Modernism and "The Wasteland"
I should first warn everyone that I wrote the majority of this post Monday after the lecture, so there will be some discrepancies in my references to the day seeing as how I am posting this entry today and not Monday (as I had initially intended). Here it goes...
A great lecture, an excellence performance by Professor Kuin and a terribly clever poem, today was an untypically good day at York University for me.
The first time I read T.S. Eliot's "The Wasteland," I was left feeling confused and asking myself, "What the hell is this about?", even though I thought I knew what the poem was about before I read it, modernity and the issues of post-WWI. Thankfully, it seems I am not the only who has found herself lost, Professor Kuin says this is a "difficult" poem and I couldn't agree more.
Writing in the modernist style, Eliot shocked his audience. But not everyone was put off by Eliot's style, it seems "The Wasteland" developed a fan club of individuals who saw the poem as a sort of anthem for the disillusioned. I am thinking this "fan club" still exists today because I have often heard "clever" 20-somethings talking about this poem as if they know what they are talking about. And because I don't know what I am talking about when it comes to this poem or even the style Eliot wrote in, I am going to formulate a sort of list, based on what I have learned thus far about Modernism from this course and other English courses.
Modernism:
-appearance of new subjects, forms and styles
-radical break from typical models (eg. using "cutting" as a method of editing poems, similar to way films are edited)
-determinism (emphasis on psychology)
-existentialism (truths and certainty questioned)
-experimental
-realism
-concern with language
-themes dealing with disillusionment
-exploring the effects of technology on people
-naturalism
I am sure the list goes on, but I can't think of anything else, can you?
I have gathered from Sarah's notes on the film dealing with Modernism that there was a general problem with audience for the poets of this time. As books became more available and more people were reading, the job of the poet to relate to their audience became difficult. The poet couldn't be sure that their allusions made any sense to their readers, because s/he had no way of knowing who was reading their work and what those individuals had previously read. The solution? a) write to the lowest common denominator, like Robert Frost, b) publish with footnotes, like Eliot in "The Wasteland" or c) write whatever you feel without considering the audience, like Ezra Pound. Options b and c seem to alienate the genearal audience, but that doesn't seem to have been a problem for these authors, afterall we study their work to this day.
Now that I have clarified those points for myself, I feel well enough prepared to write about "The Wasteland".
There were some surprising elements to this poem that I enjoyed and are really reflective of Modernism. Foremost is the form. The ways in which Eliot seamlessly moves in and out of the high, middle and low style of poetry through metre and language is terribly impressive. For example, the very beginning of the poem, the first 7 lines is a formal style, after that there is a transition into a conversational style. This transistion is smooth though, you can hear it but it isn't awkard, it just works. Also surprising to me was the multitude of allusions Eliot uses; he truly did have a wide scope of literary and historical knowledge to pull from. For example, Professor Kuin alerted me (/us) to the main allusions, the vegetation myth, The Holy Grail myth, John Webster's "The While Devil," and many biblical references. All these allusions point to themes of life, death and rebirth, which is of course what the poem is ultimately about. The perversion and sterility of the wasteland cannot be corrected until there is death, only then can there be rebirth. On a side note, was The Fisher King and Holy Grail story part of the Perceval story? I recall in a Medieval and Renaissance class I took last year reading this story, I think it was by Chretien de Troyes. I am Googling this...ok it was, here is a link to information about it, http://www.mcelhearn.com/perceval.html. Finally, I am surprised by Eliot's referece to the Buddha and Buddhist philosophy and Hindu doctrine, espeically quotes from the Upanishads. Was there a renewed interest in Eastern religious traditions during the time period in which Eliot was writing? Eliot even quotes a passage from a text written by Hermann Hesse in lines 367-377. Hesse was also the author of Siddhartha, a novel he wrote in 1922 that deals with the Buddhist message as exemplified through the life of a young man named Siddhartha (but not Siddhartha Gautama, the Buddha) who is on a spiritual quest. Perhaps Eliot read this book, but then again, perhaps not, seeing as how both the novel and poem were written in the same year, maybe the dates don't correspond. But if he had, that may in some ways explain his interest and knowledge in and of Eastern religious traditions.
I have asked a lot questions throughout this post and I am hoping someone will be able to answer them or at least consider them. I would also appreciate hearing any of the questions you had or currently have about "The Wasteland", it may open the door to a new perspective for me on this poem and that is the point of posting and commenting, isn't it?
Janice
A great lecture, an excellence performance by Professor Kuin and a terribly clever poem, today was an untypically good day at York University for me.
The first time I read T.S. Eliot's "The Wasteland," I was left feeling confused and asking myself, "What the hell is this about?", even though I thought I knew what the poem was about before I read it, modernity and the issues of post-WWI. Thankfully, it seems I am not the only who has found herself lost, Professor Kuin says this is a "difficult" poem and I couldn't agree more.
Writing in the modernist style, Eliot shocked his audience. But not everyone was put off by Eliot's style, it seems "The Wasteland" developed a fan club of individuals who saw the poem as a sort of anthem for the disillusioned. I am thinking this "fan club" still exists today because I have often heard "clever" 20-somethings talking about this poem as if they know what they are talking about. And because I don't know what I am talking about when it comes to this poem or even the style Eliot wrote in, I am going to formulate a sort of list, based on what I have learned thus far about Modernism from this course and other English courses.
Modernism:
-appearance of new subjects, forms and styles
-radical break from typical models (eg. using "cutting" as a method of editing poems, similar to way films are edited)
-determinism (emphasis on psychology)
-existentialism (truths and certainty questioned)
-experimental
-realism
-concern with language
-themes dealing with disillusionment
-exploring the effects of technology on people
-naturalism
I am sure the list goes on, but I can't think of anything else, can you?
I have gathered from Sarah's notes on the film dealing with Modernism that there was a general problem with audience for the poets of this time. As books became more available and more people were reading, the job of the poet to relate to their audience became difficult. The poet couldn't be sure that their allusions made any sense to their readers, because s/he had no way of knowing who was reading their work and what those individuals had previously read. The solution? a) write to the lowest common denominator, like Robert Frost, b) publish with footnotes, like Eliot in "The Wasteland" or c) write whatever you feel without considering the audience, like Ezra Pound. Options b and c seem to alienate the genearal audience, but that doesn't seem to have been a problem for these authors, afterall we study their work to this day.
Now that I have clarified those points for myself, I feel well enough prepared to write about "The Wasteland".
There were some surprising elements to this poem that I enjoyed and are really reflective of Modernism. Foremost is the form. The ways in which Eliot seamlessly moves in and out of the high, middle and low style of poetry through metre and language is terribly impressive. For example, the very beginning of the poem, the first 7 lines is a formal style, after that there is a transition into a conversational style. This transistion is smooth though, you can hear it but it isn't awkard, it just works. Also surprising to me was the multitude of allusions Eliot uses; he truly did have a wide scope of literary and historical knowledge to pull from. For example, Professor Kuin alerted me (/us) to the main allusions, the vegetation myth, The Holy Grail myth, John Webster's "The While Devil," and many biblical references. All these allusions point to themes of life, death and rebirth, which is of course what the poem is ultimately about. The perversion and sterility of the wasteland cannot be corrected until there is death, only then can there be rebirth. On a side note, was The Fisher King and Holy Grail story part of the Perceval story? I recall in a Medieval and Renaissance class I took last year reading this story, I think it was by Chretien de Troyes. I am Googling this...ok it was, here is a link to information about it, http://www.mcelhearn.com/perceval.html. Finally, I am surprised by Eliot's referece to the Buddha and Buddhist philosophy and Hindu doctrine, espeically quotes from the Upanishads. Was there a renewed interest in Eastern religious traditions during the time period in which Eliot was writing? Eliot even quotes a passage from a text written by Hermann Hesse in lines 367-377. Hesse was also the author of Siddhartha, a novel he wrote in 1922 that deals with the Buddhist message as exemplified through the life of a young man named Siddhartha (but not Siddhartha Gautama, the Buddha) who is on a spiritual quest. Perhaps Eliot read this book, but then again, perhaps not, seeing as how both the novel and poem were written in the same year, maybe the dates don't correspond. But if he had, that may in some ways explain his interest and knowledge in and of Eastern religious traditions.
I have asked a lot questions throughout this post and I am hoping someone will be able to answer them or at least consider them. I would also appreciate hearing any of the questions you had or currently have about "The Wasteland", it may open the door to a new perspective for me on this poem and that is the point of posting and commenting, isn't it?
Janice