Print

Print


It is Julian of Norwich, REVELATIONS OF DIVINE LOVE.  It is the
source of the last lines of 4Q.
Nancy


Date sent:              Mon, 8 Dec 2003 16:15:22 -0800
Send reply to:          "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum." <[log in to unmask]>
From:                   Peter Montgomery <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:                Re: Poets on poetry
To:                     [log in to unmask]

Well if we are going to get into the area of the
mystics, one of my favourite, I would truly appreciate
help in finding a text which has elluded me for some time.
Perhaps it was the author of THE CLOUD OF UNKNOWING or
possibly, but I don't thnk so, Julian of Norwich, who had
an extensive and very beautiful meditation on God as mother.

I read it long, long ago when I was very much in a mystical
mode, and have since, not been able to retrieve it.

Thanks,
Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Nancy Gish [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 8:07 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Poets on poetry


Dear Richard and all,

Interestingly, Denise Levertov, like Eliot, became increasingly
religious and even orthodox in later life.  She joined the Catholic
Church largely because of the liberation theology that challenged
our political policies in Central America and because of people like
Archbishop Romero and Dorothy Day, but she seemed to have
increasingly found in Christianity a form of what I think Richard
means by "mythic" that allowed for a better way of living in the
world.  Her religious poems of the 80s, especially, increasingly
define a way to see body and spirit as fused in Jesus, Mary, and--
interestingly--Julian of Norwich.
Nancy


Date sent:              Mon, 8 Dec 2003 07:53:46 -0700
Send reply to:          "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum."
<[log in to unmask]>
From:                   Richard Seddon <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:                Re: Poets on poetry
To:                     [log in to unmask]

Peter

Now wait just a minute.

Where in the preceding discussions, until you raised your head and
thought it getting curiouser and curiouser, did any one make any
value judgments about any other's understanding of the human
condition?  Perhaps you are referring to my comment about not
riding in a flying machine derived from unverified science.  Flying
carpets, which I would ride on, are part of a mythic world view and
not a pseudo-scientific one.

Your basket of grade four thinkers would have to include Freud,
Jung, Kerenyi, Kroeber, Malinowski, Robert Duncan, T. S. Eliot,
Robinson Jeffers, Charles Olson, Claude Levi-Strauss, Karl Popper,
Bradley, Nietzsche, Plato and the list goes on.  Many have tried to
understand the difference between mythic societies and their own
version of "modern" society.

I am specifically trying to understand it in terms of the 40's and 50's
California poets and the poets of the Black Mountain school: Duncan,
Jeffers, Creeley, Spicer, Olson, Levertov, Ginsberg, Snyder and others.
These poets were serious critics of their modern western society.   They
were all heavily influenced by TSE, Pound, Joyce and Yeats.  In at least
one case, Duncan, they suffered severe discrimination at the hands of
modern western culture. Jeffers became so disgusted with western society
that he completely rejected a man centered world view and came up with his
"Inhumanism".   All of these poets reacted strongly to what they conceived
of as faults inherent in western society's rejection of myth.
Understanding myth as opposed to western societies is crucial to
understanding them.

Somehow you have turned the discussion from how people
immersed in a mythic world view their world into a value filled
discussion and then used the turn to hurl semi-hidden knives.

If a person's serious thinking is always going to raise disdain and
approbation from the list how can serious learning take place.  If you
have serious problems with what I was writing please tell me.  If you are
going to change what I am saying into something you can attack please
don't.  If you don't understand, ask questions until you do.  If you know
nothing about the subject then perhaps you can join me in learning about
it.  If you find it completely lacking in intellectual merit then I would
appreciate being informed, privately if possible,  of your professional
opinion.

BTW:  I would recommend that you read "Ulysses, Order, and
Myth".  I think you will find little about Myth and much about a new
way to structure a literary work using myth.  Your quote from Eliot
does not support your preceding argument as your use would
suggest.

Rick Seddon
McIntosh, NM

Peter wrote

The tendency to think we can learn anything
about the validity of someone's understanding
of the human condition, by reducing that someone's
working system to its bare knuckle implications,
and then say it is wrong, inadequate, misguided
or whatever, is worthy of about Grade Four thinking
and little more.

What is important for our discussion is the role
of the mythic method as Eliot identified it, in helping
us to come to terms with the chaos of the modern vortex,
which, because our technology is driven into a frenzy
of change by its core dynamic of electricity moving at
the speed of light, is causing our ordinary perceptual
modes to become completely disoriented.

from Eliot, T.S. "Ulysses, Order, and Myth" Dial 75.5 (November
1923):201.

Myth is simply a way of controlling, of ordering, of giving a shape
and a significance to the immence panorama of futility and anarchy
which is contemporary history.