Brooksian Close Reading of "Prufrock"

The potentially rhetorical questions in one of the final stanzas (the first of the two beginning in “And would it have been worth it, after all”) reflect the very structure and composition of the poem. “Would it have been worth it” questions the limits of interpersonal communication, whether between speaker and listener or between female and desirer. Prufrock, in lamenting his own inaction, doubts the nature of his own desire to initiate a connection with an “other”; the underlying question is whether or not the justification or the success of the attempt is to be judged by the success of the connection. Prufrock’s neurotic self-doubt reflects that of the would-be poet in choosing to compose or not. Eliot’s portrayal of Prufrock’s dilemma ironically mirrors the possibility of his potential audience successfully recognizing what his works attempt to put forth. For Prufrock and Eliot, having established nothing beyond a superficial bond of “cups”, “tea”, and “talk of you and me”, the overwhelming concern is if the true elements of their minds may be expressed with any accuracy or if the plight of human connection lies in the impossibility of shared understanding: the “That is not what I meant at all”. Prufrock’s own invocation of Lazarus and a “her” as object of carnal desire furthers the question. If the poet, potential-prophet, or would-be lover wishes to reveal a truth, Prufrock seemingly recognizes that it must be a self-justified action, as meaning may not rely upon an “other”. Such doubt proves to be the essence of Prufrock’s immobility and the source of his reliance on discursive inner-dialogue rather than action; however, it may be posited that Eliot’s own composition of the poem, itself at times intentionally obfuscated, expresses the poet’s faith in communication, albeit imperfect communication in which a transcendent meaning may be implicitly ascertained.