D. H. Lawrence, T. S. Eliot, and the Meaning of the Mythical Method

IF 0.1 4区 文学 0 LITERATURE
Charles Sumner
{"title":"D. H. Lawrence, T. S. Eliot, and the Meaning of the Mythical Method","authors":"Charles Sumner","doi":"10.1353/cea.2024.a931455","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Abstract:</p><p>There is a discrepancy between evidence of T. S. Eliot’s respect for D. H. Lawrence and F. R. Leavis’s account of their diametrical opposition. My goal is to establish and spell out the reasons for Eliot’s ambivalent posture. On the one hand, I argue that both authors tried to reconcile the contradiction between social unity and individual freedom, and they did so by resolving it into more basic concerns with morality, impersonality, and tradition. This parallel explains Eliot’s attraction to Lawrence. On the other hand, I argue that the different way they framed and understood these concerns accounts for his antipathy and, in turn, sheds new light on the mythical method in <i>The Waste Land</i>. When considered alongside Lawrence’s work and Eliot’s judgment of it, the mythical method comes across as no glorification of the past but instead as a critique of the present for repeating it.</p></p>","PeriodicalId":41558,"journal":{"name":"CEA CRITIC","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CEA CRITIC","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/cea.2024.a931455","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract:

There is a discrepancy between evidence of T. S. Eliot’s respect for D. H. Lawrence and F. R. Leavis’s account of their diametrical opposition. My goal is to establish and spell out the reasons for Eliot’s ambivalent posture. On the one hand, I argue that both authors tried to reconcile the contradiction between social unity and individual freedom, and they did so by resolving it into more basic concerns with morality, impersonality, and tradition. This parallel explains Eliot’s attraction to Lawrence. On the other hand, I argue that the different way they framed and understood these concerns accounts for his antipathy and, in turn, sheds new light on the mythical method in The Waste Land. When considered alongside Lawrence’s work and Eliot’s judgment of it, the mythical method comes across as no glorification of the past but instead as a critique of the present for repeating it.

D.D. H. 劳伦斯、T. S. 艾略特和神话方法的意义
摘要:T.S.艾略特尊重D.H.劳伦斯的证据与F.R.利维斯关于他们截然相反的描述之间存在差异。我的目标是确定并阐明艾略特采取这种矛盾姿态的原因。一方面,我认为两位作家都试图调和社会统一与个人自由之间的矛盾,他们将这一矛盾化解为对道德、非个人性和传统的更基本的关注。这种平行关系解释了艾略特为什么会被劳伦斯所吸引。另一方面,我认为,他们对这些问题的不同界定和理解导致了艾略特的反感,进而为《荒原》中的神话方法提供了新的启示。如果将神话法与劳伦斯的作品和艾略特对劳伦斯作品的评判结合起来考虑,就会发现神话法并不是对过去的美化,而是对现在重复过去的批判。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CEA CRITIC
CEA CRITIC LITERATURE-
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信