> His whole aesthetic was one of impersonality. Also, that whole flat reading style thing came out of a strain of New Criticism that believed in letting the work stand on its own. The reader shouldn't interpret it or put any inflection on it, but just let it be as it is.

Thanks for this interesting information, Shannon.

If this is what Eliot was trying, in my opinion he failed badly, and his theoretical premise was weak. There is no such thing as an uninflected reading; there are only readings that are inflected flatly. That is not a neutral or valueless state, it communicates something forcefully.

I also can't see why anyone would aspire to a voiceless text, which to me seems to be a species of the "view from nowhere". You cannot wish the problem of perspective away, you must come to terms with it, and work with it skillfully. This is particularly true in a performance medium such as recitation.

No, that doesn't work for me at all. Bad Eliot!