intend my post to be about you, CR. But to be sure, in regard to
welcoming the good, I said only that so many critics miss so much; not that all miss all. It's a
positive pleasure to read thoughtful, insightful, balanced criticism. It
just seems to me that that pleasure is
more rare than perhaps it ought to be. But maybe I'm
On 11/17/2012 2:41 PM, Chokh Raj wrote:
[log in to unmask]"
Only I don't throw away the baby with the bath water,
I welcome what good I find,
Reading on in the passage linked to below, it's
arresting how critics miss even the most fundamental
action in Eliot's poems, including in his earliest.
Eliot's life may have been imperfect (however ridiculous
it may be for any of us to stand in that kind of
judgement on any other one of us), but the imperfections
don't abate when Gordon remarks of "Conversation
Galante" that the young woman in it "blocks the truth."
It wouldn't be so egregious a critical error were it not
that the at the center of the poem's action it is the
young woman who at each turn prevents the young man from
ensnaring the truth for his own low purposes, allowing
it, as it were, to continue to roam free. The young
woman does not block knowledge; she foils the young
man's attempts to misuse knowledge and seduce her. It
is, to quote one of Eliot's favorites, elementary.
With so little facility for even a basic understanding
of Eliot's poetic way, it's not surprising that she and
critics like her miss and misrepresent so much in
Eliot's life and art.
10:32 AM, Chokh Raj wrote:
Just one instance of
the alacrity, the sensitivity and the pace with
which Eliot's sensibility responded to Laforgue's
influence. Here's Lyndall Gordon's insightful
p. 42 "At once, on
discovering Symons, Eliot ordered three volumes
of Laforgue from France. The Oeuvres completes
must have arrived in the spring of 1909, certainly
in time for Eliot to read them over the summer,
and late in the autumn he began to pour out new