English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Wallace Stevens and T. S. Eliot had little affinity as poets; all this the world well knows. In 1950, Stevens corrected William Van O’Connor’s supposition that he knew Eliot slightly, insisting that they’d never met nor corresponded and protesting, ‘After all, Eliot and I are dead opposites and I have been doing about everything that he would not be likely to do’ (L 677). O’Connor had misread an Eliot-themed issue of the Harvard Advocate (December 1938), attributing to him Allen Tate’s contribution; Stevens actually wrote a rather more qualified ‘Homage to T. S. Eliot’, noting that ‘His prodigious reputation is a great difficulty’, and consequently asserting the need to read Eliot ‘out of the pew, so to speak’ (CPP 801). In 1940, ruminating on the possibility of establishing a ‘Chair of Poetry’ with his new acquaintance Henry Church (its potential funder) and envisaging the level of eminence necessary to its holder, Stevens thought of Eliot again, but was dismissive: ‘It is possible that a man like T.S. Eliot illustrates the character, except that I regard him as a negative rather than a positive force’ (CPP 806-7). His covering letter to Church had argued that the post required ‘a scholar, or, perhaps better, a man with an extremely aggressive mind’ (L 376): possibly Eliot might have been aggressive enough, but evidently not in the right way. For his part, Eliot noticed Stevens a good deal less than Stevens noticed Eliot, and when in 1955 Faber and Faber published the Collected Poems, Eliot had heralded the event by a statement in the Trinity Review (1954) that was hardly fulsome in its praise – despite his claim to be an ‘admirer’ – and, in its assessment of Stevens’ current standing, perhaps even had an air of speaking de haut en bas. ‘His reputation is beginning to spread’, noted the Nobel laureate whose own reputation had been judged ‘prodigious’ sixteen years previously, whilst also revealing that the idea of his firm’s publishing Stevens had actually originated with ‘one of my fellow directors’. Stevens, then, had a certain investment in asserting his difference from Eliot, and Eliot seems not greatly to have bothered about Stevens. If the latter was not personally acquainted with Eliot, he did have friendly relations (of his kind) with Robert Frost, William Carlos Williams and Marianne Moore. In fact, the nature of Stevens’ objection to Eliot’s unquestioned reputation, and his perception of its negative consequences, was later replicated in something he wrote about Frost in a letter to Church’s widow, Barbara. In this, he noted having declined an invitation to attend a celebration to mark Frost’s eightieth birthday; he recalled having been confronted by Frost’s bust in the rare book library at Harvard, ‘some years ago’, and went on to comment: ‘His work is full (or said

"Dead Opposites" or "Reconciled among the Stars"?: Stevens and Eliot