Eliot went to a great deal of trouble to explain the "meaning" of TWL.
He also spent his life pronouncing on what matters in poetry.  He also
"explained" the source of Prufrock.  What is this notion that he never

>>> [log in to unmask] 02/19/04 8:27 PM >>>
Ken Armstrong wrote:
> Aside from the "help" of the actual poem, what is the assumption at
> work that a poet could be helpful?

I can see your point Ken but would it really have hurt for Eliot to
say a few useful words.  He was very avant-guard and difficult to read
for even the best poets.  He was certainly asked similar questions
many times and might have been able to say things like "Forget the
meaning for a moment.  I liked the image that was formed in my mind
when I read a similar line by Dante."  That would be a bit more
helpful and it would have led to some other poetry reading.  And the
questioner would have still been stuck without a meaning later, without
thinking Eliot arrogant.

> Anyhow, Rickard, I wasn't being unfair to Spender, but to you.
> ; )

Ken, your email came at the right time!  I've been working on
improving my spam filters.  ;-)

Just joking,
    Rick Parker