N> This is really great context--revealing and also personal.
N> . . .
N> It shows how essential it is to know both personal and
N> historical context in reading and especially knowing local meanings
N> of words. . . But assuming the meaning of "salvage"
N> as the common one is an example of the need to find sources.
Yes, I agree. I found it very interesting that Eliot, known for complex allusions and complicated word play, was upset that Hayward thought that "dry salvages" was _not_ the name of a place ("'The Dry Salvages' _is_ a place name. . . It doesn't matter that it should be obscure, but if it is going to lead people quite on the wrong track, then something must be done. I don't like the idea of a note of explanation. Please advise.").
I found that "wrong track" comment especially interesting ("if it is going to lead people quite on the wrong track, then something must be done"), expressing the view that a reader's interpretation of a poetic phrase _can_ be on the "wrong track" (i.e., not what the poet intended). Apparently this is what lead to the unusual note that Eliot reluctantly added to the poem explaining that it is a 'place name' (and even giving guidance as to pronunciation). This seems to be a far cry from some literary criticism views (such as "death of the author") that the poet is "just another reader" of a finished work, with no "special privileges".
-- Tom --