Print

Print


I would like to do a portmanteau acknowledgment of
a lot of responses I have received tomy input
on The Waste Land. Not being in scholarly mode
(I am a teacher first and a scholar about fifth),
I don'thave much to add.

I see TWL a mythic construction using the grail legend,
much as Joyce's Ullysses uses theOdessey. If a person
want to tease out the biographical dimension, well okay.
That is one option for reading the poem. We do have the
licence of Baudelaire:
Vous hypocrite lecteur....
I am too much a fan of T&TIT to be interested in that
dimension. Oviously the poet gets his feelings, emotions,
perceptions from somewhere. But they are distilled
in the poetic process, to the point where their origin
nolonger matters, because they have become smething new,
new to the reader and new to the poet. Their existential
origin is in the poet's imagination, not in the poet's life.

We are looking at the difference between soap oprah and
high drama. Personally I find the Verdenl dimension very
soappy. It couldwellbe that Eliotwas upset withthe Peter
essay because it offended the memory of an artist for
whom he and others had very high regard, just as they did of
the Vorticist sculptor, Gaudier Bjereska (sp?) who
suffered a similar fate.

Darn it, Gunnar. You really need to tell us all about the
Bauhaus and Gropius et al. (good old al.). It is
crucial to this period and will throw light on some of
the poetic technique of the time, as will Kandinsky help
us with the use of colour. It's your field.

Cheers,
Peter.