This paper investigates the auditory imagination employed in The Waste Land, Eliot’s musical poem as well as the greatest modernist canon. Through Eliot’s auditory imagination, The Waste Land is woven throughout by musicality, jazz rhythms and rhythmical rhyme quoted or adapted from the following sources: Wagner’s two operas, Tristan und Isolde and Götterdämmerung, Verlaine’s “Parsifal,” the “Shakespeherian Rag,” the Australian soldiers’ ballad of World War I, and a nursery rhyme. The Waste Land also consists of a remarkable variety of auditory imagery, which reveals the significance and symbolism of the poem. For example, the auditory imagery employed includes the conversation or monologue of the speakers, the songs of the swallow and nightingale, the song of the hermit-thrush represented as the sound of water, the murmuring sound in the air signifying Pieta, the cry of a cock, and the thundering sound, “DA,” which is interpreted in Sanskrit as “Datta, Dayadhvam, Damyata.” This auditory imagery emphasizes the theme of the poem: immoral sexuality in the waste land is death, and the need for salvation from it. In conclusion, this variety of musicality and auditory imagery should be thoroughly traced by the reader to properly appreciate the complicated modernist masterpiece, The Waste Land, which is interwoven exquisitely by Eliot’s auditory imagination. In addition, for better appreciation the reader must simultaneously probe into the visual imagery, olfactory imagery and synaesthesiac imagery as well as auditory imagery in the poem.

he main aim of this essay is to extract similarities between James Thomson’s The City of Dreadful Night of and The Waste Land. The names of the two poets have often been mentioned in connection, but the relation between their poetry has not drawn a serious attention. This essay is meant to track possible exchanges between the poets by examining mainly The City of Dreadful Night and The Waste Land. My focus has been on how Thomson influenced the urban scenes in Eliot’s poems and the images of the “Unreal City,” which are centered on London.Thomson’s poetry shows much influence from Dante. I have tried to present a meaningful number of verbal details showing that Eliot’s reading of Thomson was not confined to The City of Dreadful Night. Thomson seems to have also been a major influence on Eliot’s general thoughts and techniques. Eliot seems to make a good case of how a later-coming and greater-talented poet can make a more universally-appealing work out of the stuffs a locally-confined predecessor presented to the world.

According to Martin Heidegger’s argument that human emotions and feelings play an important role in defining modernism, the elements of melancholy must have been a crucial element in characterizing modernism. In this respect, T. S. Eliot’s “The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock” and The Waste Land that are regarded as reflecting modernistic phases have been analyzed to show how the elements of melancholy appear in them and to what degree they present modernity. The keen awareness of fragmentation and the impossibility of totality in modernism as part of modernity has been shown to have a lot to do with melancholy. The concept of melancholy is not a brand new term which was born in modernism, rather it was a “reinvented” and “reassessed” concept that already has quite a long history. On the threshold to the contemporary era, a number of critics and writers came to be deeply interested in and did a lot of research about melancholy. Remarkably, modern critics are doing insightful studies that can illuminate the deceitful desires that are produced by capitalist society that leave people in discontentment permanently, which acts like a sense of loss. Their analyses about the mechanism of melancholy are expected to help analyze the relation between melancholy and capitalist society. In that aspect, even though melancholy appeared in modernism era, still the concept of melancholy seems to be a great issue that can be very helpful to understand the cultural aspect of contemporary era.

This essay surveys some literary, cultural criticism of T. S. Eliot and Kim Ki-Rim, focusing on each writer’s works, The Waste Land and Ki-Sang-Do. In Eliot’s creative and critical practice, his primary concern is to depict his own literature and culture. In other words, he seems to concentrate only on the fate of European literature, art, and cultural heritage, including the political balance of European countries. Therefore, the important issue for Eliot is how they can preserve and develop the tradition of Europe, both to make political peace among the European countries and to achieve “maturity” of their own culture. But Kim Ki-Rim, whose colonial circumstances are quite different from Eliot’s, is affected by double obstacles, the chaos of the pre-modern, underdeveloped Cho-sun and the period of colonial-imperialism from Japan (and the western countries), the prevalent international order then, with cultural ideology of modernity or modernism. In such a situation, Kim Ki-Rim does not concern himself with the idea of preserving the tradition of Europe-originated modernity. Rather, he suggests a possibility of breaking through the very western modernity and modernism, ultimately to build a whole new world, in which post-modern Cho-sun can hold a secure, culturally leading position.

This paper investigates teaching The Waste Land to both undergraduate and graduate students at Andong National University in Korea from personal and pedagogical perspectives. First of all, the correct translation of the original text into Korean Language is very crucial in the appreciation of T. S. Eliot’s modernist masterpiece. Incorrectly translated words or phrases by several prominent translators are noted and the correct or more appropriate translations are thoroughly indicated. The poem’s theme that immoral sexuality is death is explored mainly by biographical and mythological-archetypal criticism. In addition to the Tarot cards, quite a lot of pictures I took in such places as London, Kew, Starnbergersee, Hofgarten, Lac Léman, Vienna, etc mentioned in The Waste Land are used to enhance the pedagogical effect. Furthermore, my blog entitled “Flowers, Nature, Travel, and Poetry” (http://blog.paran.com/blueskyflowers) in Korean and the cassette tape, video and DVD containing T. S. Eliot’s voice and vision are also strongly recommended for this purpose.

is paper tries to identify the deep meaning beneath the seemingly chaotic opposites the surface structure of the poem seems to insinuate. The fact is that The Waste Land is not so much a post-modern poem as a pre-modern one, provided we acknowledge that pre-modernity has trust as its hermeneutical principle. The Waste Land can be compared with Hopkins’ “God’s Grandeur”, which uses resurrection epistemology, as opposed to the extinct immanent epistemology, to demonstrate to the intellects the providence of God revealed in their lives and their environment. Like the resurrection epistemology of the 19th century, Eliot’s poem demonstrates the existence and working of God among themselves, in spite of the negativity of death and unreality prevalent in the modern world. Broadly speaking, modern scholarships of T. S. Eliot have been made with special reference to post-modern poetry, since there appear a lot of opposites in his poem. Appended for the explanation of the poem, “Notes” to The Waste Land use the languages of philology and impressionism in an exclusively confusing way, twisting the reading of the text into a worse confusion, with the result that it does not shed any light on the explanation of the poem. Chapman’s theory of doubleness the poet frequently resorts to in the making of his poetic works, points to the specific perspective beyond the ambiguity and chaos prevailing in the poem. Special reading strategy is in dire need for the right understanding of the text. Every reader approaching his text must retain the hermeneutics of trust, which is the “leap of faith.” With the hermeneutics of trust, every reader can penetrate into “the third” in the text, which can be identified as Jesus Christ whom the disciples met on the way to Emmaus. Without proper reader’s response, the reading practice itself would be futile and unreal, because the subjects it tackles are concerned aboutthe great proposition, salvation.

T. S. Eliot uses many biblical passages throughout his poetry. Although he changed his faith from the Unitarian church to the Anglican Catholic church in 1927, he extensively uses the Bible to extend poetic significance of his poems. Before he converted into an Anglican Catholic, he mainly incorporates biblical text into his poetry to strengthen religious authority. One of the most important poems in which he poeticizes biblical text is “The Burial of the Dead” of The Waste Land. In The Waste Land, Eliot consistently mixes the prophetic messages of Isaiah, Ezekiel, Ecclesiastes, and John to achieve relative interpretation in “The Burial of the Dead.” However, he does not follow traditional, universal, and absolute interpretations of the Bible in the context of his poetic theme. Rather, he takes biblical text as one of many pluralistic religious poetics. In this sense, his biblical interpretation is plural, relative, and flexible. By using a pluralistic interpretation of the Bible, he extends his poetry into more mythic, philosophic, universal, and religious authority.

It is well known that Eliot’s The Waste Land resulted from the collaboration between Eliot and Pound; however, what Pound had done in the making of the poem has been unknown until 1968 when the manuscript of the poem was found at the New York Public Library. Valerie published the Facsimile version with the photocopied original typescripts, which has contributed our understading of the collaboration between Eliot and Pound, and Pound’s contribution to the making of this poem. Pound suggested many revisions in the manuscript, but it seems that he refrained from forcing Eliot to accept his suggestions. Eliot must have realized what Pound had suggested would have made his poem more compact and precise in diction and would also refine the meaning of the poem. Though he was ready to incorporate some Pound’s suggestions and emendations, Eliot did not accept all of his suggestions; had he incorporated these rejected suggestions, his motif and diction would have been weakened and rendered unclear and ineffective; Eliot surely knew his own poem better than anyone, including Pound; there must have been things Pound could not fully grasp. The Waste Land is a fruit of a remarkable cooperation between the two great master poets of the last century, Eliot and Pound.

This paper argues that The Waste land can be understood in terms of abundance and fertility, or life just as well as it can be in terms of ruin and desolation, or death. It captures the state of ruin or desolation or death in environmental metaphors such as the air-polluted London, the wastes-littered bank of the River Thames, and above all, the all-pervading super-dry environment it superbly presents. The barren sexual relationships between various couples are also used to present the female body on the same ontological status as the natural environment, both of them used as the dumping ground for human avarice or desire one example of which can be the commercial spirit represented by such figures as Mr. Eugenides. Against such destructive force as the avaricious commercial spirit that inevitably leads to the state of death, Eliot presents an ecological vision in which all creatures, whether animals, plants or mineral, are positioned on the same ontological level as humans. Eliot's readings, during his Harvard days, of biology, especially of heredity and eugenics as well as plant hybridization, and of eastern religions such as Buddhism, are adduced as the ultimate source of influence for such radical ecological vision as presented in The Waste Land. Eliot himself is thus argued to be a poet who attained the today's state-of-the-art ecological vision almost 50 years before any other ecological poets did.

Eliot's quoting of the teaching of Hinduism in The Waste Land could be interpreted as a case of "romantic orientalism" leading to a sort of colonial exploitation or vampirism taking life force from the non-Western. Aware of the easy pitfalls of post-colonialism as a "prejudice" against a prejudice of the West or "resentment" at and vengeance on the West, a post-colonial reading of the Western cannons dealing with non-Western sources should be done not in a tribunal of the non-Western accusers but in a fair and third tribunal. In Eliot's case, a thorough reading of the commands from Hinduism (give, be compassionate and control) in 'What the Thunder Said' will reveal that he is free from any charges of orientalism. "Shantih"(peace) coming at the end of 'What the Thunder Said' will determine the character of the commands from Hinduism. If it is interpreted as a reward, the commands are hypothetical ones―'if you do these, 'peace' will be given as a reward for your act'. But if it is interpreted as a gift, the commands are absolute and categorical ones in the Kantian sense―'just act, 'peace' may come as a gift, but not necessarily.' As ethical commands, they are absolute and categorical ones. And different interpretations of 'the Thunder' by its addressees demonstrate that the ethical command addresses each individual singularly. Absoluteness and singularity characterize the the ethical commands of 'the Thunder.' The ethical commands of Hinduism are applied to everybody in contrast to the command of the vegetation ceremonies applying to kings alone. In a time of vegetation ceremonies and the Grail quest, kings and knights are supposed to take all the responsibility on situations on behalf of people, who can sit back to watch the development and demand the sacrifice of kings if things go wrong. It is a time of heroes. But in the present when all heroes disappear, everybody can be a hero taking in charge of whatever happens. Nobody is exempted from the ethical command addressing not only inert and inactive people in 'the Waste Land' but Eliot and Tiresias, the seer of 'the Waste Land' and the readers. Whatever rebirth in the West or elsewhere will depend on faithful embodiments of the ethical command.

Many times our reading of a particular poem by T. S. Eliot may be deepened by understanding the metaphoric images of cited mythological or literary works, by exploring its relation to the poem we are ready to read. Usually the meaning of mythological or literary works quoted in his poem is invaluable or crucial to understand the whole image of the poem, because it suggests the key to comprehend the particular poem as a whole. T. S. Eliot stated in his essay “Tradition and the Individual Talent” that no poet, or no artist of any art has his complete meaning alone. His significance is the appreciation of his relation to the dead poets and artists. In the structure of Eliot's poems we should be aware of the combination of the heterogeneous elements; the past and present, which makes sometimes readers puzzed at first sight but soon wide awaked. It is required that when poetry calls for knowledge, even a common reader must be prepared to answer the demand which Eliot has made use of combining techniques mixing radical elements of the past and present in his poetry. Such a combinative manner has been long acclaimed for a new and startling technique since his poem “The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock” was published. This paper is designed to explain some of his poetical techniques, particularly showing some examples of complicated, ambiguous, contradictory expressions and making frequent use of ancient myths, classic literature and folklores. The difficulty which faces the reader immediately lies in his frequent use of distorted quotations and allusions, his reference to many languages and literatures. It is partly due to his careful investigation on mysticism such as Christian Mysticism(1899), The Varieties of Religious Experience(1902) and Mysticism (1911). It is not surprising that Eliot has been blamed for obscurity and pretentiousness. This is the result of being judged by readers who have not attempted to analyse his technique to unite the elements of past and present. Eliot said that difficulty reading modern poems would not be something peculiar to certain writers, but a condition of writing with deeper insights into classical literature.