So then what is it? or are they?
Are you denying "The Waste Land" unity based on how it was written and its
lack of traditional narrative structure?
I am well aware of the many early attempts at describing a traditional
structure for TWL. I am not aware of "everyone" denying all those attempts.
I am aware that most have given up trying to define a structure and I assure
you I am not trying to come up with another attempt.
I seem to have much trouble with people reading what I write. I am not
trying to debate your declarations concerning structure. I am asking what
it is that seems to contain the poem as a unity if it is not structure. It
was not simply TSE who described the poem as a unified entity. EP saw it as
such and Vivien saw it as such. "The Dial" published it as such.
Translators have translated it as a single poem. I know of no where that it
is referred to as "a collection". For some reason a large amount of
critical ink was spent trying to find a "structure" because the critics saw
it as a unified whole and "knew" that it therefore had to have a structure.
Perhaps they were wrong about "structure" but are you calling them wrong
about its unity?
The question is why do we read TWL as a single poem?