The coherence of the poem is not at the structural, semantic or syntactic
levels, it is at the perceptual level. Now-a-days classification or
finding a place for everything and having a place for everything is
what goes as our excuse for real thought. THE WASTE LAND cannot be
classified. It is a stone in the shoes of its critics.
From: Richard Seddon [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 11:18 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: structure
I agree with you about the disorganized way that much of TWL was written.
However, both TSE and EP regarded the typescript that EP was given as a
whole, single poem even before EP's work on it. The typescript even had an
unifying title, "He Do 'The Police In Different Voices: Part I". Even then
they and Vivien thought of it as a single entity not as a collection of
small poems. What TSE needed was EP's help clearing away the rubble from
"The Waste Land". EP's comments definitely show that he conceived of the
poem as a coherent whole. When EP returned the marked up notebook it was
still not the poem we know today, it was just slimmer. All of the early
readers of the finished poem saw it as a whole and no one challenged its
unity. Some didn't like it but no one said it was not an "it".
If TWL does not have a "structure" what does it have that gives it its
wholeness? If it is these patterns that you write of, what are they?
Patterns of what, of relationships? Of themes? Is it merely that it has a
definite beginning (in spring the time of beginnings) and a definite end,
The original title seems to be with a different typewriter and at a
different time from the original typescript. Does any one have any theories