As for the allegation of Eliot not holding aristocratic (or high-class) love affairs approbrious, here are some instances that refute the charge: The nymphs are departed. And their friends, the loitering heirs of City directors; Departed, have left no addresses. Twit twit twit Jug jug jug jug jug jug So rudely forc'd. Tereu Weialala leia Wallala leialala Elizabeth and Leicester Beating oars The stern was formed A gilded shell Red and gold The brisk swell Rippled both shores Southwest wind Carried down stream The peal of bells White towers Weialala leia Wallala leialala Eliot's Notes to TWL: 279. V. Froude, Elizabeth, vol. I, ch. iv, letter of De Quadra to Philip of Spain: In the afternoon we were in a barge, watching the games on the river. (The queen) was alone with Lord Robert and myself on the poop, when they began to talk nonsense, and went so far that Lord Robert at last said, as I was on the spot there was no reason why they should not be married if the queen pleased. CR --- On Sun, 8/23/09, Chokh Raj <[log in to unmask]> wrote: I don't think physical blemishes in Eliot's poetry are class-specific -- they could signify inward corruption irrespective of class distinctions: Princess Volupine extends A meagre, blue-nailed, phthisic hand To climb the waterstair. Lights, lights, She entertains Sir Ferdinand -- "Burbank with a Baedeker: Bleistein with a Cigar" The sable presbyters approach The avenue of penitence; The young are red and pustular Clutching piaculative pence. -- "Mr. Eliot's Sunday Morning Service" CR Diana Manister wrote Mon, 17 Aug 2009 13:10:32 : The sexual interlude between the typist and her pimply lover was depicted as sordid because of it's working-class character. Note the one-room bedsit the typist occupies. If you believe Eliot's subtext, aristocrats don't get zits and their sexual activities are never approbrious.