I am studying on my own at home in subjects I have not been able to before. I greatly appreciate your posts which have expanded my understanding immeasurably!
Excellent lecture. A poem I've read many times, its imagery never fails to move me, but much of the allusions, the symbolism in the wording were beyond me until I saw this video. It really adds to the appreciation of this incredible piece of literature.
I thank you for the solemnity of this analysis. After having seen a few other men approach this poem (one of the most heartbreakingly sad poems in existence) with loud conviction and, if I may say so, somehow ignorant shouting, this video is a pleasant suprise.
29:43 But in the case of Guy Fawkes, would it not be more apt to say that he reflects the anticipation of a bang that ultimately ends in a failure? He tried to go out with a bang, to blow up the parliament of England, but instead ended with a whimper, falling off the scaffold he was supposed to be hung upon and breaking his neck. The same with Kurtz: he also anticipated a "bang" and ended with a whimper if you think about it. He most likely went to Africa wanting to bring glory to England and himself, but instead had to die in a humiliating, anti-climactic way and have his legacy saved by Marlowe, who had to lie to his wife about his true nature.
Extraordinarily clear and convincing illustration. My only doubt is the meaning of the many 'kingdoms" in the poem(around 10:00). I think "death's other kingdom“ refers to Paradise, not the realm of Death.
Thank you for this well read and very clear explanation of the poem. It is often quoted and because of that I sent it to a friend to highlight the lack of loud voices speaking out against the very obvious negative effect of certain medical procedures that are resulting in unnecessary deaths. I now realize that my selection of the poem was much more astute than an impulsive gesture.
[...] “the dead land the stone images are raised” [...] I totally jumped the gun on that one. Thought he meant grave stones whe he said the ‘stone images are raised.’ It made a lot more sense before.
Reading Eliot along side the Trial and Death of Socrates and Sartre's "Nausea," it seems that Eliot's use of body parts disconnected from bodies, and especially "essences" in this poem ("Shape without form shade without colour,"), is reductio ad absurdum of Platonism. Am I seeing something Eliot is trying to communicate, or just reading between the lines because of how many concurrent lines I'm reading?
Well, he said that it's about the opposition between a naturalistic intellect and a desire for a spiritual/religious dimension to life. Presumably, the two voices should reflect that opposition but I agree that it is not specifically stated.
I notice this tendency for reviewers to write in their own religious interpretation of Eliot but rarely taking him at face his own beliefs… beliefs that he was very much steadfast with
“If we follow the Hindu commandments”…. Sorry, but Eliot was a professed Christian. Write your own poem if you feel that strongly about it. Don’t shoehorn your beliefs into Eliot
I am studying on my own at home in subjects I have not been able to before. I greatly appreciate your posts which have expanded my understanding immeasurably!
Excellent lecture. A poem I've read many times, its imagery never fails to move me, but much of the allusions, the symbolism in the wording were beyond me until I saw this video. It really adds to the appreciation of this incredible piece of literature.
I thank you for the solemnity of this analysis.
After having seen a few other men approach this poem (one of the most heartbreakingly sad poems in existence) with loud conviction and, if I may say so, somehow ignorant shouting, this video is a pleasant suprise.
This has been infinitely more helpful than any other analysis I have come across.
good on ya mate doing gods work
This is helping me so much than it did in my actual class.
29:43 But in the case of Guy Fawkes, would it not be more apt to say that he reflects the anticipation of a bang that ultimately ends in a failure? He tried to go out with a bang, to blow up the parliament of England, but instead ended with a whimper, falling off the scaffold he was supposed to be hung upon and breaking his neck. The same with Kurtz: he also anticipated a "bang" and ended with a whimper if you think about it. He most likely went to Africa wanting to bring glory to England and himself, but instead had to die in a humiliating, anti-climactic way and have his legacy saved by Marlowe, who had to lie to his wife about his true nature.
Good onr
Extraordinarily clear and convincing illustration. My only doubt is the meaning of the many 'kingdoms" in the poem(around 10:00). I think "death's other kingdom“ refers to Paradise, not the realm of Death.
Thank you so much for the clear analysis
Thank you sir. Well done.
shot for the analysis mate!
Thank you so much for your analysis. It’s been really helpful and eye opening
Thank you for this well read and very clear explanation of the poem. It is often quoted and because of that I sent it to a friend to highlight the lack of loud voices speaking out against the very obvious negative effect of certain medical procedures that are resulting in unnecessary deaths. I now realize that my selection of the poem was much more astute than an impulsive gesture.
NERD
Thank you for the perspective.
A very impressive lecture on a very interesting poem.
[...] “the dead land the stone images are raised” [...]
I totally jumped the gun on that one. Thought he meant grave stones whe he said the ‘stone images are raised.’
It made a lot more sense before.
You're truly the stuffed filling us the hollow, with thy knowledge.
Great analysis.
A Naturalistic Intellect.
Perhaps... a bit more inflection, if I may be so bold, sir...
Subscribed
Reading Eliot along side the Trial and Death of Socrates and Sartre's "Nausea," it seems that Eliot's use of body parts disconnected from bodies, and especially "essences" in this poem ("Shape without form shade without colour,"), is reductio ad absurdum of Platonism. Am I seeing something Eliot is trying to communicate, or just reading between the lines because of how many concurrent lines I'm reading?
so what exactly are the 2 voices? kinda bmbiguous or maybe im bad at listneing
Well, he said that it's about the opposition between a naturalistic intellect and a desire for a spiritual/religious dimension to life. Presumably, the two voices should reflect that opposition but I agree that it is not specifically stated.
human or Robart?????
I notice this tendency for reviewers to write in their own religious interpretation of Eliot but rarely taking him at face his own beliefs… beliefs that he was very much steadfast with
What’s with the headphones?
“If we follow the Hindu commandments”…. Sorry, but Eliot was a professed Christian. Write your own poem if you feel that strongly about it. Don’t shoehorn your beliefs into Eliot