Print

Print


Of course, you must also be in touch with Frances Dickey’s *Reports from
the Emily Hale Archive. *

“These letters tell a very different story from the belittling
counter-narrative Eliot wrote in 1960, and in my view, a better one.”

https://tseliotsociety.wildapricot.org/news

CR

On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 4:06 PM Chanan Mittal <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Some resonance here from Keats:
>
> Forlorn! the very word is like a bell
>          To toll me back from thee to my sole self!
> Adieu! the fancy cannot cheat so well
>          As she is fam'd to do, deceiving elf.
> Adieu! adieu! thy plaintive anthem fades
>          Past the near meadows, over the still stream,
>                 Up the hill-side; and now 'tis buried deep
>                         In the next valley-glades:
>          Was it a vision, or a waking dream?
>                 Fled is that music:—Do I wake or sleep?
>
> CR
>
> On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 4:00 PM Chanan Mittal <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> This is what is called a dynamic relationship; it doesn’t remain static
>> after a thousand letters.
>>
>> CR
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 3:44 PM Peter Dillane <[log in to unmask]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Ken,
>>>
>>> I guess if one has been lucky enough not to crash and burn too often in
>>> love it is a good idea to be slow to judge.
>>>
>>> I allow Eliot’s now released  statement was probably written in anger
>>> and it was  a while ago and it is a strange document protesting she took
>>> more notice of her uncle than her boyfriend me! etc.
>>>
>>> Clinton trying to argue that when he said he had not had sex he meant
>>> insertive copulation is tiresome. But when people dally with each other
>>> over canapes I think its still sex not that there’s anything wrong with
>>> that. The notion you can say hey I’m off the hook I didnt take it too far
>>> is unbecoming for a sophisticated man that’s all I meant.
>>>
>>> On the other hand she and he do seem to have shared the belief that
>>> genital relations define the status of a relationship. He as protest of
>>> innocence she of propriety.
>>>
>>> I note he represents their love as not congenial devoid of common
>>> interest while she makes the opposite claim. What can that mean? I spent
>>> the weekend in the pits of a motorcycle race where one could watch men
>>> working on girlfriends and wive’s bikes getting them out on the track and
>>> women similarly occupied on their mens’ bikes. I wondered how many of these
>>> crew gals and guys were bored beyond sanity - week after week year after
>>> year. Was that Eliot? Mmmm
>>>
>>> If as he says she was distant from him on so many fronts it is a
>>> remarkable thing to write over a thousand letters.
>>>
>>> I guess I am being a bit hard on an angry frightened man. Apart from
>>> anything else how do you recall what you said in 1131 letters or whose
>>> correspondence to you is included as they report he sent other people’s
>>> letters to him. You might be worried about all sorts of censure and as his
>>> statement shows in its legalistic preamble he was partly worried about
>>> early release not 2020.
>>>
>>> Ha bloody men full of themselves every damn one of em
>>>
>>> "She said she loved me for the dangers I’d survived, and I loved her for
>>> feeling such strong emotions about me”
>>>
>>> Cheers Pete
>>>
>>>
>>> On 4 Jan 2020, at 3:37 am, Ken Armstrong <[log in to unmask]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello Pete,
>>>
>>> I haven't been following the Hale and letters threads as closely as
>>> maybe I should have, having just started this morning to look at some of
>>> the pages for which CR and Rickard have provided links. And I'm not sure
>>> I've fully comprehended your definition of sex as seen from a certain
>>> Democratic angle, or which Eliot statement you refer to, but am wondering
>>> if it comports with the Guardian Jan. 2 quote from Hale: “We were congenial
>>> in so many of our interests, our reactions, and emotional response to each
>>> others’ needs – the happiness, the quiet deep bonds between us and our
>>> lives, very rich ... And the more because we kept the relationship on an
>>> honourable, to be respected, plane.” That last does sound as if it might
>>> have morphed into the beginning of "Burnt Norton."
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Ken A
>>> On 1/3/2020 12:17 AM, Peter Dillane wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi CR
>>>
>>> Just reading the Eliot statement.
>>>
>>> What do men mean when they tell you “I did not have sex with that woman”.
>>>
>>> At least when Billy Clinton did this  it was a lie or a pretty analytic
>>> way of talking. A bit like the Hollywood code of one foot on the floor.
>>> Clinton was working from self interest at least.  But old TSE  seems to
>>> have thought it a justification . I cant bring myself to consider he had
>>> the same punctilious exclusive oscillatory definition of sex as a Democrat.
>>>
>>> I’m still a bit shaken by his endorsement of his second wife as a goody
>>> because she really loved him. My wife would have said “I’m glad its about
>>> you”
>>>
>>> Pete
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for
>>> Windows 10
>>>
>>> *From: *Chanan Mittal <[log in to unmask]>
>>> *Sent: *Friday, 3 January 2020 3:08 PM
>>> *To: *[log in to unmask]
>>> *Subject: *Re: TS Eliot’s hidden love letters reveal intense,
>>> heartbreaking affair | The Guardian
>>>
>>> An abstraction
>>>
>>> “Perhaps I could not have been the companion in marriage he hoped ...
>>> Perhaps the vision saved both of us from great unhappiness – I cannot ever
>>> know.”
>>>
>>> CR
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 10:43 PM Chanan Mittal <[log in to unmask]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Edward Helmore from Princeton
>>> The Guardian
>>> 2 Jan 2020, 14.50 EST
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/jan/02/ts-eliot-hidden-love-letters-reveal-intense-heartbreaking-affair-emily-hale
>>>
>>>
>>> CR
>>>
>>>
>>>