London as a narrator strikes me as an uncharacteristic choice for Eliot. He does not often indulge in the pathetic fallacy, but then he does have thunder speaking. hmmmmm. Diana

From:  Peter Montgomery <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To:  "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum." <[log in to unmask]>
To:  [log in to unmask]
Subject:  Re: Water in TWL--why?
Date:  Fri, 3 Aug 2007 00:18:37 -0800
Conceivably, London is the narrator. I don't see a standard singler voice
There is an interpenetration and metamorphosis of voives.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Nancy Gish" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 7:46 AM
Subject: Re: Water in TWL--why?

> "A whole" and "a unity" may not be the same.  "A Drunk Man Looks at the
> Thistle," for example, seems to be framed by a "whole" of inclusiveness,
> not a unifying by exclusion.  I never feel a final sense about what
> Eliot's "whole" is, but it does involve exclusions in a way MacDiarmid's
> equally vast and brilliant poem does not.  I do not think there is ever
> a valid claim that "poetry must. . . " because one can always find poems
> that don't . . ., whatever it is.  But in the case of TWL Pound at least
> thought it was a single text from beginning to end.  Eliot seemed unsure
> both when he suggested including "Gerontion" and dropping "Death by
> Water," and much later when he called it just "rhythmical grumbling."
> There is, for example, a single narrator of "Drunk Man" who can pretty
> much be identified with MacDiarmid.  It is problematic that TWL has any
> single voice.  I am not sure Diana's view of it as monologic is right
> even though I once argued the same thing.  I feel sometimes that Eliot
> really can't control the voices of his characters like the women in the
> pub or Marie or whoever asks about "the third who walks always beside
> you."
> Cheers,
> Nancy
> >>> Ken Armstrong <[log in to unmask]> 08/02/07 11:27 AM >>>
> At 12:23 AM 8/2/2007, Richard Seddon wrote:
> >To me both Pound and Eliot seemed to be working to some sense of the
> parts
> >fitting together.
>   Excellent point. Whether you call it a whole or a unity, if it is one
> poem, however well executed, it is a unity. Interesting, too, that while
> Pound and Eliot viewed the poem as a whole, they might not each have
> viewed
> it as the other did. Seems probable that they didn't.
> Ken A
> >They seemed to think that there was some whole into which
> >a variety of very fine poetry did not fit.  Examples are "Gerotion" and
> the
> >ship board scene.  Other poetry was added, after Pounds condensation,
> which
> >Eliot seemed to feel fit in with and enhanced the rest.
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.2/933 - Release Date: 8/2/2007
2:22 PM

More photos, more messages, more storageóget 2GB with Windows Live Hotmail.