How is Robert reaching when he writes the following?

> A poem about anti-Semitism is not necessarily anti-Semitic in itself.

Othello in itself (to borrow Robert's phrase) isn't anti-Moor, while 
Chaucer's "The Prioress' Tale" is anti-Jew.  But unless you read them 
both and think about them and their techniques, how can the distinction 
be made?  All Robert says is that a work revealing/embodying prejudice 
or hatred needn't be prejudicial or hating.  What that is obvious has he 
denied?  He hasn't even argued anything about the poem.

The personal praise, chastisement, and preferences which have replaced 
the considered discussion that more often used to break out on this list 
are tiresome, irrelevant, and uninformative (and often highly comical).  
I wish the members who are interested in contributing to the other sorts 
of discussions would replace (or augment) your private complaints and 
post again, as Robert has.


Diana Manister wrote:

> Robert Meyer: You are really reaching. Why deny the obvious? I prefer 
> to take Eliot's dark side as evidence of human weakness and enjoy his 
> poetic genius. Diana
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     From:  robert meyer <[log in to unmask]>
>     Reply-To:  "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum." <[log in to unmask]>
>     To:  [log in to unmask]
>     Subject:  Re: Eliot and Anti-Semitism from the London Review of Books
>     Date:  Fri, 16 Feb 2007 17:45:58 -0800
>     >
>     > Choose: either the poem is a bad poem _or_ an anti-semitic
>     > poem. Do you really think Eliot could be this obtuse?
>     >
>     > Carrol
>     >
>     A poem about anti-Semitism is not necessarily anti-Semitic in itself.
>     Robert Meyer
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Find a local pizza place, movie theater, and more....then map the best 
> route! <>