Print

Print


Obviously literary rigormortis had set in.
P.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Nancy Gish" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 9:31 AM
Subject: Re: Rewrite The Waste Land


It is amusing that in early reviews of TSE the same kinds of words were
used.  Arthur Waugh called "Prufrock" "the unmetrical, incoherent banalities
of these literary 'Cubists,'" and warned that "the state of Poetry is indeed
threatened with anarchy which will  end in something worse even than 'red
ruin and the breaking up of laws.'"

"Literary World" called the other poems in that volume "experiments in the
bizarre and violent" and "Prufrock" "neither witty nor amusing."

TLS said they "have no relation to 'poetry.'"

And William Carlos Williams could hardly contain his outrage at all of it,
saying of "La Figlia che Piange, "Yet, in the last stanza, this paradigm,
this very fine flower of U.S. art, is warped out of alignment, obscured in
meaning even to the point of an absolute unintelligibility by the inevitable
straining after a rhyme!--the very cleverness with which this straining is
covered being a sinister token in itself."

And then they got to TWL and were really distressed.  In the words of F. L.
Lucas, "All this is very difficult; as Dr. Johnson said under similar
circumstances, 'I wish it were impossible.'"  John Crowe Ransom said Eliot's
intention in TWL "is evidently to present a wilderness in which both he and
the reader may be bewildered."  He did not, he claimed, mean "that it is
permamently a part of the language; I do not entertain it as a
probablility."

Nancy


>>> Carrol Cox <[log in to unmask]> 07/23/07 12:37 PM >>>
{This odd spacing across the screen almost loses me.) CR always loses me
so I haven't read many of his recent posts -- but there is no place for
post-modernism in this discussion. To introduce it is to make nonsense
of all attempts at periodization. Also, one simply cannot make any
statement at all which is even close to generally true of all so-called
"postmodernists." Probably aome of them are anarchists, but not very
many. The term has been pretty much ruined by meaning so many different
things and being so often (as in this thread) misused.

I think it's probably best simply to ignore contributions to these
endless attempts to link t.s.e. or fragments of his work to everything
and nothing. THese aren't literary observations, they are expressions of
pathology.

Carrol

> Richard Seddon wrote:
>
> CR
>
>
>
> I’m afraid I’m getting lost.
>
>
>
> Doesn’t  “in that
>
> the postmodern perception of reality is essentially one of anarchy
>
> and disorder without a center to hold”
>
> essentially exclude all the “Black Mountain Poets” from the label
> “Post Modern”.


>
>
>
> Rick Seddon
>
> Portales, NM
>
>
>
>


-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.14/912 - Release Date: 7/22/2007
7:02 PM