Julius' intro is far more nuanced than I had understood his book to be, from second-hand accounts.  The intro. makes me more inclined to read the book.

Two thoughs:

(i) I'm always suspicious of critics who say, "I started researching this book to praise my subject, but ended up compelled to criticize him."  It is a common persuasive device, but I wonder what would have caused Julius to undertake a project in defense of Eliot?  The essay is a little muddy on that.  In any case, even if he's using an insincere devise, his arguments will stand or fall independent of that.

(ii) I wonder what he thinks of The Cantos?

Tom K