On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 21:53:45 -0400, Tom Colket <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Letters, Vol 4, there is some material that deals with an essay that E. M.
>Forster wrote about Eliot and Eliot's work. The Forster essay, titled "T.S.
>Eliot and his Difficulties", was first published in 1928 and then
>reprinted an 1936 in a collection of Forster essays called "Abinger
>I obtained a copy of the 1936 reprint and scanned it in for the List.
>Soon I'm going to scan in an interesting letter from Vol 4 that TSE wrote to
>Forster in 1929 to thank him for this essay (posted below in its entirety).
When you see
>the TSE response to the essay, you'll see that TSE was particularly pleased
>that Forster picked up on the "horror" (Forster's description) in
>"The Waste Land."
Thank you so much for sending the Forster article Tom. I'm surprised that I
haven't come across a reprint of it anywhere. I think I would have
remembered the start, where I was thinking Forster might have been writing a
It is rather astonishing in a number of ways. Forster has TWL pegged as
intentially cryptogrammatic partially based on a TSE use of "cryptogram" in
an essay. What if he had seen the TWL draft with its use of the word?
Then Forster claimed "[TWL] is just a personal comment on the universe, as
individual and as isolated as Shelley's _Prometheus_." Compare that with
TSE's "To me [TWL] was only the relief of a personal and wholly
insignificant grouse against life; it is just a piece of rhythmical grumbling."
The essay ends with Forster comparing Eliot with Sweeney "And Sweeney guards
the horned gate [to true visions]."
> When you see the TSE response to the essay, you'll see that TSE was
particularly pleased that Forster picked up on the "horror" (Forster's
description) in "The Waste Land."
With six uses of the word "horror" and a couple of "terrible"s Eliot had to
notice it but perhaps not be pleased (remember his response to Aiken's "The
Anatomy of Melancholy"?)