We say, in a vague way, that Shakespeare, or Dante, or Lucretius, is a poet who thinks, and that Swinburne is a poet who does not think, even that Tennyson is a poet who does not think. But what we really mean is not a difference in quality of thought, but a difference in quality of emotion. The poet who "thinks" is merely the poet who can express the emotional equivalent of thought. But he is not necessarily interested in the thought itself. We talk as if thought was precise and emotion was vague. In reality there is precise emotion and there is vague emotion. To express precise emotion requires as great intellectual power as to express precise thought. But by "thinking" I mean something very different from anything that I find in Shakespeare. Champions of Shakespeare as a great philosopher, have a great deal to say about Shakespeare's power of thought, but they fail to show that he thought to any purpose; that he had any coherent view of life, or that he recommended any procedure to follow. "We possess a great deal of evidence", says Wyndham Lewis, "as to what Shakespeare thought of military glory and martial events." Do we? Or rather, did Shake
Questia, a part of Gale, Cengage Learning. www.questia.com
Publication information: Book title: Points of View. Contributors: T. S. Eliot - Author. Publisher: Faber and Faber. Place of publication: London. Publication year: 1941. Page number: 35.