Nancy Gish <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >Why do you assume the poem has "a narrator"? That itself is a very >contested claim. And why, unless it is a lyric, would the narrator's >desire be the same as Eliot's? Agreed there, Nancy. > And in what sense is the wetness on the Hyacinth girl's hair >either lust or spiritual life since it seems quite clearly to many >readers an image of young and innocent desire? The water here represents passion -- pure, undefiled -- what St. Augustine (I'd quoted) refers to as something he defiled : "I defiled the very source of friendship by the filth of concupiscence, and its clear waters I befouled with the lust of hell .... BTW I had said water as a metaphor for emotional and spiritual life, it is clear and regenerative. Earlier I had written of the yearning in the poem for the life-giving waters of "spirtuality and love". >I ask these questions because I am trying to suggest that the poem is >not a set of clues to a puzzle and it is not a set of limited categories >like "lust" vs. "spirit." But one cannot close one's eyes to what is so obvious in the text -- I have never said a word without quoting to substantiate my point from the text -- and always in relation to the poem as a whole. >Nor is it clearly spoken by one narrator--or if it is, by whom? >Some say Eliot; some say Tiresias; some say a persona in the role >of questor. Agreed. >These isolated and disparate speculations need some context and > overall framework to provide a reading. I respond to you in this case only >because this is the message that turned up; the response is to a whole >line of commentary. This point is already addressed above. Regards, CR --------------------------------- Sick sense of humor? Visit Yahoo! TV's Comedy with an Edge to see what's on, when. --------------------------------- Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online.