Legitimacy of The Wasteland

In considering the legitimacy of a theme in a work of poetry, it is important to take into account the personality of the poet, as well as look for consistency in previous works that would enable one to verify whether or not the poet actually means what they are saying. After reading The Wasteland by T.S. Elliot, my first observations were marked by the dreary, depressing and melodramatic tone and mood put forth by Elliot. The poem as it stands, without annotations, is very confusing and difficult to comprehend. However, with the presence of the annotations, the poem’s rich meaning and thematic developments are easier to comprehend.

It wasn’t until today in class discussion that I began to consider the idea of Elliot creating an immensely complex and depressing poem to beguile his readers. When that notion was brought up, I sought connections that would support the idea. And the annotations were what stuck out first. It is understandable that some writers reference past heroes or insert religious allusions into their work to support what they are saying, or for intellectual credibility. But in my opinion, in order for a work to stand-alone and actually mean something to me, the writer’s ideas alone should be able to get the message across.

In the 434 lines the poem encompasses, there are almost one hundred different annotations. Even the titles of each section are allusions to some other idea, but mainly they are present to support what Elliot is trying to say. And they do, but if you need an annotation every four lines, are you making yourself very credible from an artistic standpoint? It would seem a likely explanation was that Elliot did this intentionally. To once more acknowledge the opposition, there is no reason Elliot should make a mockery of the people by writing such intentionally depressing and dense poetry to spite them or their lack of intellectual capacities, not to mention resources. Would readers of his time pick up on all the allusions? Or are most readings similar, with the person walking away not more knowledgeable, but more cynical?

Another idea that I had regarding the idea of Elliot writing this as a joke was to portray academic dominance for egotistical reasons, or because he hoped that people would increase their literacy so they could understand what he really meant. It could be a sort of reverse psychological motivation on his behalf, that is, to create such a complex poem that people are forced to read other literature to actually take away anything from the Wasteland, other than dark and dreary imagery. Sort of how there is the idea of “anti-intellectualism” in a culture, Elliot could potentially be a catalyst for the opposite end of the spectrum, or in other words writing for someone in academia.

In light of Elliot’s tactics, I have intentionally not referenced the poem within my article to show that meaning can be portrayed without excess ideas or words from someone else to create clarity and understanding for the reader. If Elliot’s Wasteland is sincere, then the poem makes me think he was suicidal. Or he is simply incredibly talented if it was all a joke. There are many factors regarding the legitimacy, but unfortunately, we will never know either way. With that said, the poem as it stands does powerfully call the reader or society as a whole to attention to the reality they were living in in the wake of WW1, in hopes of creating a better future. But as the Wasteland ends drearily, I would have to assume Elliot believed there was no hope. Or did he? Maybe Elliot’s goal was just to confuse people.