All that can be said about this iconic poem, I think, has been said in class. There is not much to add to the discussion apart from saying that I feel just as confused now reading the poem as I did a few weeks ago. Considering it's one of the first poems done in the modern genre it's comes as no surprise that it is so abstract and surreal. Although the idea in class was to compare this style of poetry to the early surrealists such as Magritte and Dali I personally relate it more with the abstract Russian painter Kandinsky. The reason why I see the parallel is because (and this is strictly just my opinion) those paintings exude a more haphazard and disorganized form to the whole ensemble while still evoking some emotional output from all the colors and shapes. When I look at Dali, although there is chaos taking place there is also coherence to the paintings; all the figures present are clearly delineated. Humans are humans, ants are ants, clocks are clocks, and so on.
Eliot's writing in this poem is indicative of the former style. Many lines in the poem, for example the last few lines, do convey some message, but it is fragmented overall and is very hard to distill. Yes "Shantih" has a concrete meaning in Hinduism, but I still find it hard to connect it with the content of the poem.
No comments:
Post a Comment