Jump to content

Talk:T. S. Eliot

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sp0 (talk | contribs) at 06:04, 16 December 2009 (just keeping it to the waste land...). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:V0.5

Influenced

I re-added Giorgos Seferis to the Influenced section, whom somebody recently took out of it without explanation. Eliot's influence on Seferis is a critical commonplace and was acknowledged by Seferis himself; it's also stated on the Wikipedia page on him. Apparently references aren't needed in the Influenced section, but if one is needed for this, I or someone can easily find one to add. I've also removed the name of Bob Dylan and the associated link. So far as I know Eliot is not known to be a specific influence on Dylan -- if Dylan himself, or a respectable rock music critic or contemporary social historian has said he was, then his name can be added back. But the link I removed was to a college student's amateur Dylan fan page, which simply states without references that Eliot was an influence -- I don't think many people would consider such a link to be a persuasive reference. Strawberryjampot (talk) 15:48, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I put Dylan back in. The reference could be better, yes, but at least it is a reference. And, I dare say, Dylan is more important than Seferis. Eliot's influence on Dylan, by the way, is well-established, and Dylan has acknowledged it. By the way, the "influenced" list is not supposed to list every person influenced by Eliot, only the most important. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 16:03, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have no objection to listing Dylan (and assuming good faith I'll accept that the influence is established.) The citation still bothers me though. Is there any documentation of Wikipedia policy on how to determine if a citation is a respectable enough source to use? Considering all the junk that's on the internet, there must be some sort of standard on what to use. (As for Seferis, his standing is no doubt a matter of opinion, but surely the influence of one Nobel Prize winner on another meets the notability criterion.) Strawberryjampot (talk) 17:33, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Dylan is more famous than Seferis but, at least in Greece, Seferis is a lot more important. Seferis was one of the two most distinguished Greek poets of the 20th century, the other being Cavafy. He was a highly respected and influential figure, and continues to loom over Greek literature to this day; I assume it's only ignorance that makes the previous writer dismiss him and another writer consider him worth removing. Lexo (talk) 22:14, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replace "Bibliography" section with "Works" article?

Since the subject section is not actually a bibliography in the sense of a list of sources referenced in the article, but rather a list of Eliot's works, I propose renaming the section to "Works" and moving the contents to List of works by T.S. Eliot, along the lines of List of works by William Butler Yeats. If I get a little time at home, I will probably be bold and just do it, unless someone makes a persuasive argument against the change here. Or anyone else with the time and inclination should feel free to do it, too. -- Meyer (talk) 02:06, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Odd Punctuation - commas

This is a great article but has odd and ill use of commas. It seems a bit glaring to me. Do others see it? Nobody else has commented on it. For example "From 1898 to 1905, Eliot was a day student..." or "In 1925, Eliot left Lloyds". These are not clauses. The writer is using commas to mark suggested breathing points which is not what commas are for. If no-one comments within the week I'll be bold. Please feel free to leave me a message on my page with your take on this. Thanks Spanglej (talk) 15:51, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The examples mentioned were probably introduced by me. I must have put in many more of the commas you hate. I'm really bad with commas. Please fix them. WikiParker (talk) 18:16, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't hate them, I just notice them. I'll re-work the punctuation a little. Thanks Spanglej (talk) 00:42, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the cited examples, Spanglej's notion of comma usage is correct. He should feel free to make the changes. -- Meyer (talk) 00:53, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]


I'm a she. I have ;-) Spanglej (talk) 03:05, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see a man or a woman. I only see a Wikipedia editor. ;) -- Meyer (talk) 13:57, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"This is a great article but has odd and ill use of commas ... For example 'From 1898 to 1905, Eliot was a day student...' or 'In 1925, Eliot left Lloyds'. These are not clauses." -- Spanglej
" In the cited examples, Spanglej's notion of comma usage is correct." -- Meyer
Um, er ...
Strawberryjampot (talk) 03:32, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Liverpool Daily Post Slander Case

T.S.Elliot took legal action against the Liverpool Daily Post after the Newspaper printed an article which suggested he was of bad character. The case genuinely irritated Elliot. 'When rumours like this are put about by the Press you know how damaging they can be', he wrote in a letter to a friend.Johnwrd (talk) 01:25, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cows

On June 5 The Times revealed that in 1937 Eliot composed a 34-line poem entitled "Cows" for the children of Frank Morley, a friend and a fellow director of the publisher Faber and Faber.[1]. Morley's duaghter, Susanna Smithson, uncovered the poem as part of the BBC Two's "Arena: T.S. Eliot" broadcast that night as part of the BBC Poetry Season.[2] I believe the poem's `discovery' might warrant a mention in the article, but not sure where. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:19, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Old Possum's Book of Practical Cats is a collection of light verse about animals written about the same time. Perhaps a sort of appendix there could handle "Cows." WikiParker (talk) 01:00, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes indeed. The common chronology, style and motivation all suggest that Cats could comfortably co-habit with Cows. Perhaps a bovine footnote would suffice there. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:48, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Now added as a subsection in the Old Posssum's article. If this looks out of place, it could be converted into an appendix or footnote. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:39, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Rock

I've just started a new article about Eliot's 1934 pageant play, The Rock. Contributions are welcome, but I would advise contributors to read the play. It's long out of print and has never been reprinted since the initial publication, but there are a lot of old copies floating around on Amazon and Abebooks. Any verifiable information concerning the origin and production of the play would be very useful. Almost all my books by Eliot, as well as my copies of the Ackroyd and Gordon biographies, are in storage at the moment, so I'm writing with at least one hand tied behind my back. Thanks. Lexo (talk) 14:46, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Drop me a line when you need info. I have 4 other biographies and a few works that specialize on various topics (2 on religion in the works). Ottava Rima (talk) 16:36, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Boas and anti-semitism

On Septempter 19, 2009 I removed the lines:

  • The philosopher George Boas, who had previously been on friendly terms with Eliot, wrote to him that, "I can at least rid you of the company of one." Eliot did not reply.

with the comment:

  • Removed Boas. Needs definite citation. I've seen scholarly cites of both "George Boas" and "Franz Boas."

Rather than having the real name and a citation given I would really prefer that the statements remain out of the article. They really reflect more on Boas than Eliot and the article is about Eliot. WikiParker (talk) 17:25, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]


What's Pound Got To Do With It?

When quoting Eliot in his later years on the reason for his marriage, the article says:

"And she persuaded herself (also under the influence of Pound) that she would save the poet by keeping him in England."

As of today, this is the first time in the article that "Pound" is mentioned. Wherever the first reference is made to pound, it should have his full name. I didn't change it because my next point may result in an earlier reference being added.

The explicit statement that Pound was "also ... the influence" for his wife's deciding to marry him implies that Pound influenced Eliot's own decision to marry (or possibly influenced someone else), but there's nothing in the article remotely relating to this. Something must have been deleted at some point. Ileanadu (talk) 03:33, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pound's full name wasn't given because it's in quoted material (which I didn't add; I'm assuming the quote is correct.) As a temporary measure, I've added Pound's first name in square brackets, the usual convention for inserting an explanatory alteration into a quote. It can be removed later if mention of Pound is added to an earlier passage. Strawberryjampot (talk) 15:25, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Britain's favourite poet

T.S.Eliot was the favourite poet in the United Kingdom in the BBC poll, according the results announced on October 8 2009. If this went in the article, it would help Wikipedia maintain its up-to-date credentials. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 20:23, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]