Print

Print


I'm reminded of freshmen who respond to disagreement as coercion. P must
have an extremely fragile ego to be so worried about his "rights" as a
reader.  

Carrol

> -----Original Message-----
> From: T. S. Eliot Discussion forum. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
> Behalf Of Nancy Gish
> Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2013 12:20 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: 'The Waste Land' - An Autodidact's Approach
> 
> I think I noted this before, but what engages my students most is having
> them read the whole poem aloud. I assign sections and we go through the
> whole, each student thinking in advance about who is speaking and why and
> what they want to achieve or understand (acting work). They all love it
and
> say so. When asked why, one student said, "because if you are going to
read
> it out loud, you have to understand every word." They all agreed. (Hurrah!
> Who knew?)
> 
> I don't know what you mean by "original readers," since, as I have also
> noted, Mary Hutchinson heard Eliot read it in a private reading before
much
> of anyone else had seen it, and she called it "Tom's autobiography, a
> melancholy one" (from memory but very close). Yet that experience has
> been the butt of your constant contempt.
> 
> Also, it was immediately reviewed in many, many places and with totally
> contrasting and different attitudes--from the totally new work of genius
to an
> absurd and chaotic mess that was destroying poetry.
> 
> So I assume--given nearly a century of discussion and constant
> disagreement--nothing stops you from reading in your "own context." As you
> seem to dismiss every reading brought on the list, why not?
> 
> I would be genuinely interested in any serious explanation, but if it is
one
> more snippy and insulting remark, I have no interest in responding.
> Unfortunately, we are back to the private blog.
> Cheers,
> Nancy
> P. S. There are autodidacts and then there are just readers. Hugh
> MacDiarmid was a genius who left school at 18 and merely read every book
> he could find or that was published and he could get--and wrote brilliant,
> great poetry. That is an autodidact--one "self-taught." I have not read
the
> daily selections that keep turning up, but unless they are by people who
are
> genuinely self-taught, they need to be taken with several grains of salt.
> 
> 
> >>> P 05/12/13 12:39 PM >>>
> Not very helpful but fun in an ironical sort of way if one doesn't mind
> bobbing and weaving. I am curious as to when we get permission to read the
> poem in our own context, ie. bring our own experience to the poem like the
> original readers were able to do.
> 
> P. M.
> 
> Ken Armstrong <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> OK, no great discoveries here, but possibly some humor and an
autodicactical
> observation or two (interesting def. of post-modernism). It is on an
> Amazon.com page of readers' reviews of one of the quickly printed TWL
> editions when the masterpiece went viral (i.e. out of copyright):
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/bpxsd6c