Eliot’s Use of #Myths in The Waste Land
T. S. Eliot’s The Waste
Land (1922) is often regarded as the most influential modernist poem of the
twentieth century. At once fragmentary, polyphonic, and layered with allusions,
the poem reflects the spiritual barrenness and cultural disintegration of the
post-World War I world. One of the most striking features of the poem is
Eliot’s extensive use of myth, which serves both as a structural device and as
a means of imparting coherence and significance to an otherwise chaotic modern
condition.
The mythical method, as
defined by Eliot himself in his essay “Ulysses, Order, and Myth” (1923), is not
a mere decorative device but a way of giving shape and order to the modern
experience by aligning it with the enduring patterns of myth. In The Waste
Land, Eliot draws upon classical #myths, Christian symbolism, Eastern
philosophy, and above all, fertility myths and the legend of the Fisher King to
interpret the collapse of contemporary civilization. Through these myths, the
poem contrasts the sterile present with the vital patterns of the past,
suggesting the possibility of renewal even amid decay.
Myth as a Structural
Framework
Eliot’s use of myth is not
casual or ornamental. The mythical method becomes the very architecture
of The Waste Land. The poem is not structured by linear narrative but by
juxtaposed fragments, voices, and allusions. The myths act like connective
tissue, uniting diverse voices and images under a pattern that the reader can
sense even when the surface seems chaotic.
The most significant framework
is the vegetation myth popularized by Sir James Frazer in The Golden Bough
(1890). Frazer’s anthropological study traced rituals of fertility, death, and
resurrection across cultures, focusing on how societies enacted seasonal
renewal through myths of dying and reviving gods. Eliot also drew on Jessie L.
Weston’s From Ritual to Romance (1920), which specifically linked
the Grail legend with ancient fertility rites. Weston’s work suggested that the
quest for the Holy Grail, the figure of the wounded Fisher King, and the
desolate land are symbolic of human and natural sterility, awaiting restoration
through ritual or sacrifice.
These frameworks gave Eliot a
model: the modern world, spiritually sterile after the Great War, could be
represented as a Waste Land awaiting renewal. Thus, myth provides not only
imagery but the very skeleton on which the poem is built.
The Fisher King and the
Waste Land
Central to Eliot’s mythical
framework is the legend of the Fisher King, whose impotence or wound renders
his land barren. In the Grail romances, the King must be healed—often by a
knight undertaking the quest—so that fertility may return. Eliot adapts this
myth to modern Europe: the land, devastated by war and moral decay, is sterile;
the people live mechanical, passionless lives; the rivers and cities are
polluted.
The Fisher King appears
obliquely in The Waste Land. The poem’s opening image of April as “the
cruellest month” reverses the fertility promise of spring, presenting instead a
world that dreads rebirth. Later, the figure of the impotent or wounded man
recurs in fragments—the young man carbuncular, the typist’s indifferent lover,
and finally the “fisherman” at the poem’s close. These figures suggest sexual
dysfunction and spiritual paralysis. The Waste Land thus becomes not merely a
geographical desert but a metaphor for cultural sterility.
Through the Fisher King myth,
Eliot universalizes the plight of modernity. The personal and social crises of
1922 are set against an ancient and archetypal pattern, suggesting that the
sickness of civilization is not accidental but cyclical, part of humanity’s
recurring story.
Fertility Rituals and
the Theme of Renewal
The poem’s use of fertility
myths is not limited to the Grail legend. Images of water, drought, and
vegetation pervade the text, often framed by mythological allusions.
Water and Drought: The absence
of rain in sections like “What the Thunder Said” echoes not only the Fisher
King’s barren land but also fertility myths across cultures where water
symbolizes life and renewal. The longing for rain becomes symbolic of the human
yearning for spiritual rebirth.
Vegetation Cycles: Eliot
alludes to myths of Adonis, Attis, and Osiris—dying gods associated with
vegetation cycles. These figures represent the perpetual cycle of death and
resurrection, contrasting sharply with the stagnation of modern urban life
depicted in the poem.
Yet in Eliot’s hands, the
promise of renewal remains elusive. While the myths point to a possibility of
resurrection, the modern world appears trapped in sterility. The rituals that
once ensured fertility are forgotten or corrupted, leaving behind only fragments
of meaning.
Classical Myths and
Cultural Continuity
Besides fertility myths, Eliot
invokes a wide range of classical sources—Greek, Roman, and Christian—to
emphasize continuity between the ancient and the modern.
Tiresias: One of the most
important mythical figures in the poem is Tiresias, the blind prophet of Greek
mythology, who embodies both male and female experiences. Eliot himself wrote
that Tiresias is the “most important personage in the poem.” By witnessing and uniting
the sexual scenes of the typist and clerk, Tiresias symbolizes the poem’s
central consciousness, linking past and present, myth and reality.
Philomela: The myth of
Philomela, who was raped and silenced, then transformed into a nightingale,
appears in “A Game of Chess.” This myth parallels the degraded sexual
relationships in modern London, suggesting that violence and violation are not
new phenomena but recurring patterns of human corruption.
The Sibyl of Cumae: The
epigraph of The Waste Land invokes the Cumaean Sibyl, who longs for
death after being granted eternal life without youth. This myth epitomizes the
central paradox of the modern condition: longevity without vitality, existence
without meaning.
Through these myths, Eliot
emphasizes that the disintegration of the modern world is part of a timeless
human drama. They also lend an epic scope to the poem, raising modern
trivialities to the level of universal significance.
Eastern Myths and
Philosophies
Eliot also draws upon Eastern
traditions, particularly Hinduism and Buddhism, to expand the scope of his
mythic tapestry. The conclusion of the poem invokes the Brihadaranyaka
Upanishad, in which the thunder utters “DA”—interpreted as Datta
(give), Dayadhvam (sympathize), and Damyata (control). These
three imperatives offer a moral and spiritual code, standing in stark contrast
to the chaos and despair of the Waste Land.
Similarly, the Buddhist Fire
Sermon is invoked in the section of the same name, where the burning lusts of
humanity parallel the flames of worldly suffering. By aligning Western cultural
collapse with Eastern spiritual wisdom, Eliot suggests that redemption may lie
in transcultural, universal truths. The use of Eastern myths underscores the
poem’s cosmopolitan nature and its attempt to find meaning across traditions.
Myth as a Commentary on
Modern Life
Eliot’s purpose in using myth
was not simply to display erudition but to illuminate the condition of modern
society. Myths serve as a mirror, reflecting modern decay against timeless
archetypes.
The sterile sexual encounters
of modern London are contrasted with fertility rituals of ancient myth.
The aimlessness of
city-dwellers echoes the barren land awaiting renewal in the Grail legend.
The fragmented form of the
poem mirrors the fragmentation of modern culture, but myths provide an
undercurrent of coherence, suggesting that disorder can still be read in
relation to enduring patterns.
Thus, myths act as both a
critique and a consolation. They expose the emptiness of contemporary life but
also hint at the possibility of renewal if the lost rituals of meaning are
rediscovered.
Critical Views on
Eliot’s Use of Myth
Critics have long debated
Eliot’s use of myth. For some, like F. R. Leavis, it represents a profound
innovation, giving shape to the modern imagination. Eliot’s mythical method,
they argue, is his greatest contribution to modernism, enabling poets to grapple
with the chaos of the twentieth century.
Others, however, have
criticized Eliot for elitism, claiming that his dense allusions make the poem
inaccessible to the common reader. Some have also argued that reliance on myth
suggests a retreat from direct social engagement, preferring timeless archetypes
to the specifics of modern politics and economics.
Nevertheless, even critics
acknowledge that the use of myth was central to the poem’s power. Without myth,
The Waste Land would risk disintegration into mere fragments. With it,
the poem acquires depth, resonance, and a sense of universality.
Conclusion
In The Waste Land, T.
S. Eliot employs myth not as ornament but as foundation. The fertility myths,
the legend of the Fisher King, the figures of Tiresias, Philomela, and the
Sibyl, as well as Eastern philosophies, all contribute to a vast intertextual
web that transforms modern chaos into a meaningful pattern. By aligning
post-war despair with ancient archetypes, Eliot both diagnoses the sickness of
his age and gestures toward the timeless possibility of renewal.
The mythical method allows
Eliot to transcend mere personal or historical expression, situating modernity
within the eternal cycles of death and rebirth. In doing so, he creates a poem
at once deeply rooted in its time and universal in scope. The Waste Land
becomes not only a portrait of 1922 but also a meditation on humanity’s
recurring crises and its perpetual yearning for regeneration.