Print

Print


Sorry for the late reply but I was sending time with my tax return.
There are procrastinators among us.

I'm going to start out with Ken's comment on my TWL retirement project:

KA> But seriously, I'd be enchanted to think there is even one
KA> accomplished TWL reader besides Guy Brown with depth enough
KA> and articulation enough to bring out in full the
KA> undercurrent of joy that drives TWL

Well, we know that you can count me out in the articulation
department at the least.  It may have to be a long retirement
to get in enough revisions to appear to be a professional job.

And the undercurrent that I see is one of personal sadness
although how Eliot handled it by putting it in a poem is thing
of wonderment.


Somewhere before or after this was me responding to CR
(or whatever he's calling himself these days ;-) )

CR>> The immediate specific justification of a Christian context to
CR>> the opening passage is the passage which immediately follows,
CR>> saturated with Christian allusions to Ezekiel et al.

RP> Sorry, but despite the allusions my reading of that section
RP> doesn't contain religion.

Then Ken asked me:

KA> Maybe you could define "contain"?

There's a problem with my use of "contain"?  That goes to show you my
articulation.  I didn't give it much thought.  The word came to mind
and it seemed that it would do the job. Okay, what is in that section?
Eliot's own words, allusions and notes pointing to the bible.  I don't
see Eliot's own words as religious and allusions can be seen differently
by different people. Eliot's notes point to chapters that can be taken
as wisdom and not religious.

KA> Tom Jefferson read the Bible without religion by the
KA> exigency of excising the religious terminology. Effective
KA> for him perhaps, but no one of any persuasion could
KA> reasonably call the end result "The Bible."

Well, that goes to show you that there's plenty in the bible that
isn't religious.

KA> I assume you're not editing out the parts of TWL that have
KA> religious weight and which its author, presumably, put in
KA> for that reason. Or is this related to that anticipated
KA> retirement project you mentioned earlier?

Here is where we would duel because I would disregard the religious
weight that you would see.  Since neither of us spoke to Eliot about
these things we would each have to present our case.  I do have
comments by Eliot about TWL being personal.

Presenting my case IS one of my retirement projects.

Regards,
   Rick Parker