WARNING: This message has originated from an External Source. This may be a phishing expedition that can result in unauthorized access to our IT System. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email.How fine to read. I have been only a reader of this list, not a contributor. I am a long-time reader of Eliot and have an unfinished thesis on his poems that comprise Prufrock and Other Observations. But I am also a mediator/conflict resolution practitioner. Said practice speaks about the dangers of and problems with over-much certainty and the value of uncertainty for learning. At the same time, over-much uncertainty is also psychologically problematic. We have an evolutionarily determined and survival-necessary urge to know, to understand our environment. In the healthy psychology, there is a salutary balance between certainty and uncertainty. I say the obvious here, but it is an axiom about which we do best to constant remind ourselves.
I so value your comments, Chanan, that I felt a desire to express my appreciation.
And to shamelessly promote, you might be interested in my recent book published by Routledge in 2018, Embodied Conflict: the neural basis of conflict and communication.
In any case, I send my best regards.
541-915-9606[log in to unmask]
See Tim’s new book “Embodied Conflict: the neural basis of conflict and communication” at www.routledge.com/9781138087118Get a 30% discount
at that URL using the code ADC20 Read excerpts from the book
Read about Tim’s climate change novel at:
WARNING: This message has originated from an External Source. This may be a phishing expedition that can result in unauthorized access to our IT System. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email.
Just by way of an elaboration.
It is for the first time, I must admit, ever since I’ve been on the list, that I realize I was always emphatic about the absolute stances I took vis-a-vis my takes on various subjects of discussion. That was wrong. Points raised at the list against my assertions were equally valid from another perspective which I, rather unwittingly, chose to dismiss.
My recent stance, for instance, on Eliot’s PRUFROCK as a first modernist piece against Mirrlees’ PARIS was not wholly valid. PARIS did pave the way, if it did, for THE WASTE LAND.
Same was the case with my assertion on THE WASTE LAND ending. Nancy Gish had made a detailed study on the subject which I had not studied. So I shouldn’t have asserted that my take on it was absolute and final. ‘Shantih’ may carry other resonances, as much as the Hieronymo lines.
My lesson: one must not assert one’s point of view as if it is the only one. One must concede other points of view.
Not that I intend to return.
I’ve dwelt at length on our different approaches to Eliot at this forum. IMHO, any comprehensive reading of Eliot must take into account all aspects of the subject, many not very pleasant. Nancy Gish, I must admit, has always taken the metaphoric bull by the horn, even if that caused uneasiness to some. She never failed to assert her point of view, whether or not one agreed with her. Well, one must concede differences. Any adamance on my part, at any point, was a failure. It’s not you versus others. Truth and nothing but the whole truth should prevail in the last analysis.