Print

Print


Thanks, Rick. I thought I remembered an Eliot line in some essay about the present changing the past, but I overlooked the obvious essay about Tradition/Individual. Much appreciated.
 
By the way, the Tradition essay specifically calls out **literature** ("Whoever has approved this idea of order, of the form of European, of English literature . . ."), but I wonder if there is any evidence that Eliot thought the idea of the present changing the past was a much more general concept that applied to the human condition. I'm thinking about things like his marriage to Vivienne, which, in hindsight, must have seemed to Eliot like quite a different thing than it did when they first met. Would that be an example of the present changing the past, at least in one's judgment of the past or recollection of it??
 
-- Tom --
 

> Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2012 15:48:34 -0500
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Eliot, the past, and the mythical method
> To: [log in to unmask]
> 
> >1) Does anyone have a quotation that supports Perl's claim?
> 
> Tradition and the Individual Talent, end of paragraph 4:
> 
> Whoever has approved this idea of order, of the form of European, of English
> literature, will not find it preposterous that the past should be altered by
> the present as much as the present is directed by the past. And the poet who
> is aware of this will be aware of great difficulties and responsibilities.
> 
> 
> I'll look into the harder stuff later.
> 
> Regards,
> Rick Parker
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 15:03:03 -0400, Tom Colket <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> >Please forgive this long post, but I have a few Eliot questions that the
> list may be able to help with.
> >
> >I've listened to a course-on-tape by Professor Jeffery Perl, University of
> Texas, called "Literary modernism, The Struggle for Modern History". In one
> of the lectures talking about James Joyce's novel 'Ulysses', Professor Perl
> made the following point, which I have transcribed from the tapes:
> >
> >=====================
> >"T. S. Eliot, upon reading early drafts of Joyce's chapters, became
> convinced that all great art, in being, as he said, 'really new', and at the
> same time, conforming to the pattern of artworks already in existence, he
> said that the really new work of art alters not only the present but also
> the past -- That is, by the way, also how psychoanalysis works. You alter
> the PAST, not merely the present -- No one reads Homer anymore as he was
> read before the publication of 'Ulysses'. You can't do it." 
> >=====================
> >
> >I have unsuccessfully tried to find an Eliot quote that supports Perl's
> claim that Eliot said that really new works of art alter the past. 
> >
> >1) Does anyone have a quotation that supports Perl's claim?