TS Eliot discussion, American vs. British literature thread

I stumbled onto this site by accident while searching on the internet about T.S. Eliot and happened upon the "American Literature vs British Literature" thread from the archives. It of course predictably devolved into a "pissing contest", filled with childish insults and silly nationalistic chauvinism. However, some of the misinformation I found troubling, even if it was also entertaining. One of the more funny posts was when an English(?) poster arrogantly mocked an American poster for saying that Yeats was not British or English. Yeats, of course was Irish, born in Dublin and was involved in Irish nationalism, even serving in the Irish senate(!) for 6 years. Similarly, a lot of English posters seemed to be fairly uninformed about T.S. Eliot. Not only was he born in the US, he lived and was educated there until he was 25, never leaving the country apart from a year in France in his early 20's. He also considered himself to be more of an American than English poet-

“I’d say that my poetry has obviously more in common with my distinguished contemporaries in America than with anything written in my generation in England. That I’m sure of. . . . In its sources, in its emotional springs, it comes from America.”

This post is not about beating my chest to declare the superiority of American literature, as in fact I think that Ireland and Russia have produced the most impressive literary canon. It is however about a troubling theme that I have found; the fact that many Europeans and non-Americans let their anti-American world view color/colour their perceptions of American literature/art/music, etc. As we have seen from the previous thread, some of the most vociferous critics of American literature are not only entirely ignorant of America's literature but also woefully misinformed as to their own nation's literature (ie insisting that Yeats was British). I think that anti-Americanism is causing many around the world to miss out on writers like Poe, Dickinson, Kerouac and many others, to their own detriment!

as in fact I think that Ireland and Russia have produced the most impressive literary canon

Have you ever heard of French Literature??

I don't like American literature because they too frequently write in dialect and say weird things like "don't lets do that". I need a translation.


<<Have you ever heard of French Literature?? >>

Have you ever heard of Slovakian Literature?

T S Eliot was indeed an American by birth as has been stated in previous threads - born in in St Louis, Missouri, USA, but he became very much an Anglophile following his entry to Oxford University, England, in 1915, so much so that he renounced his American citzenship in 1927 and became a naturalised Briton.

A was a passionate lover of London, and during the horrors of the blitz on London during WW2 he became an air raid warden in his spare time.

Apart from practical cats, one of my favourite T S Eliot works is "Murder in the Cathedral" - the story relating to the killing of Thomas a Becket (later to be canonised as St Thomas of Canterbury) - the Archbishop of Canterbury, close to the main altar of Canterbury Cathedral, Kent, England, on the late evening of 29 December 1170. The assassination was carried out by four Knights of the Realm, on the orders of the then King of England, Henry II, who had become seriously aggrieved by Thomas who refused to acknowledge Henry's desire to keep the Roman Catholic clergy in total subordination to the Monarchy and the State - Thonas was too much of a zealous ascetic for Henry's liking...the famous words of Henry at the time being: "Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?" So he got his heavies to finish the poor guy off while he was at prayer in the very Cathedral itself.

There is now a shrine to St Thomas a Becket in Canterbury Cathedral, which shares with St Paul's Cathedral, London, the extraordinary distinction of remaining relatively intact (save for secondary damage) during all the massive air raids on both London and Canterbury (and of course many other areas) during WW2 while practically everything else in their immediate vicinty was razed to the ground and totally destroyed. The expression "Divine Intervention" obviously had some part to play in all that. It didn't work for Coventry though!

Today, seeing the tower of Canterbury Cathedral dominatiing the skyline above the city, viewed from miles away on top of the Kentish Downs*, is a beautiful sight.

No doubt Eliot still held the country of his birth in very high regard in spite of his acquired British citizenship, but as I say he very much loved England and London, and he obviously had his reasons.

http://www.infobritain.co.uk/TS_Eliot_Biography_And_Visits.htm

Biography:

http://www.theweeweb.co.uk/public/author_profile.php?id=138

*The Downs .....in Southern England - upland countryside - gentle hills and vales and pasturelands usually over about 200m ASL.

46 Gordon Square, Bloomsbury, London WC1 - the home of Eliot - the blue plaque you can see on the wall in the link above indicates the fact that he lived there. Every London former home of a famous person has a blue plaque on the wall by the main entrance.

Bloomsbury - the area of Central London that was home of many famous people in the world of the arts over the centuries.......in the early 20th century a large group of authors and writers and poet and artists became known as the "Bloomsbury Set". They either lived in wealth in a mansion, or poor and starving yet happy in a garret - as Bennett's History Boy Scripps would say: "The things I do for Jesus!" ;-)

<<*The Downs .....in Southern England - upland countryside - gentle hills and vales and pasturelands usually over about 200m ASL. >>

You'd think they'd call it the "ups" rather than the "downs".

(I guess I'll be going to check on my place up in the "downs" myself tomorrow -- about 600m ASL.)

The Downs - a range of low chalk based hills across Southern and South Eastern England, reaching elevations of up to 350/400m asl - all of them designated as AONBs. Why they are called "Downs" when they are really "Ups" in respect of the surrounding landscape is not clearly defined - let's just call it one of the many quirks of British English. It is possible to go up the Downs, although "go up ON the Downs" would be the most usual way of saying it.

Famous high point landmarks on the Downs - the Hog's Back, Box Hill, Leith Hill, Gibbet Hill (yes, there really was a gibbet there a couple of centuries ago - a wooden structure resembling a gallows where the bodies of executed criminals were hung to public view, and meant to be a warning to others thinking of breaking the law of the land - this particular gibbet was placed by the side of the road on the summit of Gibbet Hill (310m asl), near the spectacular loop in the road known as The Devil's Punchbowl, above the town of Haslemere, Surrey). Such ghoulishness in such gorgeous countryside....

The South Downs - Sussex, Hampshire and Dorset

http://www.southdownsonline.org/

The North Downs - Surrey and Kent

http://www.nationaltrail.co.uk/Northdowns/index.asp

AONB - Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Have you ever heard of French Literature?? >>

Have you ever heard of Slovakian Literature?

I have heard of the total insignificance of Slovakian literature

<<I don't like American literature because they too frequently write in dialect and say weird things like "don't lets do that". I need a translation. >>

That's funny. I've only seen that phrase in a British book. It was in one of the Chronicles of Narnia books.

No American has probably said anything even remotely like "don't let's do that" in the last hundred years, blanc -- that's not a turn of phrase we would easily wrap our mouths around if we wanted to! Sounds very British to me. Americans would say "let's not do that".

I just finished reading a novel by an English writer set in contemporary London, and the only traces of dialectical difference (mainly slang) appear in occasional snippets of dialogue. There were virtually no signs of dialectical differences in any of the expository sections or in much of the ordinary dialogue, which proves the point, yet again, that standard English and standard American speech differ more in accent than in content, syntax, or vocabulary. I had the same experience with a series of Australian mysteries. If you can read almost an entire book from another country in your own "voice" without stumbling over an odd turn of phrase or grammatical choice, then that's a pretty good sign that English is English is English.....try reading something that really IS written entirely in non-standard dialect, like Alice Walker's The Color Purple, and you'll see some REAL contrast!

<<No American has probably said anything even remotely like "don't let's do that" in the last hundred years, blanc -- that's not a turn of phrase we would easily wrap our mouths around if we wanted to! Sounds very British to me. Americans would say "let's not do that". >>

Yeah, but we're talking about literature here. Most good American literature is old and rural and hence there is a lot of annoying dialect used, regarless of modern American English.

Old and rural? What are you reading -- the Deerslayer? Leatherstocking Tales? We have plenty of good modern lit. If you choose to confine yourself to the 18th C., well, even a modern American like me would be in the same boat as you, having to check out the footnotes. But that's hardly a defining characteristic of American literature in general!

I know this is a little bit of an aside. I bought a copy of Charles Dickens 'Oliver Twist' some time ago because it was available for £1. Over Christmas when Oliver Twist was on TV, I dug it up and had a look at it. In particular I had a look at the character of 'Fagin', both in the book, and in the Roman Polanski Film and the earlier Black 'n' White film.

I offered the book as a present to a guest, but he was not interested in taking it. Afterwards I thought, that he was right - the description of Fagin is anti-semitic.

Should this book be banned?

Recently there has been a lot of publicity given to the new stage play 'Oliver' with Rowan Atkinson playing 'Fagin'. It is very interesting and entertaining.

Like a lot of things we are not supposed to do, there is something really appealing about this portrayal of 'evil' or 'a bad man'. Fagan is such a vivid character.

I am sure that in a Politically Correct world 'Oliver Twist' would be banned. However I think there is something to be gained by trying to analyse it and discuss it. What is more worrying are the deeper unconscious prejudices that it gives rise too.

No, books should never be banned. They should be read in the light of the mores and prejudices of the day or of the author and understood to reflect that point of view. As a window to history, that kind of text is invaluable for understanding how things were, and for understanding your own modern values and how they have developed and changed over time. If you only expose yourself to like-minded thinking, how will you ever truly understand your own values and ideas? You need the contrast to put things in true perspective. And the bad guy is always the most fun.

Just the other day I was watching 'Oliver' (1968 musical). It occurred to me that a Marxist spin would be appropriate for this story. Fagin is a Leninist character, organizing pauperized proletariat for a struggle to get back their properties stolen by the ruling oppressors via the unjust relations of production. In comes Oliver, himself a product of monstrous class system. Good revolutionary Fagin observes Olivers talent for class struggle and schools him in revolutionary ideas and tactics. But the counterrevolutionary ruling class exploitators strike back by kidnapping young Oliver, brainwashing him and turning him into a traitor. This results in annihilation of revolutionary cell and tragic ending. Of course the class struggle continues. Sunrise.