[41 Brimmer St., Boston]
I hope that my last letter did not sound priggish. It was not meant so.
Tuesday morning, after three days in bed, for the most part a welcome torpor and isolation, but not of positive enough value to be worth continuing beyond the holiday. (Only one bank-holiday before I leave). I did no work and but very little reading. ICriterion, TheJuly 1932;c3'Commentary';a1 must try to do my June Commentary in the next few days. AsCharles Eliot Norton Lectures (afterwards The Use of Poetry and the Use of Criticism)stimulated by Mirsky;a4 for the public lectures, ICharles Eliot Norton Lectures (afterwards The Use of Poetry and the Use of Criticism)stimulated by Mirsky;a4 have been thinking of a subject (not a title): the conditions of poetic creation and enjoyment. Withpoetryas social construct;a3 the social changes which take place in our time, and with the thought of social change so much in the air – I mean that society no longer consists in a small number of ‘revolutionaries’ and a mass of people who take for granted that nothing can or will change; now the ordinary feeling is ‘what next’ and people differ chiefly in their views of what and the how of change – nowadays a sort of social-economic view of art and literature is more and more held. People see literature more as varying according to the social constitution of the society in which it is written; and are consequently inclined to see it as nothing more – and there seems to me to be a serious danger in that. Society, they think, alters according to laws, and moves towards a definite end; art, literature, religion even, belong not only in their forms but in their essence, to particular phases; and perhaps in the perfectly organised society there will be no place for literature at all. MyMirsky, Dmitri S.stimulates TSE's Norton Lectures;a4 ownMirsky, Dmitri S.'The End of Bourgeois Poetry';a6 vague notions have been stimulated by Mirsky’s ‘Fin de la poésie bourgeoise’; and, as you perceive, are still very vague. But without going too far into sociology, I might illustrate the function of poetry at several past times, and then try to assign it a function for the present or for any time – emphasising what seems to me the permanent things which make poetry more than merely the expression of a particular stage of society. In short, is it perhaps only in a more superficial, though neglected aspect, that poetry can ever be classified, as ‘aristocratic’, ‘bourgeois’ or [‘]proletarian’?
IHinkley, Susan Heywood (TSE's aunt, née Stearns)delighted at Dear Jane's acceptance;a5 had aHinkley, Eleanor Holmes (TSE's first cousin)Dear Jane;g5to be produced in New York;a1 very jubilant letter from Aunt Susie about Eleanor’s having ‘Dear Jane’ accepted in New York – IHinkley, Eleanor Holmes (TSE's first cousin)Charlotte Brontë play;g4compared to Dear Jane;a3 am very glad, as I feel that there is less chance for the Bronte play.1 They say nothing about their plans for this summer. PenelopeNoyes, Penelope Barkerin London, browner and thinner;a8 came in to tea yesterday with V. and came and saw me in bed for a few moments – looking very brown and very much thinner than two years ago – INoyes, James Atkins;a2 hope to see them again soon and I shall ask Pa to lunch – you were not mentioned. IEliot, Vivien (TSE's first wife, née Haigh-Wood)and TSE's departure for America;e9aggrieved at being left;a7 wondered what V. said to her about the American voyage – the fact that I will not take her is rather a grievance, I fear – in explanations to outsiders I emphasise the extra expense and the necessity for me to make money; the fatigue for her comes second; then my inability to look after her and do all that I shall have to do.
IThorp, Willard;a8 hadBeachcroft, Thomas Owen ('T. O.');a1 Willard Thorp to lunch with Tom Beachcroft2 to-day; I thought that they might find something in common in an interest in seventeenth literature; but I did not feel that it went very well. Perhaps they are both too shy; anyway, they both directed their remarks towards me rather than towards each other.
I wonder if I am to have my letter on Wednesday again this week.
1.DearHinkley, Eleanor Holmes (TSE's first cousin)Dear Jane;g5to be produced in New York;a1 Jane, a comedy in three acts about Jane Austen, written in 1919, was to be produced by Eva Le Gallienne at the Civic Repertory Theatre, New York, for eleven days from 14 Nov. 1932. See Arthur Ruhl, ‘“Dear Jane”: Civic Repertory Theatre Offers Play about Jane Austen’, New York Herald Tribune, 15 Nov. 1932; ‘Miss Hinkley: Local Playwright’, Boston Globe, 26 Jan. 1971, 37; Russell Clark and William Phillips, ‘Eleanor Holmes Hinkley’s “Lost” Play, Dear Jane: Jane Austen in the Theatre’, Sensibilities 45 (2012), 91–109.
2.T. O. BeachcroftBeachcroft, Thomas Owen ('T. O.') (1902–88), author and critic. A graduate of Balliol College, Oxford, he joined the BBC in 1924 but then worked for Unilevers Advertising Service until 1941. He was Chief Overseas Publicity Officer, BBC, 1941–61; General Editor of the British Council series ‘Writers and Their Work’, 1949–54. His writings include Collected Stories (1946).
2.T. O. BeachcroftBeachcroft, Thomas Owen ('T. O.') (1902–88), author and critic. A graduate of Balliol College, Oxford, he joined the BBC in 1924 but then worked for Unilevers Advertising Service until 1941. He was Chief Overseas Publicity Officer, BBC, 1941–61; General Editor of the British Council series ‘Writers and Their Work’, 1949–54. His writings include Collected Stories (1946).
5.EleanorHinkley, Eleanor Holmes (TSE's first cousin) Holmes Hinkley (1891–1971), playwright; TSE’s first cousin; daughter of Susan Heywood Stearns – TSE’s maternal aunt – and Holmes Hinkley: see Biographical Register.
4.DmitriMirsky, Dmitri S. S. Mirsky (1890–1939), son of Prince P. D. Svyatopolk-Mirsky, army officer and civil servant. Educated at the University of St Petersburg, where he read Oriental Languages and Classics, he served as an army officer and was wounded during WW1 while fighting on the German front; later he served in the White Army. In 1921, he was appointed Lecturer in Russian at the School of Slavonic Studies, London (under Sir Bernard Pares), where his cultivation and command of languages brought him to the attention of a wide literary circle. His works include Contemporary Russian Literature (2 vols, 1926) and A History of Russian Literature from the Earliest Times to the Death of Dostoevsky, 1881 (1927). In 1931 he joined the Communist Party of Great Britain (see ‘Why I became a Marxist’, Daily Worker, 30 June 1931), and in 1932 returned to Russia where he worked as a Soviet literary critic (and met Edmund Wilson and Malcolm Muggeridge). In 1937 he was arrested in the Stalinist purge, found guilty of ‘suspected espionage’, and sentenced to eight years of correctional labour: he died in a labour camp in Siberia. See G. S. Smith, D. S. Mirsky: A Russian–English Life, 1980–1939 (2000). Mirsky later did TSE this crude disservice: ‘The classicists led by T. S. Eliot, came forward as conscious supporters of the re-establishment of classical discipline, of a hierarchy, and as open enemies of democracy and liberalism – in short, as the organized vanguard of theoreticians of a capitalist class going fascist’ (The Intelligentsia of Great Britain, trans. Alec Brown [1935], 123).
6.JamesNoyes, James Atkins Atkins Noyes (1857–1945), mutual acquaintance in Cambridge, Mass., pursued library and genealogical work, 1895–1905; a great clubman. Father of EH’s friend Penelope Noyes.
12.PenelopeNoyes, Penelope Barker Barker Noyes (1891–1977), who was descended from settlers of the Plymouth Colony, lived in a historic colonial house (built in 1894 for her father James Atkins Noyes) at 1 Highland Street, Cambridge, MA. Unitarian. She was a close friend of EH.
1.Margaret Thorp, née Farrand (1891–1970), contemporary and close friend of EH; noted author and biographer. WillardThorp, Willard Thorp (1899–1990) was a Professor of English at Princeton University. See Biographical Register. See further Lyndall Gordon, Hyacinth Girl, 126–8, 158–9.