Absolutely not. Or so it appears, at least. What I really valued in your observation is: "...possible excess is testimony to the direction's value." I was contemplating the value of this direction in a creative writer like Eliot. Much of his early poetry is preoccupied with these excesses -- a curious blend of fact and fiction. To me, much of the beauty of his early art lies in this tug of war between opposing impulses, as in Sweeney among the Nightingales. And I rejoice at the hint of triumph by an "idealist" state, the "golden grin" in this case. One may find me too naive in this, though! Regards. ~ CR Peter Montgomery <[log in to unmask]> wrote: Not to rub it in, though I do like giving massages, all kinds of examples occurred to me of directions in which one can go too far, but probably doesn't excpt on occasion: eg: eating, drinking .... //Can one go too far in love making?// Or to use the modern, mindless consumer lingo: Can one have too much sex? Cheers, peter ----- Original Message ----- From: cr mittal To: [log in to unmask] Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 10:12 AM Subject: Re: TSE: The Journey from Chaos to Christianity A valuable correction, Peter. Thanks. ~ CR Peter Montgomery <[log in to unmask]> wrote: The presence of excess n the extremity of a direction doesn't require that one go to that excess, even though that possible excess is testimony to the direction's value. The obverse is boredom which is characteristic of directions in which one cannot go too far. It's a bit like "Be thou either hot or cold. If thou art neither hot nor cold I will vomit thee out of my mouth." (Apocalypse (Revelations). 1,2o3?) That doesn't mean one must be either combusted or frozen. :) It does mean one should not be indifferent or neutral. Cheers, Peter ----- Original Message ----- From: cr mittal To: [log in to unmask] Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2006 6:53 AM Subject: Re: TSE: The Journey from Chaos to Christianity At least, that's what TSE admits in Mélange Adultère de Tout : C’est à Paris que je me coiffe Casque noir de jemenfoutiste. ..... J’erre toujours de-ci de-là A divers coups de tra là là De Damas jusqu’à Omaha. ..... On montrera mon cénotaphe Aux côtes brulantes de Mozambique. (It's in Paris that I wear a black cap Of one who couldn't care less. ..... I wander always here and there And get lost in fleshpots From Damascus to Omaha. ..... They'll point out to my cenotaph On the burning coast of Mozambique.) It shows his going to extremes on both sides of the matrix* -- exploring dimensions of "desire" as well as martyrdom. Was it a consequence of this "going too farrr" that he found an affinity, maybe, with Tiresias who was an expert in matters of sex, as well as a prophet living on the outskirts of Athens (both literally and metaphorically). *You'll kindly correct me if I'm wrong in my use of the term "matrix" here. Regards. ~ CR mikemail <[log in to unmask]> wrote: Interesting - so excess is necessary in all worthwhile endeavour? mike ----- Original Message ----- From: Peter Montgomery To: [log in to unmask] Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2006 10:36 AM Subject: Re: TSE: The Journey from Chaos to Christianity Somewhere Eliot said something like: "Except in directions in which one can go too far, there are probably not directions worth going." Cheers, Peter ----- Original Message ----- From: mikemail To: [log in to unmask] Sent: Saturday, April 22, 2006 11:08 AM Subject: Re: TSE: The Journey from Chaos to Christianity The gratitude is mine. I do believe that serious alcoholism is indeed a spiritual search. I had some ideas about TSE and the same. I've heard drunks on park benches arguing about The Virgin Mary. Mike ----- Original Message ----- From: cr mittal To: [log in to unmask] Sent: Saturday, April 22, 2006 7:48 PM Subject: Re: TSE: The Journey from Chaos to Christianity I must express my grateful thanks, Mike, for your kind appreciation. It reassures me about my conception of the central conflict in Eliot. As for "alcohol", I have something tucked up my sleeves to share with the List vis-a-vis TSE. But I must space my mails lest they overwhelm and kill the appetite. ;-) Best regards. ~ CR mikemail <[log in to unmask]> wrote: Thank you CR for this. Also for confirmation of what I have long felt about Eliot's poetry. It took me some time to realise the meaning of the sexuality / spirituality conflict - Eliot brought it into focus, especially in TWL. I read it at about the right time, coming into some kind of light after two decades of alcohol and substance abuse. Mike ----- Original Message ----- From: cr mittal To: [log in to unmask] Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 7:54 PM Subject: Re: TSE: The Journey from Chaos to Christianity mikemail <[log in to unmask]> wrote: Excellent - but I don't agree with Lewis about the chaos. Mike Nor do I. To me, Eliot's entire creative output (both poetry and plays) centers round the chaos engendered by the predominance of 'desire' (lust) over love. Like the Buddha, Eliot is overwhelmned by the enormity of the cosmic force of 'desire' against which a human being is ranged, helplessly, as a puny creature. All the same, Eliot's protagonists struggle, hopelessly in the early poetry, and with hope in the later poetry, against this adversary, howsoever formidable and all-pervasive it might be. In sum, it's a quest for order in the midst of chaos. It's the chaos he decries again and again, as in that intended epigraph for TWL: "the horror, the horror". In this context, it should be interesting to read the following book-review in The Atlantic Monthly of July 5th, 2005. Let me take the liberty, with due apologies, to reproduce it here. Regards. ~ CR ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Tuesday, July 5th, 2005 The Annotated Waste Land with Eliot's Contemporary Prose by T S Eliot A Breath of Dust A Review by Christopher Hitchens Lawrence Rainey's introduction to this book opens with an anecdote about a starstruck and tongue-tied DDDonald Hall, the American poet (and, like Eliot, a former editor of the Harvard Advocate), who journeyed to meet his hero in London in 1951. Having babbled his way through the interview, Hall rose to take his leave. Then Eliot appeared to search for the right phrase with which to send me off. He looked me in the eyes, and set off into a slow, meandering sentence. "Let me see," said T. S. Eliot, "forty years ago I went from Harvard to Oxford. Now you are going from Harvard to Oxford. What advice can I give you?" He paused delicately, shrewdly, while I waited with greed for the words which I would repeat for the rest of my life, the advice from elder to younger, setting me off on the road of emulation. When he had ticked off the comedian's exact milliseconds of pause, he said, "Have you any long underwear?" I sat for a second or two after reading that before I remembered its analogue, in a novel that had been published seven years prior to this encounter. In Brideshead Revisited, Charles Ryder's father gives him sage counsel about going to Oxford. Do you know in the summer before I was going up, your cousin Alfred rode over to Boughton especially to give me a piece of advice? And do you know what that advice was? "Ned," he said, "there's one thing I must beg of you. Always wear a tall hat on Sundays during term." A few pages later on Charles meets Anthony Blanche at a lunchtime feast in Oxford, after which the louche, stammering, epicene figure "stood on the balcony with a megaphone which had appeared surprisingly among the bric-a-brac of Sebastian's room, and in languishing, sobbing tones recited passages from The Waste Land to the sweatered and muffled throng that was on its way to the river." "'I, Tiresias have foresuffered all,'" he sobbed to them from the Venetian arches -- "Enacted on this same d-divan or b-bed, I who have sat by Thebes below the wall And walked among the l-l--- lowest of the dead ..." Like many of the post-Great War generation, Waugh had taken The Waste Land as the specially resonant poem of an epoch, and indeed paid it a further compliment by alluding to one of its more famous lines ("I will show you fear in a handful of dust") in the title of one of his late novels, A Handful of Dust. George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-four, which was published just before Hall met Eliot at the London offices of Faber and Faber, has the glacial O'Brien tell Winston Smith, "There is no possibility that any perceptible change will happen within our own lifetime. We are the dead. Our only true life is in the future. We shall take part in it as handfuls of dust and splinters of bone." When O'Brien springs the trap on Smith and leads him to Room 101, it might be said that "we are in rats' alley / Where the dead men lost their bones." (My student Michael Weiss, who pointed this out to me, speculates that it might be a partial or subliminal revenge on Orwell's part for Eliot's refusal to let Faber and Faber publish Animal Farm.) But these are among, and only among, the influences of The Waste Land. What of the influences upon it? Several of them are fairly easy to determine: Geoffrey Chaucer, Andrew Marvell, Charles Baudelaire, the Bhagavad Gita, Ulysses, and James Thomson's "The City of Dreadful Night." They are easy to determine partly because they are obvious; partly because Eliot did not attempt to disguise the provenance of his poem, or at least not ostensibly; and partly because he proudly accompanied the final book with a convenient set of references and an acknowledgment of debts. This tactic, which Peter Ackroyd in his biography says was adopted "in order to avoid the charges of plagiarism which had been leveled at his earlier poetry," shows Eliot to have been, like Bellow's Augie March, a "Columbus of the near-at-hand." A hasty visit to Margate is pressed into service as readily as a recent text from James Joyce, or a class on the Buddha that the poet had attended not long before, and few of the London landmarks are very far from the bank in "The City" at which Eliot toiled from nine to five. Rainey's edition is best read in conjunction with Valerie Eliot's 1971 facsimile of the successive drafts of the poem. Here we can see, as they occurred, the alterations wrought by the editorial hand of Ezra Pound. As dedicatee of The Waste Land, Pound is usually credited with trimming and improving the text, and certainly deserves recognition for promoting and marketing it. Most of the changes, however, turn out to have been for the worse. (In any case, as a reader of the Cantos will readily see, if Pound was truly any good at pruning and refining, he must have been literature's most salient example of the physician who could not heal himself.) It might now seem a bit stale for Eliot to have put the last words of Kurtz on his epigraph page, because to us "the horror, the horror" has become a cliché. It wasn't so in 1922, and the death wish of the Cumaean Sybil, substituted by Pound, rather robs the poem of its main retrospective claim, which is to modernity. A spirited opening stave, very much in debt to Joyce and depicting a night of pointless debauchery, was cast aside. Worst of all, Pound shielded readers from Eliot's lengthy and intense prologue to the moment "When lovely woman stoops to folly," in Part III of "The Fire Sermon." I would have wanted to keep the Popean parody: This ended, to the steaming bath she moves, Her tresses fanned by little flutt'ring Loves: Odours, confected by the cunning French, Disguise the good old hearty female stench. The reek of disgust there -- which is horridly protracted over several more excised lines -- is essential to an understanding of Eliot, and has a very dddirect connection to the distraught marital relations that, among many other pressures, kept his nerves on a knife edge while he was composing the poem. Rainey writes that The Waste Land is "preceded by its reputation," which is hardly worth saying, since that is what "reputation" means. He adds that it is "endowed with authority so monumental that a reader is tempted to overlook the poem itself." Perhaps. But since we must indeed look back at the work through the refraction of what we already "know" about Eliot, it might be worth asking why such a pious Christian felt so impelled to exhaust himself in the invocation of darkness and despair. Eliot had not quite become a committed Anglo-Catholic in 1922, but he had formed an attachment to the royalist, Catholic, traditionalist ideas of Charles Maurras and his Action Française, which later mutated (as did Eliot) toward fascism. Most of Eliot's later work is much more "contained," as it were, and less "wild" (a term frequently used by reviewers of The Waste Land). He himself became more formal, more Anglicized, more calm and devotional. Yet there was plainly a death wish at work, and none of the subsequent attachments to order and to the organic society could quite conceal it. Exegesis can go only so far. It is extremely useful to know that while Eliot was trying to make up his mind about the twentieth century, he depended so much on Bertrand Russell for friendship and material help. We know that he had studied Eastern religion, but might it not have been from the famously agnostic Russell that he drew encouragement to cite those "faiths" that preceded monotheism? No answer in these pages. It was for me, however, astonishingly interesting to discover that there was actually a popular song, written for the Ziegfeld Follies in 1912, called "That Shakespearian Rag." Its authors, Gene Buck and Herman Ruby, cannot have imagined the moan of immortalization that Eliot was to give their ephemeral ditty. (Not content with annexing and slightly mangling Buck and Ruby's title, Eliot even inverted their comment "Most in-tel-li-gent, ve-ry el-e-gant" and could be accused of echoing their view that "that old clas-si-cal drag / Has the proper stuff.") The allegation of plagiarism is often tiresome, since it is very difficult to establish originality or authenticity, and since poetry almost invariably involves synthesis (which Ackroyd rightly describes as Eliot's particular gift). Still, it is surprising to find no mention at all, in this extensively sourced volume, of Madison Cawein's poem Waste Land. Cawein was as distant from Eliot, in poetic terms, as it was possible to be. He was a Kentucky blues man and a barroom versifier. However, like Eliot, he was fascinated by the Celtic twilight and the search for the Grail. And his verses, with their haunting title, did appear in the January 1913 edition of Poetry magazine. Since that very issue also contained an essay by Ezra Pound on the new poets writing in London, it seems more rather than less likely that Eliot would have read it. I looked at the man; I saw him plain; Like a dead weed, grey and wan, Or a breath of dust. I looked again -- And man and dog were gone, Like wisps of the graying dawn. After fanaticalllly going to buy some long underwear immediately after his meeting with Eliot, Donald Hall shook himself, as all servile acolytes eventually must, and decided that the great man must have been joking. But how certain can we be that Hall was correct in this assumption? Several of Eliot's English friends caught him overdoing things: wearing a bowler hat at odd moments, and saluting uniformed guardsmen in the street -- trying too hard, in other words. (Auden did a much better job of becoming an American, or at least a New Yorker, than Tom ffrom St. Louis did of becoming a stage Englishman.) At other times Eliot was apparently far too dismissive and laconic. Various critics have done me the honor to interpret the poem in terms of criticism of the contemporary world, have considered it, indeed, as an important bit of social criticism. To me it was only the relief of a personal and wholly insignificant grouse against life; it is just a piece of rhythmical grumbling. He was to tell the Paris Review that in the composition of the closing sections "I wasn't even bothering whether I understood what I was saying." There seems no reason at all why we should not take him at his word. Defensive modesty of this variety can often be worth noting; what critic has ever succeeded in getting any sense or any beauty out of the final pages? And in what conceivable universe -- even the batty, sinister one of Ezra Pound, who insisted that the poem open in that manner -- is April the cruelest month?&< It is not disputable that by publishing The Waste Land when he did, Eliot caught something of the zeitgeist and enthralled those who needed borrowed words and concepts to capture or re-express the desolation of Europe after 1918. But this latest attempt at context and explication has the effect, prefigured in earlier scrutinies, of helping to further demystify what is certainly the most overrated poem in the Anglo-American canon. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------- Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min. --------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail goes everywhere you do. Get it on your phone. --------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.4.5/322 - Release Date: 4/22/2006 --------------------------------- Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates. --------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.4.5/322 - Release Date: 4/22/2006 --------------------------------- Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates. --------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.4.5/322 - Release Date: 4/22/2006 --------------------------------- How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger’s low PC-to-Phone call rates.