>>7288018Look, I'm all with you about language etc. I'm not calling Eliot a talentless hack, I'm calling him a writer I don't enjoy.
To me the constant references to academia are, as in Pound's poetry, distracting and obnoxious.
I really, seriously, honestly get the feeling these guys were posturing more often than they were deploying references for the plain reason that they added something to the poem.
I don't doubt these guys were scholars who knew and read an enormous amount. I doubt whether they had the superhuman patience to refrain from showmanship for the sake of art. I mean, it gets to be impossibly obscure. Nobody has command of Vedic texts, classical Chinese and Medieval Troubador poetry so as to be comfortable to reference each of them.
It seems like early 20th century poetry was more fond of referencing than any other period.
My personal opinion is that you should reference only when the value of the reference is enough to cut a profit after deducting points for how obnoxious and annoying it is, and finally that you should only reference works, authors and ideas you have a powerful and detailed grasp of.
