True, but he did.

>>> P <[log in to unmask]>08/24/15 4:20 PM >>>

And if Eliot hadn't written TWL we probably wouldn't have the critics or the biographers either.

On 24 Aug 2015 12:36 pm, Nancy Gish <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
If you think Lyndall Gordon and Peter Ackroyd  and Robert Crawford are parasites, fine. But biographies are about lives, not just poems, so if you write a biography, you write about the life. And lives do deeply affect what an author writes. Had Eliot not spent summers on the Mass. coast and sailed up past Maine to the straits of Belle Isle, we would almost certainly not have those powerful images at the end of "Gerontion" or the haunting ones in "Marina" or the fishmen who "lounge at noon" or the Dry Salvages. "Marina" describes the ocean off the coast of Maine; it's very vivid and accurate. Eliot sailed there. I live there, and it is accurate and evocative. The idea that poems come out of nothing experienced by the poet makes no sense.
No one ever suggested conversion by the way.

>>> P 08/24/15 3:07 PM >>>

It is much preferable to look at the facts & ignore the opinion, based or baseless. Even more preferable is focusing on the poetry & leaving the rest for the parasites to crawl all over each other about.

I wonder if Eliot's antisemitic streak ever converted anyone to antisemitism. BTW, antisemitism includes all the Semites, not just the Jews, does it not?


On 24 Aug 2015 11:49 am, Nancy Gish <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
No it isn't. Some opinions are based on facts and some are just speculation. Readers need to sift those, not just assume the truthiness is all.

>>> P 08/24/15 2:46 PM >>>

It's all a matter of opinion anyway.

On 24 Aug 2015 7:33 am, Nancy Gish <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Much of this review is generally knowledgeable and useful, but it ends on a weird note. A biography is by definition the story of a life, and it is not meant to be "finished" and "polished" at the expense of the life itself. Anyone who has read Eliot's harshly negative comments on women writers or his poetry on Fresca and the disgusting Bolo and "Gross Lulu" poems, let alone the facts of his relations with Emily Hale, Vivienne, and Mary Trevelyan would be a bit surprised to know that gender is of passing interest. And anyone who has read After Strange Gods or the lifelong influence of Charles Maurras would find exclusion of the issue of Jews simply dishonest. There is no need at all to look to other scholars--though ignoring Lyndall Gordon, or Ken Ascher on Maurras, would be a failure in itself--to find gender and anti-Semitism as issues. One need only read Eliot's own writings.
To call this a miscue is to call for idealizion, not biography. And to object to other scholars in a scholarly biography is equally strange. Wilson is a professor and lacks an excuse for such misguided remarks.
"Crawford’s one serious miscue here is his being too attuned to all this: He frequently lingers on questions of “gender” and Eliot’s view of Jews, as if looking over his shoulder at the assertions of scholars rather than keeping his eye trained on the details of the poet’s life. This gives Young Eliot, at times, the feel of a monograph of passing interest rather than an effort to present the finished, polished story of Eliot’s life. A few slips into jargon and the occasional direct references to the work of other scholars, which should have been reserved for the endnotes, contribute to this feeling."
>>> Chanan Mittal 08/24/15 9:44 AM >>>
Poet in Embryo
Old Possum’s formative years.
The Weekly Standard 
Aug 10, 2015