Jonathan Terrington's Reviews > The Waste Land and Other Poems
The Waste Land and Other Poems
by
There is a simplicity to the greatest poetry. And at once there is a complexity. There is a simplicity, in that the greatest works of poetry don't contain wordiness or explicitly state their intentions. They strip back language to allow for a nice flow and rhythm to what they are doing. But at the same time there is a complexity generated by a presumed sense of intent and knowledge. The poet assumes that you will get, from the scarcity of language used, what they are aiming to convey. And that is part of the beauty of language, that because the poet strips everything down, there is so much which you can read into and draw as your own understanding of what the poem is about.
And that is what I sensed in The Wasteland and the other poems. The Wasteland is universally accepted as one of the most important pieces of modernism - regardless of all the arguments about it being a plagiarised piece of fiction. For an interesting breakdown on that idea of plagiarism and literature read . And no matter how you read Eliot's work: as a reinvention of older myths and narratives; as a depiction of a destroyed post-war landscape and the people affected by that world; or as a beautiful piece of art; there is so much to gain from reading this work. It really all proves that simply because older ideas are drawn upon and referenced that it doesn't have to be stealing.
Upon further reading and analysis it has come to my attention that what Eliot does in this masterpiece is to both play off the worlds of the common peasants and bourgeoise with those who would be considered academic royalty. He sets up a comparison of white collar and blue collar workers, essentially creating a poem that works like a giant chessgame. In some ways a game of oneupmanship in which Eliot tells the reader that he is better than them but still sympathetic to them. This can be seen in the classical references to high forms of literary art that Eliot draws upon. But there are also elements in which Eliot shows that he is not supercilious and in fact appears to both sympathise and empathise with the proletariat working class (the second section for instance and in lines such as "consider Phlebas" particularly seem to suggest this).
Regardless of how you want to read it I challenge you to go and read one of the great works of literature. It is a notoriously difficult poem to understand and I know I got very little of it, but it was powerful and moving. And I am now looking forward to further discussion and dissection of this in upcoming classes. Isn't the greatest power of literature apparent in how it lives on after we have read it?
by

Jonathan Terrington's review
bookshelves: poetry, personal-favourites, classic-literature, classic-challenge-2, historical, university
Jul 18, 2013
bookshelves: poetry, personal-favourites, classic-literature, classic-challenge-2, historical, university
My ode to T.S. Eliot
T. S. Eliot,
You walked among the stars
In your words,
light trails blazing.
Master of the modern,
Ruler of the poetic.
There is, and was, no poet to compare.
Your mythology and legend stand immense.
Behold the waste land of the world,
Behold the glorious prose of a world shaker.
Though some have called thee,
Mighty and dreadful ,
Such slander upholds your greatness,
The potency of your reinvention.
There is a power to you - in
So behold T.S. Eliot.
A masterful poet.
One who walked among the stars
And brought the heavens a little nearer.
There is a simplicity to the greatest poetry. And at once there is a complexity. There is a simplicity, in that the greatest works of poetry don't contain wordiness or explicitly state their intentions. They strip back language to allow for a nice flow and rhythm to what they are doing. But at the same time there is a complexity generated by a presumed sense of intent and knowledge. The poet assumes that you will get, from the scarcity of language used, what they are aiming to convey. And that is part of the beauty of language, that because the poet strips everything down, there is so much which you can read into and draw as your own understanding of what the poem is about.
And that is what I sensed in The Wasteland and the other poems. The Wasteland is universally accepted as one of the most important pieces of modernism - regardless of all the arguments about it being a plagiarised piece of fiction. For an interesting breakdown on that idea of plagiarism and literature read . And no matter how you read Eliot's work: as a reinvention of older myths and narratives; as a depiction of a destroyed post-war landscape and the people affected by that world; or as a beautiful piece of art; there is so much to gain from reading this work. It really all proves that simply because older ideas are drawn upon and referenced that it doesn't have to be stealing.
Upon further reading and analysis it has come to my attention that what Eliot does in this masterpiece is to both play off the worlds of the common peasants and bourgeoise with those who would be considered academic royalty. He sets up a comparison of white collar and blue collar workers, essentially creating a poem that works like a giant chessgame. In some ways a game of oneupmanship in which Eliot tells the reader that he is better than them but still sympathetic to them. This can be seen in the classical references to high forms of literary art that Eliot draws upon. But there are also elements in which Eliot shows that he is not supercilious and in fact appears to both sympathise and empathise with the proletariat working class (the second section for instance and in lines such as "consider Phlebas" particularly seem to suggest this).
Regardless of how you want to read it I challenge you to go and read one of the great works of literature. It is a notoriously difficult poem to understand and I know I got very little of it, but it was powerful and moving. And I am now looking forward to further discussion and dissection of this in upcoming classes. Isn't the greatest power of literature apparent in how it lives on after we have read it?
Sign into Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ to see if any of your friends have read
The Waste Land and Other Poems.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
July 18, 2013
–
Started Reading
July 18, 2013
– Shelved
July 19, 2013
– Shelved as:
poetry
July 19, 2013
– Shelved as:
personal-favourites
July 19, 2013
– Shelved as:
classic-literature
July 19, 2013
– Shelved as:
classic-challenge-2
July 19, 2013
– Shelved as:
historical
July 19, 2013
– Shelved as:
university
July 19, 2013
–
Finished Reading
Comments Showing 1-15 of 15 (15 new)
date
newest »

message 1:
by
Glaiza
(new)
Jul 19, 2013 02:41AM

reply
|
flag





Dolors, considering some of the other poets you've read/been reading I fully recommend that you try and read Eliot. This was my first proper read of his work but he has always fascinated me.

I read an excellent essay recently on Eliot (on The Love Song of J Alfred Prufrock mainly, but also touching on The Waste Land) in Modernism: A Short Introduction. The rest of the book is also very good.

I really do like the article on plagiarism and pedagogy more and more as I think on it. I've always been frustrated by those who can't see a distinction between plagiarism and influence. For instance claiming that Twilight or Harry Potter or Eragon are plagiarised is in my mind a fallacy. They may not be the greatest works of art but they borrow rather than resort to unoriginal blatant ripping off.


That sounds interesting. Another of the more comprehensive resources is the Cambridge Companion, though it's a bit patchy. Between it and Ayers' book though, I went on to read more of Pound and H.D.


