Print

Print


No. They were indeterminately diagnosed symptoms about what he may or may
not have been undergoing at that time. Which is why things are no longer
classified that way. I reiterate.

GAVIN



on 9/28/02 8:09 PM, Nancy Gish at [log in to unmask] wrote:

> You may be talking about what psychiatry says now.  I was and am
> talking about what they said when Eliot both represented it and had a
> psychiatrist for therapy because of his "breakdown."  If I recall, that is
> what started this discussion.  In any case it did mean something quite
> specific to call him neurasthenic.  There were clear symptoms that
> referred to, and he had them.
> Nancy
>
>
>
> Date sent:              Sat, 28 Sep 2002 17:14:37 -0700
> Send reply to:          "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum." <[log in to unmask]>
> From:                   Francis Gavin <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject:                Re: Some Queries, was Re: Deluge...
> To:                     [log in to unmask]
>
> I don't care what they meant then we're talking about what they mean
> now--which is essentially nothing since they were too general. Describing
> Eliot as "neurasthenic" means nothing, as it once may have meant what
> seemed like something but was really in fact nothing.
>
> GAVIN
>
>
>
>
>
> on 9/28/02 12:37 PM, Nancy Gish at [log in to unmask] wrote:
>
>> I'm sorry, but if you want a long list of medical articles from the
>> period that say quite differently, let me know.  At the turn of the
>> century and up to and through the war, "hysteria" was a broad term that
>> did indeed include shell shock and what we would call post-traumatic
>> stress.  I only said "neurasthenia" was hard to distinguish, and there
>> is a long text making that claim and giving charts of differences that
>> then got quoted by many doctors.  On this you are factually wrong as to
>> what the terms meant then. As I spent many, many weeks reading on this
>> at the Bodlian last year, I am quite certain of my terminology. Cheers,
>> Nancy
>>
>>
>> Date sent:              Sat, 28 Sep 2002 12:13:58 -0700
>> Send reply to:          "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum."
>> <[log in to unmask]> From:                   Francis Gavin
>> <[log in to unmask]> Subject:                Re: Some Queries, was
>> Re: Deluge... To:                     [log in to unmask]
>>
>> Both neurasthenia and hysteria are considered quaint antiquated terms in
>> medical circles. Hysteria is sometimes used in a very limited way to
>> describe disassociation in personality formation, neurasthenia not at
>> all. Neither one has anything to do with battle fatigue or PTSD, which
>> are in turn, two different things.
>>
>> GAVIN
>>
>>
>> on 9/28/02 10:26 AM, Nancy Gish at [log in to unmask] wrote:
>>
>>> "Shell Shock" is what they called hysteria and we
>>> would probably call post-traumatic stress disorder.  In any case, there
>>> was a very extensive literature on it that actually goes back a couple
>>> of thousand years to ancient Egypt.  Vittoz specifically wrote on
>>> "neurasthenia."