Eliot vs. Chaucer, Essay Example

It is obvious from the first lines of T.S. Eliot’s Wasteland that the poet knew about Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales. It is obvious because Eliot uses the same symbolism of April that Chaucer uses. While Chaucer says that April has “sweet flowers,” (line 1) Eliot says that April is the harshest month by saying that the land is dead, and because flowers are coming out of dead land the flowers are related to this harshness  (lines 1-2). While Chaucer is clearly saying that April is full of hope (as in April rains will “pierce the drought of March to the root” (line 2)), Eliot is saying that the feeling of April centers around the internal world of the person observing the poem: meaning that depending on how a person feels relates to how they experience the environment that they’re in. If a person is feeling lonely or isolated then April flowers aren’t sweet at all because they’re reminding the person of better things, things that a person isn’t exposed to in heartbreak and loneliness. Both beginnings are speaking about new life, just in different perspectives.

If these two poems are put next to each other then Eliot’s reference to Chaucer is immediately seen, for in the first stanza both also mention roots. Eliot’s “dull roots” (line 4) are symbolic of little growth while Chaucer’s roots are symbolic of hope, renewal, and change. It seems as though Eliot was referencing Chaucer as a counter-argument to Chaucer’s hope. Eliot says his typical life-giving elemental forces have the opposite effect of their intended purpose: roots that don’t grow, flowers that are not sweet. In a way, Eliot’s response is mean: he twists Chaucer’s beautiful rhymes so that they’re given a depth that doesn’t circle around joy but instead lingers on contradictions.

In Eliot’s second stanza he states, “Winter kept us warm” (line 5). Here is a perfect example of contradiction. Typically winter is a cold season but Eliot says that winter—a symbol for an emotional state—is better because the pain of full-blown love is numbed in forgetfulness. Eliot is making commentary on how it’s better to not have to feel very much at one time because it can be overwhelming and it’s better to feel a little bit at once as in the line, “feeding/A little life with dried tubers” (lines 6-7) because it rejectsheartbreak or other strong emotions. Chaucer’s poem does the opposite of this. Chaucer lives in the present and doesn’t wish to remain, or have preference for one season like Eliot does. This is made apparent with Chaucer’s word choice such as “young sun” (line 7), “sweet breath” (line 5), and “small fowl are making melody” (line 9). Chaucer’s focus in his poem, while also commentary on the natural world, suggests things that are alive and in being alive are physically felt.

In Eliot’s poem, lines 8-12, he has the narrator talk about a group of people traveling together, perhaps on a vacation. They go to a lake in Germany and drink coffee in a coffeehouse. Chaucer speaks about a pilgrimage as well but with different references. Chaucer’s pilgrimage is a religious one as seen by it being a pilgrimage (religious journey) and seeking “far off saints” (line 14). Eliot’s poem doesn’t mention anything about a pilgrimage but is a more politically conscious poem as in the line “Bing gar keineRussin, stamm’ ausLitauen, echtdeutsch” (line 12) which translates to “I am not Russian at all; I come from Lithuania, a true German.” This presents a political and cultural context to Eliot’s work and suggests something about the political climate in Europe around the First World War.

In lines 13-18 Eliot finally mentions something positive; a feeling of freedom from the narrator when they go sleigh riding in the mountains. It isn’t the sleigh riding that makes the narrator feel free but rather the mountains: that model of lofty goals, gods, and heaven. The mountains are symbolic of getting away from normal life, and in Eliot this means looking down on the world as if from a viewpoint of heaven. Chaucer still alludes to pilgrimages in the last lines of his stanza. Both poets are making commentary on the most important political persuasions of their respective times: Eliot on the regime change in Russia, and Chaucer on the importance of religion (though he makes a comic commentary on religion through his work suggesting his viewpoint on some of the dogmas inherent in his time).

What is common in both poets’ work around line 18 is this reference to change and sickness. For Eliot this comes with the allusion to murder in referencing Marie Louise Elizabeth Mendel who was Archduke Rudolph’s cousin who in turn was a man murdered with his wife. This is Eliot’s commentary the destruction of established governmental rules and the shift between monarchies to political parties. Chaucer’s poem reflects on faith in religion as the group of pilgrims is seeking a martyr in order to cure their sicknesses. While Chaucer is seeking a cure for sickness, Eliot is almost reveling in it. This difference is the true distinction between either poem which further supports the idea that Eliot was not only well versed in Chaucer’s work, but that Eliot was making commentary of Chaucer through those first 18 lines in The Wasteland.

Eliot says in The Wasteland “my nerves are bad tonight” (line 111) which is generally though of to be about Eliot’s marriage to his wife Vivien. In mentioning “nerves” Eliot is bringing about the idea of a psychological situation in his marriage, and indeed psychoanalysis was very popular at this time. This line rings true as both Eliot and his wife had fits of nervous conditions throughout their lives. This idea of bringing the personal into a work of literature (and a personal thing that has to deal with a very intimate part of someone’s relationship) is shown in D.H. Lawrence’s White Stocking story. In this story Ted and Elsie are the two main characters and Lawrence presents Ted as a character who has a lot of rage issues. This is similar to Eliot saying that he (or his character) has nervous fits, for both speak to psychological aspects of the characters. Ted is undergoing this existential crisis that in turn makes him question his relationship and his identity in the relationship (Ted has control issues as can be seen with his fits of rage throughout the story) while Eliot’s character seems to have similar psychological/existential crises (since the poem’s passage is titled “Game of Chess” which refers to marriage as a game of strategy). Both works mimic each other in dealing with intimate relationships.

Works Cited

Poetry Collection. Prentice Hall Literature. Ed. Unknown. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc, 2012. 893-1000.