Hobsbaum also sees a disparity between Eliotıs American writing style and
traditional English poetic writing practice. Although Hobsbaum does not
see this in itself as necessarily negative, the implication is that
American modernism is largely a geographical and cultural entity, unable
to successfully function within an English milieu:
'Again, Eliotıs work exhibits the characteristic American qualities of
free association or phanopoeia and autobiographical content. English
verse, however, has been at its best as fiction: an arrangement of what
is external to the poet to convey the tension or release within'.²
Hobsbaumıs attitude, I think (more surmise), could be taken as more or
less representative amongst some of the British critics contemporaneous
with Hobsbaum. Maybe this is what Kenner might be reacting to.
Hi Jeffrey -
Yes, Hobsbaum might be a fair symmetrical opposite to Kenner. For Kenner,
I think, the big problem is that British literature missed out on the
great adventure of International Modernism (I.M. very narrowly defined,
however; missed out on the central importance of Pound, Kenner would say).
Hobsbaum, I take it, might agree with this, but say it's a good thing
Pound's influence wasn't greater, because where we can see it, it's
disastrous.
But isn't that quotation you include really weird? For one thing, he
surely means "logopoeia" rather than phanopoeia, and even then 'free
association' would be a misreading of the concept. The "dance of the
intellect" isn't the same thing as free association, is it? And TSE's
autobiographical content??
I'm also bemused and skeptical when people make such apparently
prescriptive self-evident remarks about the innate qualities of national
identity and national culture. It is interesting, however, that he says
"English versehas been at its best as fiction." What do you think he's
getting at?
Best,
Jeremy
