T. S. Eliot’s Misreading of Some Mythological Sources in The Waste Land
AbstractReading always entails an act of interpretation and all interpretation involves misreading. All poets cannot be separated from the previous ones. They must read and misread their precursors. T.S. Eliot misreads the mythological sources that he uses in his poem The Waste Land. This misreading is not a mistake, but it is meant to create new meaning to the available text. By misreading the previous texts, the poet creates a space of creativity for himself. There are six ways of misreading as explicated by Harold Bloom. In this article only three ways of misreading will be explained and applied, namely clinamen, tessera, and kenosis.
Bloom, H. (1973). The anxiety of influence: A theory of poetry. New York: Oxford UP.
Brooker, J. S. (1988). When love fails: Reading The Waste Land with undergraduates. In J. S. Brooker (Ed.), Approaches to teaching Eliot’s poetry and plays (pp. 103-108). New York: MLA.
-----------. (1994). Mastery and escape: T. S. Eliot and the dialectic of modernism. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.
Brooker, J. S. & Bently, J. (1990). Reading The Waste Land: Modernism and the limits of interpretation. Amherst: The University of Massachusetts Press.
Brooks, C. (1968). The waste land: Critique of the myth. In J. Martin (Ed.), A collection of critical essays on “The Waste Land" (pp. 59-86). Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall.
Hands, A. (1993). Sources for the poetry of T. S. Eliot. Oxford: Hadrian Books.
Leitch, V. B. (1983). Deconstructive criticism: An advanced introduction. New York: Columbia UP.
Ovid. (1955). Metamorphoses. trans. Mary M. Innes. London: Penguin Books.
Smith, G. (1983). The waste land. London: George Allen & Unwin.
Traversi, D. (1976). T. S. Eliot the longer poems: The waste land, ash Wednesday, four quartets. London: Bodley Head.
Weston, J. L. (1920). From ritual to romance. London: Cambridge UP.