2000

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 11.1974  Wednesday, 25 October 2000.

[1]     From:   David M Richman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Tuesday, 24 Oct 2000 16:12:44 -0400 (EDT)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 11.1965 Eliot on the Elizabethans

[2]     From:   Sam Small <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Wednesday, 25 Oct 2000 11:18:50 +0100
        Subj:   Re: SHK 11.1965 Eliot on the Elizabethans


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           David M Richman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 24 Oct 2000 16:12:44 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: 11.1965 Eliot on the Elizabethans
Comment:        Re: SHK 11.1965 Eliot on the Elizabethans

Any critic may be excerpted, to the critic's cost.  Eliot is often
useful and incisive on the Elizabethans.  His characterization of
Marlowe as a writer of savage and serious farce still strikes me, thirty
years after I first read it, as right on the money.  (Even Mr. Eliot had
an interest in money.)  The long introductory essay called "Seneca in
Elizabethan Translation" is still one of the best things I know on
Seneca and the Elizabethans.  His essays on Shakespeare are less good,
and he disowned them (sort of) as the reflections of a young, or at
least, an immature youngish man.  Would we were all that candid.  On
balance, Eliot on the Elizabethans is very much worth reading.  David
Richman

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Sam Small <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Wednesday, 25 Oct 2000 11:18:50 +0100
Subject: 11.1965 Eliot on the Elizabethans
Comment:        Re: SHK 11.1965 Eliot on the Elizabethans

> (Eliot) On Shakespeare: Perhaps it is a part of his special eminence to have
> expressed an inferior philosophy in the greatest poetry

I can perfectly understand this point of view.  The later Shakespeare
philosophy was opaque to say the least.  I like to think of this view as
a realistic vista of the universe where parallel truths hide and
threaten.  For all Fascists, Christians, Communists, Moslems, Atheists
and other such certain-ists this must be painfully repugnant.  I guess
we have to classify Eliot thus.

SAM SMALL

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Search

Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.