I neglected to add the quotes around 'dissociated' my original post to  
which Ken responded with his quip about Pound psychoanalyzing Eliot. I  
used quotes because in the same post I said I agreed with Nancy that  
dissociated is a problematic term.

The Wasteland more than any poem of it's time shows how personae serve  
survival. Displaced persons in Europe at that time had to quickly  
adapt to new cultures, language, tastes and mores, in fact being  
required to quickly develop personae in keeping with the societies in  
which they found themselves. Marie is only one example. Eugenides is  
another. But in fact the entire European population was changed by the  
war in having to adapt to new national boundaries, and loss of friends  
and family. Professional identities were often lost, as we see now to  
a lesser extent when we meet immigrant  doctors and scientists who are  
driving cabs. This is an existential condition of dissociation, and  
not mental illness.


Sent from my iPod

On May 7, 2010, at 8:01 AM, Diana Manister <[log in to unmask]>  

> Ken apparently you missed Rick's post in which he said he found the  
> notion of Pound psychoanalyzing Eliot amusing. He wrote that in  
> response to my claim that Pound took TWL on its own terms as the  
> expression of a dissociated personality and did not try to have  
> Eliot  "unify" it.
> That's what Rick wrote, and prompting me to waste my time to correct  
> your false statement is irresponsible on your part.
> Diana
> Sent from my iPod
> On May 6, 2010, at 10:40 PM, Nancy Gish <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> In fact, it is a commonly recognized psychological term used by  
>> many psychologists/philosophers (not, when Eliot was at Harvard,  
>> clearly separate) with a specific meaning.  Eliot had read and  
>> commented on some of them (for example, William James), and he knew  
>> the meanings.  He uses them explicitly in many of his writings-- 
>> especially many not collected.
>> What someone now just thinks it means without any of that context  
>> is really not an answer to Diana.
>> Nancy
>> >>> Ken Armstrong <[log in to unmask]> 05/06/10 10:10 PM >>>
>> DIana Manister wrote:
>> > Nonetheless, I agreed with Nancy's opinion that dissociation is a
>> > misleading term.
>> No one ever said there is either association or dissociation, black
>> and white. It's a relative term, which way I suspect most people  
>> take it
>> and Eliot meant it in talking about sensibility. I see no problem  
>> using
>> it this way.
>> > My post in no way indicated that Pound was psychoanalyzing Eliot.
>> > That's a ridiculous interpretation of my comment.
>> But it must be entirely your own, as no one else, recently at least,
>> made any such statement.
>> Ken A