CR: Couldn't Death by Water be a chance for another life, an ending that is a beginning? Diana
Rick,What I wrote was just to put across my point on the desirability ofkeeping Part IV where it is. The inferno of the poem which Eliotconceived as a representation of "horror" reaches its climax with'The Fire Sermon'. 'Death by Water' then hints at a different typeof death -- a death that transforms and redeems. And Part V, as Iwrote, paves the way for such a life-giving death.Don't you think thissequence makes sense?Regards,CRP.S. Please consider Cleanth Brooks also on this:"The death by water would seem to be equated with the deathdescribed in Ariel's song in The Tempest. There is a definite differencein the tone of the description of this death--"'A current under sea/ Picked his
bones in whispers', as compared with the 'other' death--'bones cast in a
little low dry garret,/Rattled by the rat's foot only, year by year."-----
Chokh Raj <[log in to unmask]> wrote:death by waterIt was most probably Cleanth Brooks who in his 'The Waste Land:A Critique of the Myth' wrote about the lyrical beauty ofA current under sea / Picked his bones in whispers.Reminds me of lines from 'The Tempest' :Full fathom five thy father lies;Of his bones are coralmade;Those are pearls that were his eyes;Nothing of him that doth fadeBut doth suffer a sea-changeInto something rich and strange.A "death by water" is, indeed, so different from the dry, steriledeath in a "rats' alley / Where the dead men lost their bones".Part IV of TWL, therefore, is in the nature of an interlude,adreamy reverie in the midst of a bleak reality. Part V thenpaves the way for such a death.Cheers!CR
Sick sense of humor? Visit Yahoo! TV's Comedy with an Edge to see what's on, when.