Thanks, Nancy, am just back on the list under a new email address
after being removed two nights ago by a technical glitch. The problem,
I think, is with my email provider, not the listserv, so should Tim
read this, no action is necessary at this point.
As you pointedly remarked about Pat Sloane's book, after reading
virtually thousands of emails from someone on the subject in question,
one does not necessarily feel obliged to read the book, too. And I'm
sure you can imagine I'm already aware of those books, for what that's
worth. I take it then that the shining can only come through in books,
not on the list.
As for specifics. the little ditty by the commenter on Kaveney that I
included with my first post on the subject sums it up pretty well.
Beyond that, you and I in pursuit of conversation on Eliot are
probably too much like the boarhound and the boar, before the stars
intercede. No need to subject the list to another round.
When Guy Story Brown first appeared on the list, in all the hub-bub
that ensued, in our off-list exchanges he emailed me to impart what he
thought was the most important fundamental fact (this is my reading of
his fact) regarding Eliot's poetry. I didn't mention it to him, but it
was almost word for word exactly what my Eliot professor had said on
the last day of our seminar. I've never heard another critic say it.
What I'm sure of is that no one ever will arrive at it through the way
of Roz Kaveney, as if she is saying something worth saying.
On 4/11/2014 11:55 PM, Nancy Gish wrote:
> Dear Ken,
> "evidence of it's shining effect would be nice to see once in a while in place": For your reading pleasure. None are biography.
> I'm not including articles, also not biography.
> Gender, Desire, and Sexuality in T. S. Eliot, Nancy K. Gish and Cassandra Laity, eds. London,
> Cambridge UP, (2004).
> The Waste Land: A Poem of Memory and Desire, Twayne, Boston (1988).
> Time in the Poetry of T.S. Eliot, Macmillan, London (1981).
> But, FYI: "Drivel" is not specific or exact. Could you elaborate?
> >>> Ken Armstrong 04/11/14 9:57 AM >>>
> On 4/11/2014 12:06 AM, Nancy Gish wrote:
>> I wonder if you would state specifically and exactly why it is "pathetic." It describes genuine events in his life.