Print

Print


In a message dated 4/6/03 9:35:45 PM EST, [log in to unmask] writes:

>  The reasoning, I mean.
>  And only the reasoning. Ditto to Steve and Rick.
>  Do we assume that TSE made
>  a mistake? Inquiring minds want to know...
>
>  Ken

   I certainly don't think it's a "mistake", as TSE was a master of grammar.
I do think it's poetic license -- "Let us go then, you and I" sounds a lot
better than "Let us go then, you and me".

========================

   Actually, Ken, (and I think you'll want to kill me for this) as long as
the topic came up innocently, there is one other personal reason that I've
thought TSE may have had for phrasing the line like that. Here's a section of
a letter Jean Verdenal wrote to TSE (TSE Letters, page 32):

(translation) "My dear friend, we are not very far, you and I, from the point
beyond which people lose that indefinable influence and emotive power over
each other, which is reborn when they come together again. It is not only
time that causes forgetfulness -- distance (space) is an important factor".

I'm not saying that TSE is alluding to this exact letter from Verdenal. Only
seven letters from Verdenal to TSE have survived (and none from TSE to
Verdenal). But if Verdenal used phrasing like "you and I", that phrase may be
a private allusion to the friend that I think could be the "you" in
'Prufrock'.

-- Steve --