After reading TWL pp 60-76 and looking over the annoations for various lines, this section, and lines like this in particular, stood out to me. Forgive me for not writing ragrding tarot cards, but i am wrapped up with the Christian element of this work from T.S. Eliot. He mentions both Ezekiel and Ecclesiastes in his annotations of lines 20 and 23 of 'The Burial of the Dead", which makes perfect sense as there are stark references to objects and organisms described in both biblical books. However, when he writes heavily about rock and water for 29 lines (330-359) and fails to mention anything regarding the story of Moses, i become confused and curious. Surely it can't be a coincidence. Eliot even mentions a spring just after mentioning water and rock together. In his annotations, these lines fall into the beginning of 'What the Thunder Said'. In his annotation of this section, the only biblical reference he mentions is the road to Emmaus, which does not have a relation to Moses. This section and the lack of clarity around it makes me wonder about what Eliot could have been thinking about whike writing it.

The first thirty lines of TWL provide a fairly concrete setting and tone for the beginning of the poem. Eliot plays with the concept of time and new beginnings, mentioning flowers growing out of the "dead land" which could be interpreted as the waste land. He also writes about the mixing of "memory and desire" and "Dull roots with spring rain" which draw parallels to past (memory, dull roots) and future (desire, spring rain). Within the first 20 lines, the story progresses from spring, to summer, and into winter. From lines 20-30, Eliot mentions "Son of man" which is almost certainly referring to Jesus, as that is one of his meny titles in the Bible. Eliot actually borrows the images of fear and dust, as well as burdensome insects, from Ecclesiastes 12, which talks about how dust shall return to the earth when people fear God again. It also says how dust will return to the earth one the grasshopper becomes burdensome and man goes to his home. This runs parallel to Eliot's cricket that provides no relief and his characters search for shelter, shade and rest in the lines in the mid twenties. The first thirty lines conclude with Eliot writing on how he will show someone fear in a handful of dust, which circles back to the passages in Ecclesiastes.

The old title of 'He Do The Police in Different Voices' sounds abysmal in my mind compared to 'The Waste Land'. I personally do not like the 'He Do The' section because it just sounds like terrible english. I also think having 'he' and 'police' shrinks down the possibilities of what could lie within the work. 'Different voices' sounds interesting to me and would be a part of the title that I would like to look more into, but I believe the final title, with it's broadness and vagueness, leaves a lot more up for interpretation and presents a larger element of mystery with for the work. The first section of the final version is also more vague and I believe gets the reader to think more about what is actually happening and what Elliot is actually referring to. In the old version, there is an element of chaos in the beginning, but not exactly ambiguity. Overall, I believe the final version is much better because it makes the reader think more.

This title evokes a sense of desolation more so than anything else in my mind. A waste land seems empty and deserted to me, but it also seems like a place where anything can show up and anything new can occur. This opens up the poem to almost limitless opportunities, both with new content being added to this blank slate, or elaborating on it staying desolate. This concept adheres to the idea that modernism doesn't have one universal form, and that breaking out of traditional forms of art takes many forms in and of itself. These resulting ideas all group under one umbrella designated as 'modernism'.