Print

Print


To be de-civilised is not to be uncivilised.
To be de-civilised is not to be a savage.
It is to have no identity at all. A hollow man.
P.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Carrol Cox" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, May 24, 2010 6:22 AM
Subject: Re: Mr. Eugenides


> Peter Montgomery wrote:
> >
> > Eliot was a big fan of THE HEART OF DARKNESS.
> >
> > Is Kurtz de-civilised?
>
> No! To be civilized is to be aware of oneself as related to The City.
> Kurtz's life would be unintelligible within a paleolithic or even
> neolithic culture. And while K's attitude towards the "natives" invokes
> the Eurocentric use of "savage," his attitude towareds hmself, let alone
> the attitude of (a) the fictional narrator and (b) the story as a whole
> is biguous. Tos label Kurtz as "uncivilzied" is to justify Europe: It is
> not Europe that is committing genocide n the Congo but those savages who
> have infected Kurtz with their savagery which then has rebounded on
> them.
>
> Now it may be that Eliot (the man) or Eliot (the poet of TWL) himself
> thought in these terms, of Kurtz or the woman in the narrow canoe as
> "decivilzied." Assuming that would add quite an interesting edge to the
> poem but it would make Eliot the man worthy of the greatest contempt.
> (Ditto re Conrad.)
>
> "The horror. The Horror" Kurtz muttrs -- and perhaps that horror is
> analyzed in the history of such words as "pagan," "civilization,"
> "savage," "urbane," and other terms in which is embodied the
> valorization of The City (- Europe in the 196h c.) and "The Country" (=
> the rest of the world in the 19th-c). (My expositon here is jumbled
> since I'm explorginga what for me is new angle from which to look at the
> consciousness arising from the savage (!) rampage of Europe across the
> world in the last 3 centuriesd. It is too bad Empson did not include a
> chapter on "savage" in his _Structure of *Complex Words_, for quite a
> bit of (terrifying) history is packed into the 'equations' as Empson
> called them which structure this term.
>
> Carrying this (even in its rough state here) back to TWL, we may see a
> sort of (unintended) savage (!) irony in that phrase which ends the
> poem.
>
> I'll stop here for now.
>
> Carrol
>
>
> >
> > Mr. Civilisation, he dead!
> >
> > P.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Carrol Cox" <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2010 7:19 AM
> > Subject: Re: Mr. Eugenides
> >
> > > Diana Manister wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Peter,
> > > >
> > > > Yes dehumanized. De-civilized too, if you will,
> > >
> > > "decivilized" (which is also not Eliot's word) is an even more
> > > inappropriate metaphor than dehumanized. The behavior of the clerk is
> > > only possible within civilization! For one thing, even in a
> > > pre-capitalist class societies she would not have been living alone or
> > > preparing her own meal. Those tins involved international commerce.
> > > Moreover, the entire episode presupposes the atomized social relations
> > > which appeared embryonically in the 175th-c (and Milton with amazing
> > > prescience grasped) and only fully (and only in England & the U.S.) in
> > > the 19th-c. They were only beginning to develop in France & Germany
(and
> > > this enters into the causes of WW1).
> > >
> > > So whatever the young man and woman are or are not, they are highly
> > > civilized -- and surely Eliot had enough of an historical sense and
was
> > > precise enough in his language (even the silent language of thought
and
> > > intention) that he would never have seen these characters as
> > > de-ciivilized. These vague, sloppy categories introduced by readers
> > > rather than the poem trivialize the whole poem.
> > >
> > > Carrolk