In the last three sections of The Waste Land, Elliot uses many allusions to put in more feeling into his poems, and, most of all, to cause an even more vivid feelings and meanings to express to the reader. In these sections, there are many allusions to , Buddha and most of all, to Greek mythology. I believe that T.S. Elliot chose to use allusions to Greek mythology characters, because every character in the Greek mythology has a deep meaning, every character symbolizes something, giving the poem a better meaning when these allusions are made.
In the third chapter for example, Tiresias was mentioned. He is the most famous Greek soothsayer. Tiresias was given the gift to see in the future; however, he was blinded by Athena when he saw her taking a bath. Now, Tiresias has a very singular aspect and is that he is an old man with wrinkled female breasts. “I Tiresias, though blind, throbbing between two lives,/ Old man with wrinkled female breasts…” (Elliot, line 219). As a consequence to the fact that Tiresias is half man half women contributes to he foreseeing the intercourse between a man and a woman, and “forsuffer” it, “(And I Tiresias have foresuffered all/ Enacted on this same divan or bed…” (Elliot, line 244); however, it is not clear to me why does he suffer when seeing the clerk and the woman having intercourse? Is it because he laments that humans can’t really achieve satisfaction through intercourse? I’m sure that the use of Tiresias has a deep meaning which is hidden deeply in Elliot’s writings.
Besides the clear allusion that Elliot does of Buddha by placing the title of one section of Buddha’s “Three Cardinal Discourses” (“The Fire Sermon”), Elliot does an allusion to “The Fire Sermon” at the very end of the third section of his book of poems:
To Carthage then I came
Burning burning burning burning
O Lord Thou Pluckest me out
O Lord Thoug pluckest
Burning (Elliot, line 311).
Burning, burning, burning, every Earthly thing is burning with lust, delusion and pain. Every earthly thing just misleads the mind to make the body, but no the soul, think that it is being satisfied. Every Earthly thing is burning, just like Carthage when the Roman Empire lit it in Flames to end the Punic Wars (this allusion can be also considered an allusion to war)
Then, in the fifth section of The Waste Land, explicit allusions to war are made such as “Falling towers/Jerusalem Athens Alexandria/Vienna London…” (Elliot, line 375). Here, the falling towers are the falling historical monuments that each city mentioned above got burned or destroyed by wars.
And last but not least, Elliot does an allusion to society in an amazing way, he does an allusion through the use of a children’s song.
I sat upon the shore
Fishing, with the arid plain behind me
Shall I at least set my land in order? (Elliot, line 425)
London Bridge is falling down falling down falling down (Elliot, line 427).
Here, before the children’s song is mentioned, a fisherman look behind him and saw the consequences of the human race “the arid plain”; however, the fisherman is fishing which means that since there is still water, there is still hope. This same meaning is what the children’s song mean, that modern society is decaying “London Bridge is falling down”; however, it has fallen yet.
A Classic Appearance (Waste Land sections 1 and 2)
After rereading the first two sections of The Waste Land again, I realized that my previous interpretations of the text still stood firmly; however, I found other interpretations which I had not grasped before.
In the first section, “The Burial of the Dead”, I found it rather interesting how Elliot mentions through Marie the complete opposites of what every human being thinks of the seasons.
APRIL is the cruelest month, breeding
Lilacs out of the dead land, mixing
Memory and desire, stirring
Dull roots with spring rain.
Winter kept us warm, covering
Earth in a forgetful snow, feeding
A little life with dried tubers. (Elliot, line 7).
How can you breed flowers form a dead land? How can winter and snow keep us warm? These sudden contrasts confused me. In my opinion, Elliot suggests that April, where summer and blooming is at its climax, is when you visit the dead and leave on their graves flowers. This action is why April is the cruelest month, because you again recall the memories you had with the dead, and you desire that they will live again like flowers do after winter. Then, the speaker, Marie, talks about winter being the season that kept you warm. This is because no flower is around to remind your deceased loved ones.
I also questioned myself about the “Unreal City”, that Elliot mentions in the last stanza of the first section. Why is the unreal city in London? I thought it might be due to the bloody wars in which London has participated in; however, if it were for the wars, wouldn’t Germany, France, Russia, etc. be also locations for unreal cities?
Then, a singular verse clicked in my mind Dante’s Inferno, “I see crowds of people, walking round in a ring…” (Elliot, line 56). This image of people walking around in a ring is just like the punishment that the Avaricious and the Prodigal received in the Fourth Circle of hell. In this circle, the doomed had to push the waits that they had spent or saved and pushed them around in circles.
Then, in section two, “The Chess Game”, I realized something about a word “tonight” that was spelled “to-night”, “My nerves are bad to-night.” (Elliot, line 111). The word to-night made me think that Elliot might have wanted to say that this wasn’t the only time the rich girl went crazy, that she had felt this way in other occasions. I interpreted as “My nerves are bad too tonight”, but in order for the sound and rhythm of the poem to be right, Elliot made this enjambment.
In the first section, “The Burial of the Dead”, I found it rather interesting how Elliot mentions through Marie the complete opposites of what every human being thinks of the seasons.
APRIL is the cruelest month, breeding
Lilacs out of the dead land, mixing
Memory and desire, stirring
Dull roots with spring rain.
Winter kept us warm, covering
Earth in a forgetful snow, feeding
A little life with dried tubers. (Elliot, line 7).
How can you breed flowers form a dead land? How can winter and snow keep us warm? These sudden contrasts confused me. In my opinion, Elliot suggests that April, where summer and blooming is at its climax, is when you visit the dead and leave on their graves flowers. This action is why April is the cruelest month, because you again recall the memories you had with the dead, and you desire that they will live again like flowers do after winter. Then, the speaker, Marie, talks about winter being the season that kept you warm. This is because no flower is around to remind your deceased loved ones.
I also questioned myself about the “Unreal City”, that Elliot mentions in the last stanza of the first section. Why is the unreal city in London? I thought it might be due to the bloody wars in which London has participated in; however, if it were for the wars, wouldn’t Germany, France, Russia, etc. be also locations for unreal cities?
Then, a singular verse clicked in my mind Dante’s Inferno, “I see crowds of people, walking round in a ring…” (Elliot, line 56). This image of people walking around in a ring is just like the punishment that the Avaricious and the Prodigal received in the Fourth Circle of hell. In this circle, the doomed had to push the waits that they had spent or saved and pushed them around in circles.
Then, in section two, “The Chess Game”, I realized something about a word “tonight” that was spelled “to-night”, “My nerves are bad to-night.” (Elliot, line 111). The word to-night made me think that Elliot might have wanted to say that this wasn’t the only time the rich girl went crazy, that she had felt this way in other occasions. I interpreted as “My nerves are bad too tonight”, but in order for the sound and rhythm of the poem to be right, Elliot made this enjambment.
"Remember, Not Everything is Lost" (Waste Land Sections 2,3,4,5).
After reading what was left of The Waste Land (“A Game of Chess”, “The Fire Sermon”, “Death by Water”, and “What the Thunder Said”) I realized that the whole compilation of poems is just a crude reflection of the hugely flawed society in which we currently live in, and will live in if we don’t take our faults into consideration (individually).
In the second section, “A Game of Chess”, Elliot depicts a stratified society in which a rich girl and her environment is described, and a poor, maybe prostitute, that is worried about not satisfying Albert (a soldier), since she will then loose him to other girls that can satisfy him.
The Chair she sat in, like a burnished throne,
Glowed on the marble, where the glass
Held up by standards wrought with fruited vines
From which a golden Cupidon peeped out
(Another hid his eyes behind his wing)
Doubled the flames of sevenbranched candelabra
Reflecting light upon the table as
The glitter of her jewels rose to meet it,
From satin cases poured in profusion;…
Unstoppered, lurked her strange synthetic perfumes,
Unguent, powdered, or liquid…/And drowned the sense in odors. (Elliot, line 89).
In the above excerpt taken out form the beginning of the second section of Elliot’s poems, the author clearly creates an image of the richness that the girl who is seating in the throne has. She is in a room filled with abundant jewelry and expensive decorations such as marble floors, and sevenbranched candelabras; however, although the girl has everything in her life to entertain herself, she goes crazy and paranoid while she waits for her love, I think, who is taking longer than expected.
‘My nerves are bad to-night. Yes, bad. (Elliot, line 111).
‘What is that noise?’
The wind under the door.
‘What is that noise now? What is the wind doing?’
Nothing again nothing. (Elliot, line 120).
Here, the constant questioning of the girl is a reflection of her paranoia and anxiety. In the other hand however, there is poverty. Lil a poor girl, who I think is a prostitute, is talking to a friend about her life and about Albert. In my opinion, Albert is just a frequent client who asks Lil for her services, which are intercourse.
Now Albert’s coming back, make yourself a bit smart.
He’ll want to know what you done with the money he gave you
To get some teeth. (Elliot, line 144)
And if you don’t give it to him, there’s others will, I said. (Elliot, line 149)
You ought to be ashamed, I said, to look so antique.
(And her only thirty-one). (Elliot, line 157).
In the above quotes of Lil’s conversation clearly a sense of poverty is shone. First, Albert gave Lil some money for teeth, and he wants to see her teeth when he gets back; however, it looks like Lil spent the money in other things in order to survive. Then, the fact that Albert will leave her if she doesn’t GIVE IT to her, is a clear way of expressing that he wants only sexual pleasure. And last, another imagery of poverty is when the author mentions that she looks so antique even though she is only thirty-one. The fact that she is thirty-one and already Lil is looking antique shows how hard life has been to her.
Basically, when Elliot makes this contrast between the two “worlds”, one of poverty and suffering, and the other of richness and anxiety, he is basically comparing the different reactions that the rich and the poor have depending on their situation. When the rich girl, although she has everything in life, is stood up, she goes completely crazy, and starts asking herself paranoiac questions such as the noise that the wind makes beneath the door. In contrast, when the poor girl has nothing in life, she goes to having sex for money, and, if she is stood up, she won’t be able to survive which will cause her not to go crazy, but to die. I believe this is what Elliot wanted to show in this section.
“HURRY UP PLEASE IT’S TIME” (Elliot lines: 141,152, 165,178 and 179). This phrase constantly interrupted the dialogue that Lil had with the narrator, and, most of the times, it was “totally uncalled for”. The phrase just appeared in the middle of the dialogue, and it was said by a third person. This phrase was very odd to me, but I then realized that it may simply be the way that Elliot used to show the reader where the characters were. Well, at the end of the section, Lil and her partner say “Goonight” to some men which are called Bill and Lou, making me think that maybe they are in the brothel where Lil works at, and the owner, who apparently is Bill or Lou are closing the establishment.
The third section has a very peculiar title, “The Fire Sermon” (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanamoli/wheel017.html#s3 ). I say this title is peculiar, because I remember that once Buddha made a speech called the “The Tree Cardinal Discourses of the Buddha”, where, the third part of the speech was called “The Fire Sermon”. In this third part, if I’m not mistaken, Buddha refers to every Earthly thing as if it were burning with lust, pain, and delusion. He makes this comparison to show that if we want to be happy we have to get rid of these Earthly things that cause negative reactions and eventual sadness in a human being. Then, before even reading this section I realized that Elliot was going to criticize our society again.
The first stanza, starts by talking about a clean and perfect river, and nature (as it is) abounds widely until we come and everything goes caput. “But at my back in a cold blast I hear/ The rattle of the bones, and the chuckle spread from ear to ear” (Elliot line, 186). Then, the poem continues depicting images of a contaminated canal where a fisherman is sadly fishing, surrounded by the polluting machines of humans.
While I was fishing in the dull canal…
White bodies naked on the low damp ground…
The sound of horns and motors… (Elliot, line 197).
Basically, Elliot describes who we have turned the world with our actions. The canal is infested with naked bodies! War! That is what Elliot want’s to show us readers, he wants to tell us to stop ignoring what is happening and act accordingly to create solutions.
In this section, metaphorically, the consequences of not following “The Fire Sermon” are shown after Tiresias “forsuffers” the violet hour in which a female who has intercourse with a male clerk, just for the pleasure of it, and when the sex is over, she is glad that it has finished:
She turns and looks a moment in the glass,
Hardly aware of her departed lover;
Her brain allows one half-formed though to pass:
‘Well now that’s done: and I’m glad it’s over.’(Elliot line 252).
Clearly by doing this Elliot states that we shall never be satisfied if we don’t get rid of Earthly pleasures and things in general. And last, to finalize this section, Elliot mentions how Elizabeth, by following the sermon of Buddha, achieves to be happy, well, when Elizabeth is not tempted by Leicester’s words, but is satisfied with the humble people who expect nothing, she is happy, she is satisfied.
The broken fingernails of dirty hands.
My people humble people who expect
Nothing.’ (Elliot line 305).
The fourth section of The Waste Land is the shortest; however, its meaning is extensive and rather profound. In this section, the body of a Phoenician sailor, who apparently drowned, is at the bottom of the sea being food for the fishes. Phlebas, the Phoenician sailor, has already finished his cycle of life, but he was once like every other human being. “Consider Phlebas, who was once handsome and tall as you.” ( Elliot, line 321). And, because Phelbas was once like I, I believe that Elliot is sending the reader a wake up call which is: You don’t live in eternity, so do what you have to do now.
Last but not least, the fifth section of the poem book by T.S. Elliot, “What the Thunder Said”. In this section, I believe that Elliot just states that the world is decaying rapidly due to the actions of the human race, such as wars and pollution.
AFTER the torchlight red on sweaty faces
After the frosty silence in the gardens
After the agony in stony places
The shouting and the crying
Prison and place and reverberation
He who was living is now dead
We who were living are now dying
With a little patience. (Elliot, line 330).
Everything is falling apart; however, Elliot then mentions a hooded figure walking beside me/humanity as I tore around everything in my path. “Who is the third who walks beside you?” (Elliot, line 359). That third figure which the speaker couldn’t identify is Jesus in my eyes. Elliot is making us remember that when sins abound, also does Jesus to save us from them. This, I took it as a sign of hope given by Elliot, he says that there is hope of saving our world, but Jesus is only the hope, will the action is us, and that action cannot be stopped by Jesus. Basically, Elliot says, that although the hope of changing is still near, it is up to us to fulfill that desire which we so hope for.
I sat upon the shore
Fishing, with the arid plain behind me
Shall I at least set my lands in order? (Elliot line, 425).
The arid lands are what humans have caused, but we can still set them in order.
In the second section, “A Game of Chess”, Elliot depicts a stratified society in which a rich girl and her environment is described, and a poor, maybe prostitute, that is worried about not satisfying Albert (a soldier), since she will then loose him to other girls that can satisfy him.
The Chair she sat in, like a burnished throne,
Glowed on the marble, where the glass
Held up by standards wrought with fruited vines
From which a golden Cupidon peeped out
(Another hid his eyes behind his wing)
Doubled the flames of sevenbranched candelabra
Reflecting light upon the table as
The glitter of her jewels rose to meet it,
From satin cases poured in profusion;…
Unstoppered, lurked her strange synthetic perfumes,
Unguent, powdered, or liquid…/And drowned the sense in odors. (Elliot, line 89).
In the above excerpt taken out form the beginning of the second section of Elliot’s poems, the author clearly creates an image of the richness that the girl who is seating in the throne has. She is in a room filled with abundant jewelry and expensive decorations such as marble floors, and sevenbranched candelabras; however, although the girl has everything in her life to entertain herself, she goes crazy and paranoid while she waits for her love, I think, who is taking longer than expected.
‘My nerves are bad to-night. Yes, bad. (Elliot, line 111).
‘What is that noise?’
The wind under the door.
‘What is that noise now? What is the wind doing?’
Nothing again nothing. (Elliot, line 120).
Here, the constant questioning of the girl is a reflection of her paranoia and anxiety. In the other hand however, there is poverty. Lil a poor girl, who I think is a prostitute, is talking to a friend about her life and about Albert. In my opinion, Albert is just a frequent client who asks Lil for her services, which are intercourse.
Now Albert’s coming back, make yourself a bit smart.
He’ll want to know what you done with the money he gave you
To get some teeth. (Elliot, line 144)
And if you don’t give it to him, there’s others will, I said. (Elliot, line 149)
You ought to be ashamed, I said, to look so antique.
(And her only thirty-one). (Elliot, line 157).
In the above quotes of Lil’s conversation clearly a sense of poverty is shone. First, Albert gave Lil some money for teeth, and he wants to see her teeth when he gets back; however, it looks like Lil spent the money in other things in order to survive. Then, the fact that Albert will leave her if she doesn’t GIVE IT to her, is a clear way of expressing that he wants only sexual pleasure. And last, another imagery of poverty is when the author mentions that she looks so antique even though she is only thirty-one. The fact that she is thirty-one and already Lil is looking antique shows how hard life has been to her.
Basically, when Elliot makes this contrast between the two “worlds”, one of poverty and suffering, and the other of richness and anxiety, he is basically comparing the different reactions that the rich and the poor have depending on their situation. When the rich girl, although she has everything in life, is stood up, she goes completely crazy, and starts asking herself paranoiac questions such as the noise that the wind makes beneath the door. In contrast, when the poor girl has nothing in life, she goes to having sex for money, and, if she is stood up, she won’t be able to survive which will cause her not to go crazy, but to die. I believe this is what Elliot wanted to show in this section.
“HURRY UP PLEASE IT’S TIME” (Elliot lines: 141,152, 165,178 and 179). This phrase constantly interrupted the dialogue that Lil had with the narrator, and, most of the times, it was “totally uncalled for”. The phrase just appeared in the middle of the dialogue, and it was said by a third person. This phrase was very odd to me, but I then realized that it may simply be the way that Elliot used to show the reader where the characters were. Well, at the end of the section, Lil and her partner say “Goonight” to some men which are called Bill and Lou, making me think that maybe they are in the brothel where Lil works at, and the owner, who apparently is Bill or Lou are closing the establishment.
The third section has a very peculiar title, “The Fire Sermon” (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanamoli/wheel017.html#s3 ). I say this title is peculiar, because I remember that once Buddha made a speech called the “The Tree Cardinal Discourses of the Buddha”, where, the third part of the speech was called “The Fire Sermon”. In this third part, if I’m not mistaken, Buddha refers to every Earthly thing as if it were burning with lust, pain, and delusion. He makes this comparison to show that if we want to be happy we have to get rid of these Earthly things that cause negative reactions and eventual sadness in a human being. Then, before even reading this section I realized that Elliot was going to criticize our society again.
The first stanza, starts by talking about a clean and perfect river, and nature (as it is) abounds widely until we come and everything goes caput. “But at my back in a cold blast I hear/ The rattle of the bones, and the chuckle spread from ear to ear” (Elliot line, 186). Then, the poem continues depicting images of a contaminated canal where a fisherman is sadly fishing, surrounded by the polluting machines of humans.
While I was fishing in the dull canal…
White bodies naked on the low damp ground…
The sound of horns and motors… (Elliot, line 197).
Basically, Elliot describes who we have turned the world with our actions. The canal is infested with naked bodies! War! That is what Elliot want’s to show us readers, he wants to tell us to stop ignoring what is happening and act accordingly to create solutions.
In this section, metaphorically, the consequences of not following “The Fire Sermon” are shown after Tiresias “forsuffers” the violet hour in which a female who has intercourse with a male clerk, just for the pleasure of it, and when the sex is over, she is glad that it has finished:
She turns and looks a moment in the glass,
Hardly aware of her departed lover;
Her brain allows one half-formed though to pass:
‘Well now that’s done: and I’m glad it’s over.’(Elliot line 252).
Clearly by doing this Elliot states that we shall never be satisfied if we don’t get rid of Earthly pleasures and things in general. And last, to finalize this section, Elliot mentions how Elizabeth, by following the sermon of Buddha, achieves to be happy, well, when Elizabeth is not tempted by Leicester’s words, but is satisfied with the humble people who expect nothing, she is happy, she is satisfied.
The broken fingernails of dirty hands.
My people humble people who expect
Nothing.’ (Elliot line 305).
The fourth section of The Waste Land is the shortest; however, its meaning is extensive and rather profound. In this section, the body of a Phoenician sailor, who apparently drowned, is at the bottom of the sea being food for the fishes. Phlebas, the Phoenician sailor, has already finished his cycle of life, but he was once like every other human being. “Consider Phlebas, who was once handsome and tall as you.” ( Elliot, line 321). And, because Phelbas was once like I, I believe that Elliot is sending the reader a wake up call which is: You don’t live in eternity, so do what you have to do now.
Last but not least, the fifth section of the poem book by T.S. Elliot, “What the Thunder Said”. In this section, I believe that Elliot just states that the world is decaying rapidly due to the actions of the human race, such as wars and pollution.
AFTER the torchlight red on sweaty faces
After the frosty silence in the gardens
After the agony in stony places
The shouting and the crying
Prison and place and reverberation
He who was living is now dead
We who were living are now dying
With a little patience. (Elliot, line 330).
Everything is falling apart; however, Elliot then mentions a hooded figure walking beside me/humanity as I tore around everything in my path. “Who is the third who walks beside you?” (Elliot, line 359). That third figure which the speaker couldn’t identify is Jesus in my eyes. Elliot is making us remember that when sins abound, also does Jesus to save us from them. This, I took it as a sign of hope given by Elliot, he says that there is hope of saving our world, but Jesus is only the hope, will the action is us, and that action cannot be stopped by Jesus. Basically, Elliot says, that although the hope of changing is still near, it is up to us to fulfill that desire which we so hope for.
I sat upon the shore
Fishing, with the arid plain behind me
Shall I at least set my lands in order? (Elliot line, 425).
The arid lands are what humans have caused, but we can still set them in order.
Oh! A Farewell to us! (Waste Land section 1)
The first section of the intricate compilation of poems by T.S. Elliot, The Waste Land, is called “The Burial of the Dead”. Here, Elliot talks about Death in a human’s life; however, he does it in a strange and rather confusing way. And, although it may seem weird that a author would try to confuse his/her reader, I think Elliot in fact tried to confuse the reader in this section to give him the mood of what Death is really about. Basically, there is no form of narrating what awaits us after Death, reason for why Elliot tried to confuse his reader, to make the reader feel that anxiety of knowing what awaits us after death strikes. Elliot then demonstrates how many people trying to escape that uncertainty of what happens after death, recur to the horoscope or the Tarot.
Here, said she,
Is your card, the drowned Phoenician Sailor... (Elliot, line 46).
The Hanged Man. Fear death by water. (Elliot, line 55)
…Tell her I bring the horoscope myself:
One must be so careful these days. (Elliot, line 59).
Another thing that caught my attention was the usage of other languages in the middle of the poem by Elliot: “Firsch weht der Wind Der Heimat zu. Mein Irisch Kind, Wo weilest du?” (Elliot, line 34). What is Elliot trying to do by just speaking in a random language in the middle of the stanza? Is he trying to prove his authority over the speaker? I hope this doubt is later answered.
As I kept reading, I noticed that Elliot mentioned the “Son of Man”:
…Son of man, You cannot say, or guess, for you know only a heap of broken images, where the sun beats, And the dead tree gives no shelter, the cricket no relief,
And the dry stone no sound of water. (Elliot, line 24).
What does Elliot mean by the “Son of man”? Is he referring to the creations of men, or the simple creation of other human beings by one man (Adam)? I really don’t know, but what I interpreted of this excerpt is that Elliot is criticizing (harshly) the human race, because it only has bad memories of wars, violence, poverty, inequality, etc. the human race is constantly surrounded by these problems and, apparently, it is doing little to nothing to fix them. As Elliot mentioned the ironies of a tree giving no shelter, or a cricket no relief, I instantly pictured a constant suffering of a being, and isn’t that constant suffering reflected on many humans? My answer is yes.
I found a metaphor in this section of The Waste Land where Elliot compares rocks, with situations. “Here is Belladonna, the Lady of the Rocks, The lady of situations” (Elliot, line 50). Notice, that Elliot states that the same lady (Belladonna) represents both rocks and situations, giving the reader a sense of similarity between these two things. I personally thought how rocks constantly change and shift their positions depending on the environment conditions, just like situations change depending on their context. This analogy speaks only the truth, since life is filled with situations that are constantly being altered, changing humans’ lives.
And I will show you something different form either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust… (Elliot line, 30)
The sentence above caught my attention above all the sentences that compose this poem. Elliot describes fear as something humans have rarely experienced, when I believed that we as humans are in constant fear of something bad to happen. Why is that? Why does Elliot look at fear as something so rare? However, he then makes and opposition to the rareness of fear and describes fear as being so common as to be in a handful of dust. Why? Why? Why? Is this a way used by Elliot to tell the reader that there is more to fear? That we should fear about the destiny of the decaying society we live in?
The hyacinth flower is mentioned in “The Burial of the Dead”, making me think about the Greek myth of the creation of this flower. In accordance to the Greek mythology, Apollo killed this chilled who he loved dearest, and, to honor him, he made the hyacinth flower sprout from his sepulcher. I thought of Elliot using the hyacinth flower to indicate the honor we (the living) do to the dead.
‘You gave me hyacinths first a year ago;
‘They called me the hyacinth girl.’
Yet when we came back, late, form the Hyacinth garden,
Your arms full, and your hair wet, I could not
Speak, and my eyes failed, I was neither living nor dead, and knew nothing,
Looking into the heart of light, the silence. (Elliot, line 42)
This hyacinth girl was a signed of death, and how, she is being mourned by someone as she looks into the light; however, the hyacinth has a bulbous form, which in turn is similar to a uterus which in fact gives LIFE. As a consequence, Elliot could be implying that in fact that death is a rebirth, either spiritual or physical, I don’t know.
I found very interesting the ending of this section: “You! Hypocrite lecteur!—mon semblable,—mon frère!” (Elliot, line 76). Elliot directly talks/relates to the reader of his poem as a hypocrite, although brother and similar of Elliot. I believe Elliot is saying that every human being is an hypocrite because he or she chooses to ignore one or more faults in society such as war, poverty, inequality, etc. this is also speaks only the truth.
Here, said she,
Is your card, the drowned Phoenician Sailor... (Elliot, line 46).
The Hanged Man. Fear death by water. (Elliot, line 55)
…Tell her I bring the horoscope myself:
One must be so careful these days. (Elliot, line 59).
Another thing that caught my attention was the usage of other languages in the middle of the poem by Elliot: “Firsch weht der Wind Der Heimat zu. Mein Irisch Kind, Wo weilest du?” (Elliot, line 34). What is Elliot trying to do by just speaking in a random language in the middle of the stanza? Is he trying to prove his authority over the speaker? I hope this doubt is later answered.
As I kept reading, I noticed that Elliot mentioned the “Son of Man”:
…Son of man, You cannot say, or guess, for you know only a heap of broken images, where the sun beats, And the dead tree gives no shelter, the cricket no relief,
And the dry stone no sound of water. (Elliot, line 24).
What does Elliot mean by the “Son of man”? Is he referring to the creations of men, or the simple creation of other human beings by one man (Adam)? I really don’t know, but what I interpreted of this excerpt is that Elliot is criticizing (harshly) the human race, because it only has bad memories of wars, violence, poverty, inequality, etc. the human race is constantly surrounded by these problems and, apparently, it is doing little to nothing to fix them. As Elliot mentioned the ironies of a tree giving no shelter, or a cricket no relief, I instantly pictured a constant suffering of a being, and isn’t that constant suffering reflected on many humans? My answer is yes.
I found a metaphor in this section of The Waste Land where Elliot compares rocks, with situations. “Here is Belladonna, the Lady of the Rocks, The lady of situations” (Elliot, line 50). Notice, that Elliot states that the same lady (Belladonna) represents both rocks and situations, giving the reader a sense of similarity between these two things. I personally thought how rocks constantly change and shift their positions depending on the environment conditions, just like situations change depending on their context. This analogy speaks only the truth, since life is filled with situations that are constantly being altered, changing humans’ lives.
And I will show you something different form either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust… (Elliot line, 30)
The sentence above caught my attention above all the sentences that compose this poem. Elliot describes fear as something humans have rarely experienced, when I believed that we as humans are in constant fear of something bad to happen. Why is that? Why does Elliot look at fear as something so rare? However, he then makes and opposition to the rareness of fear and describes fear as being so common as to be in a handful of dust. Why? Why? Why? Is this a way used by Elliot to tell the reader that there is more to fear? That we should fear about the destiny of the decaying society we live in?
The hyacinth flower is mentioned in “The Burial of the Dead”, making me think about the Greek myth of the creation of this flower. In accordance to the Greek mythology, Apollo killed this chilled who he loved dearest, and, to honor him, he made the hyacinth flower sprout from his sepulcher. I thought of Elliot using the hyacinth flower to indicate the honor we (the living) do to the dead.
‘You gave me hyacinths first a year ago;
‘They called me the hyacinth girl.’
Yet when we came back, late, form the Hyacinth garden,
Your arms full, and your hair wet, I could not
Speak, and my eyes failed, I was neither living nor dead, and knew nothing,
Looking into the heart of light, the silence. (Elliot, line 42)
This hyacinth girl was a signed of death, and how, she is being mourned by someone as she looks into the light; however, the hyacinth has a bulbous form, which in turn is similar to a uterus which in fact gives LIFE. As a consequence, Elliot could be implying that in fact that death is a rebirth, either spiritual or physical, I don’t know.
I found very interesting the ending of this section: “You! Hypocrite lecteur!—mon semblable,—mon frère!” (Elliot, line 76). Elliot directly talks/relates to the reader of his poem as a hypocrite, although brother and similar of Elliot. I believe Elliot is saying that every human being is an hypocrite because he or she chooses to ignore one or more faults in society such as war, poverty, inequality, etc. this is also speaks only the truth.
" I am Zeus the Puppet Master" (Sections 30 to end)
I remember asking myself in the analysis of the sections sixteen to thirty about who was the play-writer, about who was the force that plotted out every person’s life? So, because of this question I had, I kept on reading and found that in section 31 the gods were mentioned. “The most important aspect of piety toward the gods…” (Epictetus sec 31). After reading this small phrase I began to wonder about which gods they were referring to, and, due to the time period where Socrates and Epictetus were alive, I concluded that the gods they were referring to were the Greek gods of the Olympus. Now, if we continue to read what follows the phrase from section 31, a clear reflection of a philosopher in Greece during that time period is given to the reader:
The most important aspect of piety toward the gods is certainly both to have correct beliefs about them, as beings that arrange the universe well and justly, and to set yourself to obey them and acquiesce in everything that happens and to follow it willingly, as something brought to completion by the best judgment. (Epictetus sec. 31).
In this small excerpt, I saw as a reader the fear that the people of Greece had toward the Gods in that time. The excerpt clearly says that you have to willingly obey everything that the gods demand. This shows fear of punishment by the gods if they are refused by a powerless human being such as a philosopher, or a non-philosopher. I also saw, how religion should fit every doctrine or theory that was devised during that era.
Speaking of a philosopher and a non-philosopher, Epictetus strangely stratifies the society in which he lived in as philosopher or non-philosopher. “The position and character of a non-philosopher: he never looks for benefit or harm to come from himself but from things outside. The position and character of a philosopher: he looks for all benefit and harm to come from himself.” (Epictetus sec 48). Epictetus here suggests that being a philosopher was one of the highest statuses you could get in his society, due to the fact that he compares through his handbook the non-philosophers, and the philosophers, where, obviously, the philosopher has always better traits than the non-philosopher.
Finally I must say that since the life of a Stoic is plotted by the gods and written in the cosmos, then really the gods have all the power, which makes me end this analysis in accordance with my friend and classmate, Juan Mauricio Venegas, where stoicism is summarize in this sentence,
Well, Crito, if it is pleasing to the gods this way, then let it happen this way. (Epictetus sec. 53).
The most important aspect of piety toward the gods is certainly both to have correct beliefs about them, as beings that arrange the universe well and justly, and to set yourself to obey them and acquiesce in everything that happens and to follow it willingly, as something brought to completion by the best judgment. (Epictetus sec. 31).
In this small excerpt, I saw as a reader the fear that the people of Greece had toward the Gods in that time. The excerpt clearly says that you have to willingly obey everything that the gods demand. This shows fear of punishment by the gods if they are refused by a powerless human being such as a philosopher, or a non-philosopher. I also saw, how religion should fit every doctrine or theory that was devised during that era.
Speaking of a philosopher and a non-philosopher, Epictetus strangely stratifies the society in which he lived in as philosopher or non-philosopher. “The position and character of a non-philosopher: he never looks for benefit or harm to come from himself but from things outside. The position and character of a philosopher: he looks for all benefit and harm to come from himself.” (Epictetus sec 48). Epictetus here suggests that being a philosopher was one of the highest statuses you could get in his society, due to the fact that he compares through his handbook the non-philosophers, and the philosophers, where, obviously, the philosopher has always better traits than the non-philosopher.
Finally I must say that since the life of a Stoic is plotted by the gods and written in the cosmos, then really the gods have all the power, which makes me end this analysis in accordance with my friend and classmate, Juan Mauricio Venegas, where stoicism is summarize in this sentence,
Well, Crito, if it is pleasing to the gods this way, then let it happen this way. (Epictetus sec. 53).
Who is the Puppet Master? (Sections 16-30)
Right now, I’ve read up to section 30, and I have concluded that there are two main ideas (amongst others) in the Stoic philosophy. The first one has to do with being indifferent towards another person’s life, or any aspect that is not part of your life plan. This first ideal leads me to the second which is that your life, or anybodies life, is already made up for you by and unknown force which has not been yet disclosed by the speaker.
Again in sections 16, 19 and 23: “Do not hesitate, however, to sympathize with him verbally, and even to moan with him if the occasion arises; but be careful no to moan inwardly.” (Epictetus sec. 16). “… and you yourself will want neither to be a general or a magistrate or a consul, but to be free. And there is one road to this: despising what is not up to us.” (Epictetus sec. 19). “If it ever happens that you turn outward to want to please another person, certainly you have lost your plan of life.” (Epictetus sec. 23). Clearly the three quotes written above show that in order to have a “satisfactory” and “triumphant” life, you have to become estranged with every single aspect that doesn’t concern you such as a moaning person. This senseless way of living a life is completely impossible for a human being to achieve since this animal – and particularly this species – depends on others for their survival. For example, if a baby were to be born, and the mother, who’s only task in life was to conceive and nurture this baby dies, then the baby will be left alone causing it to eventually die. Some may argue that another person will then nurture the baby, but this is impossible, if every person sticks to their plan of life, because no one would be available since the spot of caring for this baby was already taken.
The second main idea in Stoicism is also repeated in section 17, “Remember that you are an actor in a play, which is as the playwright wants it to be: short if he wants it short, long if he wants it long… What is yours is to play the assigned part well. But to choose it belongs to someone else.” (Epictetus sec. 17). This section, clearly states that we are where we are due to a superior force. And, this section proves my theory of the absence of choice in a stoic world. In a play, if you are an actor, you may not change your role, meaning that you can’t choose what to do in life. But, who or what in the world chooses what our role in life is? Do stoics have a God, or is it just "like that"?
A new stoic theory presented as I read from sections 15 to 30, and it was the one of judgment. Judgment of perspective about an event being negative or positive. “When you see someone weeping in grief at the departure of his child or the loss of his property… be ready to say immediately, “What weighs down on this man is not what has happened (since it does not weigh down on someone else), but his judgment about it.” (Epictetus sec. 16). Of all the previous theories of Stoicism, this is the one I completely agree with. This idea is completely true, and it is because of this tendency in life that humans fight and wage wars. For example, politicians all over the world are constantly fighting whether this or that is positive or negative in accordance to their perspectives.
Again in sections 16, 19 and 23: “Do not hesitate, however, to sympathize with him verbally, and even to moan with him if the occasion arises; but be careful no to moan inwardly.” (Epictetus sec. 16). “… and you yourself will want neither to be a general or a magistrate or a consul, but to be free. And there is one road to this: despising what is not up to us.” (Epictetus sec. 19). “If it ever happens that you turn outward to want to please another person, certainly you have lost your plan of life.” (Epictetus sec. 23). Clearly the three quotes written above show that in order to have a “satisfactory” and “triumphant” life, you have to become estranged with every single aspect that doesn’t concern you such as a moaning person. This senseless way of living a life is completely impossible for a human being to achieve since this animal – and particularly this species – depends on others for their survival. For example, if a baby were to be born, and the mother, who’s only task in life was to conceive and nurture this baby dies, then the baby will be left alone causing it to eventually die. Some may argue that another person will then nurture the baby, but this is impossible, if every person sticks to their plan of life, because no one would be available since the spot of caring for this baby was already taken.
The second main idea in Stoicism is also repeated in section 17, “Remember that you are an actor in a play, which is as the playwright wants it to be: short if he wants it short, long if he wants it long… What is yours is to play the assigned part well. But to choose it belongs to someone else.” (Epictetus sec. 17). This section, clearly states that we are where we are due to a superior force. And, this section proves my theory of the absence of choice in a stoic world. In a play, if you are an actor, you may not change your role, meaning that you can’t choose what to do in life. But, who or what in the world chooses what our role in life is? Do stoics have a God, or is it just "like that"?
A new stoic theory presented as I read from sections 15 to 30, and it was the one of judgment. Judgment of perspective about an event being negative or positive. “When you see someone weeping in grief at the departure of his child or the loss of his property… be ready to say immediately, “What weighs down on this man is not what has happened (since it does not weigh down on someone else), but his judgment about it.” (Epictetus sec. 16). Of all the previous theories of Stoicism, this is the one I completely agree with. This idea is completely true, and it is because of this tendency in life that humans fight and wage wars. For example, politicians all over the world are constantly fighting whether this or that is positive or negative in accordance to their perspectives.
Sit Down and Enjoy the Cosmos' Pattern - (Sections 1 to 15)
The Handbook of Epictetus talks about the Stoic teachings and views of life. One of the many teachings encountered in the handbook is the one of achieving a state of complete dissatisfaction.
“… state of mind that the Stoics thought was involved in bringing desires into line completely with the way the world actually is. It was one of understanding fully that nothing, and notably no event that might result in dissatisfaction, could possibly be otherwise that it actually is. Given the awareness of the place of such event in the whole pattern of the cosmos, one could be quite unable to conceive of the events being any different.” (Epictetus 3).
This quote compiles together in a few sentence the intricate Stoic belief of dissatisfaction. It states that in order to be completely satisfy about life you’d have to know the nature of the occurrences in life, and be able to acknowledge that they will eventually happen this way, regardless of your efforts to change that event; however, I don’t see why knowing what will come free you from a state of dissatisfaction. Knowing that what will come can’t be changed doesn’t free me of my dissatisfaction about life at all. If I know that my dearest friend will die in two hours, and that there is absolutely nothing I can do, I would still be dissatisfied of what will come next (my friend’s death). I will not be surprised, but I will be very dissatisfied.
Also, mentioning that the cosmos hold the pattern to the events that will happen in life, made me think back to the friendly Tralfamadorians, and their way of accepting things as they simply are. In accordance to the Stoics’ belief about a completely dissatisfied state of being, the Tralfamadorians would be in that state already, due to the fact that they are able to see life in the fourth dimension. And, by being able to do this, they know and understand the events to come; however, then again, I don’t agree with the Stoics. The Tralfamadorians may have learned to accept the future events as they are going to be, but they don’t seem satisfy of what will come. For example, why in the world will the Tralfamadorians be O.K. with the irrevocable fact that they will eventually destroy the universe and every molecule of life in it? This happening obviously doesn’t make them happy at all.
“Some things are up to us and some are not” (Epictetus Sec. 1) It is with this sentence that the first section of the Handbook of Epictetus starts with. It brought my attention, because it signifies the causes for many world problems in the human race. For example, if Hitler would’ve accepted the fact that it wasn’t up to him, or anybody, to decide that the Jews, or any race besides the German, were dangerous, the Second World War would of probably not occurred; however, if everybody would understand this quote about the things that are up to us and the ones that are not, the world would become an indifferent world. Every individual will eventually create his/her own world to care for. As a consequence, most, if not all, of the social, political, economical and environmental conflicts that the human race now faces will disappear taking along every emotion that makes life worth living. Basically, if I everybody carries out their tasks in satisfactory manner, every single problem will be solved in the way that the person in charge of solving it sees fit. This will cause no dispute or interaction with any other individual, because everybody will be concentrated with their tasks. Also, as a reaction to this “perfect” world, emotions about somebody else will disappear leaving us in a “perfect” but lifeless world.
However, there is also some sense of truth in this particular quote that, if applied, will make the world better. If this phrase is interpreted in a “Let It Be” kind of way, it will be positive. For example, if I don’t like a particular color, tough, I will have to learn to accept that that color exists and that there is nothing I can do to change that. Then, when the stage of acceptance is covered, I will eventually learn to live in harmony with the color I dislike.
“Illness interferes with the body, no with one’s faculty of choice, unless that faculty of choice wishes it to.” (Epictetus Sec 9). Choice/Free Will is mentioned in this sentence, making it an awkward sentence. At the beginning of the Handbook of Epictetus, the speaker mentioned that, although humans haven’t found it yet, destiny or every person’s life is written in the cosmos. So, if this is true, then why would humans have the faculty of choice? Logically, if every single event is premeditated, then nothing may be chosen, because everything is already sorted out for us by a superior force. I really don’t understand this apparent contradiction in the Stoic philosophy. As a consequence of having your life already CHOSEN for you, you will then be sucked in the same surprise-less world that the Tralfamadorians were, where choice/free will is completely absent. And yes, you as a naive human may think that you can choose whether to eat soup or not, the choice that you make was really already done for you (in a Stoic perspective).
“… state of mind that the Stoics thought was involved in bringing desires into line completely with the way the world actually is. It was one of understanding fully that nothing, and notably no event that might result in dissatisfaction, could possibly be otherwise that it actually is. Given the awareness of the place of such event in the whole pattern of the cosmos, one could be quite unable to conceive of the events being any different.” (Epictetus 3).
This quote compiles together in a few sentence the intricate Stoic belief of dissatisfaction. It states that in order to be completely satisfy about life you’d have to know the nature of the occurrences in life, and be able to acknowledge that they will eventually happen this way, regardless of your efforts to change that event; however, I don’t see why knowing what will come free you from a state of dissatisfaction. Knowing that what will come can’t be changed doesn’t free me of my dissatisfaction about life at all. If I know that my dearest friend will die in two hours, and that there is absolutely nothing I can do, I would still be dissatisfied of what will come next (my friend’s death). I will not be surprised, but I will be very dissatisfied.
Also, mentioning that the cosmos hold the pattern to the events that will happen in life, made me think back to the friendly Tralfamadorians, and their way of accepting things as they simply are. In accordance to the Stoics’ belief about a completely dissatisfied state of being, the Tralfamadorians would be in that state already, due to the fact that they are able to see life in the fourth dimension. And, by being able to do this, they know and understand the events to come; however, then again, I don’t agree with the Stoics. The Tralfamadorians may have learned to accept the future events as they are going to be, but they don’t seem satisfy of what will come. For example, why in the world will the Tralfamadorians be O.K. with the irrevocable fact that they will eventually destroy the universe and every molecule of life in it? This happening obviously doesn’t make them happy at all.
“Some things are up to us and some are not” (Epictetus Sec. 1) It is with this sentence that the first section of the Handbook of Epictetus starts with. It brought my attention, because it signifies the causes for many world problems in the human race. For example, if Hitler would’ve accepted the fact that it wasn’t up to him, or anybody, to decide that the Jews, or any race besides the German, were dangerous, the Second World War would of probably not occurred; however, if everybody would understand this quote about the things that are up to us and the ones that are not, the world would become an indifferent world. Every individual will eventually create his/her own world to care for. As a consequence, most, if not all, of the social, political, economical and environmental conflicts that the human race now faces will disappear taking along every emotion that makes life worth living. Basically, if I everybody carries out their tasks in satisfactory manner, every single problem will be solved in the way that the person in charge of solving it sees fit. This will cause no dispute or interaction with any other individual, because everybody will be concentrated with their tasks. Also, as a reaction to this “perfect” world, emotions about somebody else will disappear leaving us in a “perfect” but lifeless world.
However, there is also some sense of truth in this particular quote that, if applied, will make the world better. If this phrase is interpreted in a “Let It Be” kind of way, it will be positive. For example, if I don’t like a particular color, tough, I will have to learn to accept that that color exists and that there is nothing I can do to change that. Then, when the stage of acceptance is covered, I will eventually learn to live in harmony with the color I dislike.
“Illness interferes with the body, no with one’s faculty of choice, unless that faculty of choice wishes it to.” (Epictetus Sec 9). Choice/Free Will is mentioned in this sentence, making it an awkward sentence. At the beginning of the Handbook of Epictetus, the speaker mentioned that, although humans haven’t found it yet, destiny or every person’s life is written in the cosmos. So, if this is true, then why would humans have the faculty of choice? Logically, if every single event is premeditated, then nothing may be chosen, because everything is already sorted out for us by a superior force. I really don’t understand this apparent contradiction in the Stoic philosophy. As a consequence of having your life already CHOSEN for you, you will then be sucked in the same surprise-less world that the Tralfamadorians were, where choice/free will is completely absent. And yes, you as a naive human may think that you can choose whether to eat soup or not, the choice that you make was really already done for you (in a Stoic perspective).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)