 |
 |
Incidentally, Et, O ces voix d’enfants, chantant dans la coupole! http://tseliotsthewasteland.wikia.com/wiki/Et,_O_ces_voix_d%E2%80%99enfants,_chantant_dans_la_coupole ! CR On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 11:21 AM Chanan Mittal <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Mystique of Romance > > *Et, O ces voix d’enfants, chantant dans la coupole!* > > > *the walls* > > *Of Magnus Martyr hold* > *Inexplicable splendour of Ionian white and gold.* > > > > > > *The voice of the hidden waterfallAnd the children in the apple-treeNot > known, because not looked forBut heard, half-heard, in the stillnessBetween > two waves of the sea. * > > *the fire and the rose are one * > > CR > > On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 1:06 PM Chanan Mittal <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> *Dry the pool, dry concrete, brown edged,And the pool was filled with >> water out of sunlight,And the lotos rose, quietly, quietly,The surface >> glittered out of heart of light...Then a cloud passed, and the pool was >> empty.* >> >> >> *Go, go, go, said the bird: human kindCannot bear very much reality.* >> >> This is it. >> CR >> >> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 6:32 PM Chanan Mittal <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> >>> Classicism of Eliot’s poetry is, in fact, a consummation of Romanticism, >>> not its negation. It’s a triumph of imagination. >>> >>> “Here, said she, >>> Is your card, the drowned Phoenician Sailor, >>> (Those are pearls that were his eyes. Look!)” >>> >>> The personal here acquires a more universal character without ceasing to >>> be personal: >>> >>> “I sat upon the shore >>> Fishing, with the arid plain behind me >>> Shall I at least set my lands in order?” >>> >>> And the images soar as much on wings of Romantic poesy: >>> >>> “The river’s tent is broken: the last fingers of leaf >>> Clutch and sink into the wet bank. The wind >>> Crosses the brown land, unheard. The nymphs are departed.” >>> >>> A transformation of Romanticism, if you like. Its spirit vibrant and >>> alive. >>> >>> CR >>> >>> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 8:12 PM Chanan Mittal <[log in to unmask]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> In point of fact the point I’m making is nothing new. It was raised as >>>> earlier as that. It was made by Grover Smith too (TS Eliot’s Poetry and >>>> Plays: A Study in Sources and Meaning). Eliot, he wrote, was admittedly a >>>> classicist only ‘in tendency.’ Temperamentally a romantic, he abhorred the >>>> gap between the actual and the ideal. All the same Eliot paved the way for >>>> a new idiom of poetry. >>>> >>>> CR >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 6:06 PM Cox, Carrol <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> The New Poetic: Yeats to Eliot (Classic Criticism) C.K. Stead: >>>>> Continuum >>>>> >>>>> ------- >>>>> >>>>> This alleged "new poetic" is over a century old; in other words, >>>>> critics who treat Pound, Eliot, Yeats etc as "new" are duplicating the >>>>> critics of 1920 who regarded Wordsworth and Shelley as the cutting edge of >>>>> poetic practice. >>>>> >>>>> Is there anyone on the list deeply familiar with the criticism & >>>>> scholarship of the last 20 hears who can give real information on what >>>>> 'now' is regard as "new"? >>>>> >>>>> At the time when LBJ" rape of democracy in the Dominican Republic >>>>> abruptly shifted my focus of energy, I was reading Merwin, Snodgrass, et al >>>>> as "new," though my personal preferences were Pound & Pope. And even by >>>>> 1965 the "New" critics were looking a bit moldy alongside Frye, Kenner, >>>>> Davie, & others. >>>>> >>>>> Carrol >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>