More to the point, how could an intelligent man not acknowledge, or worse, realize the humanity of women.  And, if there is a certain "type" of woman, then there is a certain "type" of man.  I cannot help but think of Stevens, also living in an unhappy marriage, but the women in his works are real and often may be turned to for truth or enlightenment, i.e., She sang beyond the genius of the sea . . .

On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 3:03 PM, Carrol Cox <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Nancy Gish: "It's hardly news, as it is written about in books and articles for--oh--maybe 40 years or more."

My point, of course, is both specific to Eliot and a more general historical point. That's been written about for rather more than a century. See the reply of Mrs. Croft to Wentworth's idiocy about not wanting women on his ship! But also see the poignant final sentences of the fourth volume of Parade's End.

And who can miss the question Prufrock dare not ask. I've just been listening to a reading of Paradise Regained:

Belial the dissolutest Spirit that fell,
The sensuallest, and after Asmodai
The fleshliest Incubus, and thus advis'd.

    Set women in his eye and in his walk,
Among daughters of men the fairest found;
Many are in each Region passing fair
As the noon Sky; more like to Goddesses
Then Mortal Creatures, graceful and discreet,
Expert in amorous Arts, enchanting tongues
Perswasive, Virgin majesty with mild
And sweet allay'd, yet terrible to approach. . . .
        PR II. 151-61

TERRIBLE: Terrifying. Prfrcock's thoughts precisely!

Also Eliot's???