Print

Print


If you read the earlier exchange about his car, you would see it was clear from letters I quoted that it did belong to him.
Nancy

>>> Ken Armstrong <[log in to unmask]> 04/04/11 4:22 PM >>>
David,

Ah, the motor car. I don't think it was his, was it? Although from the
description of his driving skills, why would anyone lend it to
him.........My mother's estate just a few years ago was valued at about
$600,000 plus, which gave her an income of about $27,000 a year, varying
a little bit with the stock market. If your reckoning is correct, TSE
would have been sitting much more pretty at the end of his life, perhaps
living on four times or more my mother's 27K, which sounds quite
comfortable to me but not what anyone would call wealthy. Probably, as
you point out, that Nobel prize did make a big difference for what
amounted to his married life with Valerie. The original question was
whether he made much money from his poetry, not whether he was a pauper
or one of the super rich. I'm merely saying he occupied some of the vast
territory in between and that excessive wealth was never one of his
problems. He did, as no one has acknowledged, travel and lecture for the
purpose of earning money through most of his life.

Ken A

David Boyd wrote:
>
> Ken
>
> You must be very rich indeed if you can dismiss 105,000 at 1965
> values as 'not wealthy'
>
> - this sum alone equates to 2009 values to over 1.5 million pounds,
> just inflating it by retail price index inflation or to 3,150,000
> inflating in line with average earnings - not insubstantial wealth,
> I'd suggest
>
> (in order to avoid death duties (taxes) Eliot's estate was probably
> minimised in favour of the much-younger Valerie anyway.)
>
> And there was a thread some time ago about the much-younger and
> more-impecunious Eliot still being financially-able to own and run a
> motor car c 1930 - in those days, in itself only the preserve of the
> well-to-do.
> On 4 April 2011 16:07, Ken Armstrong <[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
> David,
>
> What an estate is worth at the time of death, though, is also not
> necessarily a fair way to look at a person's "wealth" during his
> lifetime. The source you mention says in excess of 105,000 pounds.
> But for the majority of his life, did he not undertake lecture
> tours and the like to supplement his income? What would 105,000
> pounds translate to today? Nothing, as an estate valuation, that
> would be considered wealthy I'll wager.
>
> Ken A
>
>
> David Boyd wrote:
>
>
> I'd suggest your comments are somewhat misinformed, Kate
> If anyone has access to the Oxford Dictionary of National
> Biography, I believe Eliot's entry will end as they all do
> with the value of his estate upon his death.
> I have no idea, except I'd guess it was a very very large sum
> of money - for just one example, the Nobel Prize for
> Literature is worth a fortune alone.
> And then there was his exceedingly well-paid directorship of
> Fabers etc etc etc
> It's true that sales of poetry can never have netted Eliot
> the vast sums of money that prose publishing brought to eg Sir
> Walter Scott or Charles Dickens or even Thomas Hardy, but
> Eliot undoubtedly became a very wealthy man indeed and of
> course Valerie must have a very healthy income indeed from
> worldwide royalties especially from the musical 'Cats'
> It's also true of course that Eliot struggled financially
> when younger, but that's by no means unusual for any writer or
> actor or similar, and it has little bearing on his eventual
> glittering prosperity.
> regards
> David
>
> - Show quoted text -
> On 3 April 2011 06:11, Kate Troy <[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]> <mailto:[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>> wrote:
> How much money did Eliot make from his poetry? Not much, I
> take it. He had to work at a bank and rely on patrons. I
> hear that Byron made a little, but how much was a little? Of
> course, he had family money. Rod McKuen was the first poet
> who made a million dollars from his poetry, and he wrote bad
> poetry. But, he also wrote a good translation of a French
> song that was more than a translation. So, tit for tat. Kate
>
> On 3 April 2011 06:11, Kate Troy <[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]> <mailto:[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>> wrote:
>
> How much money did Eliot make from his poetry? Not much, I
> take
> it. He had to work at a bank and rely on patrons. I hear that
> Byron made a little, but how much was a little? Of course,
> he had
> family money. Rod McKuen was the first poet who made a million
> dollars from his poetry, and he wrote bad poetry. But, he also
> wrote a good translation of a French song that was more than a
> translation. So, tit for tat.
> Kate
>
>
>