Tabitha Arnesen wrote:
> I think part IV provides a welcome tranquil interlude
> after the end of part III.
Though fitting the mood, "tranquil" is sort of an odd word for the
description of a decaying body, isn't it?
I originally wrote:
> I'm suggesting that possibly "The Waste Land" would be stronger
> if the redacted "Death by Water" had been
> placed between "A Game of Chess" and "The Fire Sermon".
I'm now re-thinking that because of what I also originally wrote:
> I think that the sequence Memory -> Reality -> Death
> isn't too bad.
> Think past, present, future.
The "past, present, future" thought was one I had first right at my
writing it . Since then though it has been bugging me. My suggested
change pretty much divides the poem in two. Much like a blank page
inserted into the poem between the major thoughts:
(Memory, Reality, Death) (Desire, Purgation/redemption)
(Past, Present, Future) (Desire, Purgation/redemption)
As for the other comments made on my post concerning keeping the poem
fragmented with the original order: I still think there would have
been enough of it for Eliot to have made his name.
Thanks for all your thoughts.