The Romantically Impaired Prufrock Essay, Research Paper

The Romantically Impaired Prufrock

T.S. Eliot & # 8217 ; s & # 8220 ; The Lovesong of J. Alfred Prufrock & # 8221 ; depicts the complexness of the modern age. Eliot, himself justified the complexness by reasoning that the poet, who is to function as the translator and critic of a complex age, must compose complex poesy. And surely we would all hold that the twentieth century was a complex age ( Martin 423 ) .

J. Alfred Prufrock is no Hamlet. He is a hopeless romantic at best, T.S. Eliot & # 8217 ; s posting kid for twentieth century blue society.

Prufrock lives in a universe where art and music have become the idle conversation of dilettantish adult females who are spiritually, sexually, and intellectually dead, but for whom the significance and life of art have long since been drained in the eternal rhythm of their teacups ( Fryxell 112 ) . The adult females, & # 8220 ; taking of Michelangelo & # 8221 ; seem to experience no existent passions and they have no existent ideas ; they are machines without the gas or oil that keeps a machine traveling. Prufrock himself is something of an exclusion, but non much of one ( Fryxell 110 ) .

Eliot & # 8217 ; s dramatic soliloquy is built around three major subjects. The first of these is the clip subject. Drenched with anxiousness, Prufrock says: & # 8220 ; And so there will be time. & # 8221 ; Prufrock uses clip as an alibi to stay comfy in his undisturbed existence. By opening the 4th stanza with: & # 8220 ; And so there will be clip, & # 8221 ; Eliot echoes the memorable line: & # 8220 ; Had we but universe plenty and clip & # 8217 ; from Andrew Marvell & # 8217 ; s seductive verse form, & # 8220 ; To His Coy Mistress. & # 8221 ; Ironically, Prufrock does non experience compelled to prehend the twenty-four hours ( Pagnattaro 108 ) . Prufrock repeats his

strong belief that & # 8220 ; so there will be clip & # 8221 ; to inquire & # 8221 ; Do I make bold? & # 8217 ; and Do I make bold? & # 8217 ; & # 8221 ; -that is, foremost, does he make bold show his true feelings to the adult female he adores, and if non, does he make bold to fly down the stares after he rang the buzzer, cognizing that the topic of his fondnesss may descry the & # 8220 ; bald topographic point in the middle & # 8221 ; of his hair ( Pagnattaro 108 ) . Yes, & # 8220 ; so there will be clip, & # 8221 ; clip for Prufrock to drop back everlastingly among the unit of ammunitions of teacups ( Fryxell 111 ) .

The 2nd subject of Prufrock is the & # 8220 ; Do I dare & # 8221 ; subject, in which Prufrock inquiries his ability to upset his existence. The & # 8220 ; Do I dare & # 8221 ; subject reveals Prufrock & # 8217 ; s apprehension of being no good, mediocre, a also-ran, victim of unemployable gifts ( Donoghue 2 ) . Intentionally, Eliot has Prufrock get down this subject with a philosophical inquiry ; Prufrock asks: & # 8220 ; Do I dare dist

urb the existence? ” But before the terminal of the verse form, the inquiry degenerates into: “Do I dare eat a Prunus persica? ” This devolution non merely demonstrates Prufrock’s cowardliness, but reveals the same superficiality as the dilettantish adult females “talking of Michelangelo.” Ultimately, Prufrock’s paradigm displacements from his “universe” to his “digestion.”

The 3rd subject is one of universe fatigue, which is begun in the line: & # 8220 ; For I have known them all already, known them all. & # 8221 ; This subject underscores his depression from the life he leads. This is shown most efficaciously in the line: & # 8220 ; For I have measured out my life with java spoons. & # 8221 ; Prufrock uses his fatigue as an alibi for non making what his alter-ego had hoped to make. He begins this dislocation by stating that it would non be worthwhile, that he would be misunderstood, and that to convey life into this universe he would hold to be like Lazarus come to life, & # 8220 ; come back to state you all. & # 8221 ; But he is non Hamlet, he is non John the Baptist. He is merely a hapless also-ran, J. Alfred Prufrock.

Prufrock can non see the forest for all the toothpicks ( Citino 2 ) . He merely flirts with the impression of being epic, of being alive. He is a sexually repressed, pseudo-intellectual, who can merely woolgather of passion and love. But we pity him ; we relate to him. In a complex age of fast paced life, where 1 has small clip to decelerate down and see life, allow entirely bask it, we have the voice of one ordinary also-ran request: & # 8220 ; Should I, after tea and bar and ices, have the strength to coerce the minute to its crisis. & # 8221 ; J. Alfred Prufrock is no Hamlet. Are you?

Plants Cited

Williamson, George. A Readers Guide to T.S. Eliot. 1953.

Kenner, Hugh. The Invisible Poet ; T.S. Eliot. 1964.

Martin, Mildred. A Half-century of Eliot Criticism. 1972.

Alexander, James D.. Eliot & # 8217 ; s The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock. & # 8217 ; The Explicator. Fall 1994. Vol. 53. p53.

Donoghue, Dennis. Beginning. The Southern Review. Summer 1998. v34. p32-40.

Pagnattaro, Marisa. The Comedy of J. Alfred Prufrock. The Georgia Bar Journal. Fall 1993. Vol. 64. p24-28.

Citino, David. The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock & # 8217 ; s Friend. ANQ. Fall 1998. v11. i4. p61.

Fryxell, Donald. Understanding Prufrock. Robert Frost & # 8217 ; s Chicken Feather ; And Other Lectures. 1968 Augustana College NDEA English Institute.

Eliot, Thomas Stearns. & # 8220 ; The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock, & # 8221 ; The Complete Poems and Plays. New York: Harcourt, 1952.