Print

Print


Jennifer Formichelli wrote:

>On a final note. Peter raised the question of class in
>J. Alfred Prufrock and T. Stearns Eliot, an
>abbreviation that Eliot flirted with around 1916 or
>so, I believe. It is not, however, a question of
>class; rather, it is a question of English versus
>American abbreviation. ... I suspect the appearance of
>T. Stearns Eliot around 1916, when TSE was settling in
>England, was a confusion about English versus American
>abbreviations, whilst the adoption of T.S. Eliot
>conformed (not unlike Eliot himself) to the English
>model. 
>
>  
>
Dear Jennifer,
    I don't know, but wonder if Eliot didn't, like many people who 
become public, realize he had to have a public name.  (Compare to Bob 
Dylan last night in the wonderful first part of Martin Scorsese's film.  
BD)  That he tried out various possibilities is reasonable.  He had 
other English models that did not conform to his final choice, so, for 
me, the American/English conventions aren't as compelling as they are 
for you.
    As for what he is called by those who are not his friends, it is 
usual that when referring to a public person that the nom de demos is 
used, isn't it?

Best,
Marcia