by J. L. Speranza
--- for the Grice Club.
THIS WAS MEANT as commentary on Helm's apt reply to McPherson, this blog. Blogger disallowed my publication in that thread, hence here:
Larry Helm: you are right on spot when you mentioned that ambiguity was much better understood THEN. I once wrote a piece which I entitled, and circulated publicly elsewhere, "Seven Types of Griceian Ambiguity"! -- punning on that Sheffield-born master (with the pipe and beard): Empson.
My favourite pre-Griceian master of literary criticism -- a favour I share with zillions -- is Owen Barfield.
This below is a commentary on his "Poetic Diction: A study in meaning", from the wiki entry for Barfield.
I don't like The Waste Land much -- or rather, having seen that horrendous film, "Tom and Viv" I came to realise that most of it was written by that darling of society and pathetic figure in the end: Vivian Haigh-Wood. This again after the Barfield cite from the wiki.
-- Barfield's Poetic Diction opens with examples of "felt changes" arising in reading poetry, and discusses how these relate to general principles of poetic composition. But Barfield's greater agenda is "a study of meaning". Using poetic examples, he attempts to demonstrate how the imagination works with words and metaphors to create meaning. He shows how the imagination of the poet creates new meaning, and how this same process has been active, throughout human experience, to create and continuously expand language. For Barfield this is not just literary criticism: it is evidence for the evolution of human consciousness. This, for many readers, is his real accomplishment: his unique presentation of "not merely a theory of poetic diction, but a theory of poetry, and not merely a theory of poetry, but a theory of knowledge". This theory was developed directly from a close study of the evolution of words and meaning, starting with the relation between the primitive mind's myth making capacity, and the formation of words. Barfield uses numerous examples to demonstrate that words originally had a unified "concrete and undivided" meaning, which we now distinguish as several distinct concepts. For example, the single Greek word pneuma (which can be variously translated as "breath", "spirit", or "wind") reflects, Barfield argues, the primordial unity of these concepts of air, spirit, wind, and breath, all included in one "holophrase". This Barfield considers not the application of analogy to natural phenomena, but the discernment of its pre-existence. This is the perspective Barfield believes is original in the evolution of consciousness, which was "fighting for its life", as he phrases it, in the philosophy of Plato, and which, in a regenerate and more sophisticated form, benefiting from the development of rational thought, needs to be recovered if consciousness is to continue to evolve."
Re: Viv:
"Eliot was in Oxford for one year only, and was expected to return to Harvard to begin a career as an academic philosopher, an idea he railed against. He wanted to be a poet. He had already completed The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock in 1911,[6] the poem that was to make his name when it was published in Chicago in 1915, and he saw remaining in England as a way to escape his parents' plans for him. When he was in his 60s, Eliot wrote that he was immature and timid at the time, and was probably in love with Emily Hale, a Bostonian he'd had a relationship with back in the U.S.; he wrote her 1,000 letters over the course of his life, letters that his estate has so far not allowed to be published.[6] What he really wanted from Vivienne, he said, was a flirtation. But a meeting with the American poet, Ezra Pound, had persuaded him that the pursuit of poetry was possible, and in Eliot's mind marrying Vivienne became part of that, in that it meant he could stay in England and avoid philosophy at Harvard.[18] "'I came to persuade myself that I was in love with her," he wrote, "simply because I wanted to burn my boats and commit myself to staying in England." ... The couple were married after three months, on June 26, 1915 at Hampstead Register Office in London, with Lucy Ely Thayer, Scofield's sister with whom Vivienne had become close, and Vivienne's aunt, Lillia C. Symes, as witnesses. Eliot signed himself as of "no occupation," and described his father as a brick manufacturer.[19] Neither of them told their parents.... Cyril Connolly, the writer, spread a story that Vivienne had seduced Eliot in a punt, and that he had felt obliged to marry her—the "awful daring of a moment's surrender/Which an age of prudence can never retract" that Eliot writes of in The Waste Land—though James Edwin Miller argues that it was unlikely either would have felt that sex had compromised Vivienne, because she had already had at least one affair.[20] In any event, Eliot told a friend, Conrad Aiken, that he wanted to marry and lose his virginity....
In 1938 Vivienne was committed to a Northumberland House mental asylum on the borders of Harringay in north London. On 22 January 1947, never visited by Eliot, Vivienne died at the age of 58. The cause of death was given as a heart attack, but it is thought more probable that she overdosed."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Cyril Connolly, the writer, spread a story that Vivienne had seduced Eliot in a punt, and that he had felt obliged to marry her—the "awful daring of a moment's surrender/Which an age of prudence can never retract" that Eliot writes of in The Waste Land—though James Edwin Miller argues that it was unlikely either would have felt that sex had compromised Vivienne, because she had already had at least one affair.
ReplyDeleteGhastly. And lest we forget...Lord Russell hisself supposedly humped Viv, even while PMS Eliot was in the house, or out for tea, reading Horace, what have you. Any rationalist's got to respect the old goat for that.
Yes. In fairness to Viv, I think SHE typed "The Waste Land". I think "April is the cruellest month" is hers. The film "Tom and Viv" is pretty good, but then so is Miranda Richardson who plays Viv. Russell makes a cameo performance as played by this actor who plays Anthony Blanche in "Brideshead Revisited". I think the TITLE for "Waste Land" was also Viv's. I do have the bio, somewhere, on which the film was based. It was forbidden in the USA, I understand. I may have a galley copy, somewhere. I think the Eliot estate sued the makers of "Tom and Viv" -- so there is some hot transcultural polemic here. Helm may know about all this.
ReplyDeleteAu contraire. Tom and Viv was weak in my estimation, and DaFoe hardly TS (not me favorite scribe, but ...well..a bit deeper ). And the Russell character did not seem too accurate--to wax biographically for a few nano-seconds, Russell was the mentor and benefactor of so many greats --Eliot, Lawrence, Wittgenstein, Keynes, others. Yet he's become a sort of Pangloss-figure and symbol of ...oh stuffy, british arrogance, which is mostly BS. Russell was the one denouncing the blackshirts, the nazis, AND the stalinists, while the literary types flirted with Il Duce, and/or communism (or in the case of Eliot, the royals and the anglo-catholic tradition).
ReplyDeleteAlso read Wittgenstein's Poker for a rather flattering portrayal of Russell the man and thinker (and Witt. as possible...madman). Russell was not perfect by any means but hardly the villain that both extreme right and left make him out to be. Even the Chomster respected aged Russell, who in his 90s joined the students protesting 'Nam.
Yes, Lord Russell was a good one. It amused me that he was born in Wales, er, England, er Wales, er England er Wales.
ReplyDeleteI mean, he was born in Monmoutshire when this was part of England. But Monmoutshire is now part of Wales. So I suppose this may allow for some "Action and Events" sort of analysis.
------
Someone said (Gardner died recently) that there is only one way to describe Russell physically or physiognomically: he looked exactly like Tenniel's Mad Hatter, and I have to confess that's MY character in the play.
There is a note in Gardner's Annotated Alice that the Mad Tea Party is Trinity with McTaggart as the dormouse, Moore as the hare, and Russell as the Mad Hatter. I suppose Alice is Philosophy herself!
Heh. Really on the Sinister-scale, Carroll-Dodgson quite outdoes Russell (or most), but they're ideological cousins, perhaps. Alice has its moments I guess, but not my fave...tory-whimsy. Tenniel's drawings pretty cool (probably better than the last ho-wood production)
ReplyDeleteThe Russells, as in Roussel were with Bill of Normandy's liegemen, and later the whigs, but his maternal side....probably a bit of old welsh or briton (his eyes were dark, were they not...). So he may be better cast as say...Merlin, rather than Mad Hatter, but whatev. One of the sons of Godwin and PB Shelley as well.
Yes, and in any case Grice loved him. Bealer (in his "Quality and concept") quotes a mimeo by Grice, "Definite descriptions in Russell and in the vernacular" which someone should publish or edit for the Russell Society -- there is such a thing, of course.
ReplyDeleteGrice possibly was concerned when Russell wrote that little diatribe which included Grice by transitivity, in "Mind": "Mr. Strawson on referring" (repr. in Russell's Analysis papers).
Grice spent the rest of his life trying to befriend the Russellians, and he succeeded!
---
Cool. I doubt Professor Grice's friendship with Russell won him many pals at Cal-Berk.---where it seems either one joins the maoist homies, or perhaps Kissinger posse. I don't claim to have mastered the def. descriptions issue, but am fairly convinced descriptions still hold (regardless of what Kripke tried to sell). Even Searle said that as well, AFAIK
ReplyDeleteA few of my dilettantish attempts at descriptions and Russellian phunn:
ReplyDeleteDescriptions
Napoleon/Hamlet
teapot .
Commentary appreciated. I sort of tired of AP--and even St. Russell's writing-- a few years ago. One, it's rather difficult, and two, tends to make people think you're a nazi or something. And three, Russell seems to lead to Quine and I am not supportive of Quine's naturalist-behaviorist bent
Good. I'll check.
ReplyDeleteI think what appealed Grice about Russell was, well, Logic! The idea that 'grammar' is "a pretty good guide to logical form" and all that. And also to teach Strawson (who WAS Grice's student back at St. John's college in the 1940s so I fear he felt a responsibility on that front: once a student, ALWAYS a student) that ordinary language is NOT sacrosanct.
There is also Grice's reactionary bent: if everybody in Oxford was SHOUTING, "Ordinary Language! No Logical Symbols with Us, Please!", he felt he should let a few know that there was MORE to "Oxford" philosophy than a disrespect for Logic!