"Burnt Norton"

Because I couldn't really make heads or tails of "The Waste Land," I decided to take a stab at "Burnt Norton." What I gathered from this poem is that it's about the presence of time, specifically about it's ever-present capacity. Eliot's speaker seems to be saying that the past, present, and future coexist simultaneously, not one after the other.

I find this interesting because I recently saw an episode of "Through the Wormhole" on The Science Channel that centered around the possibility of time not existing. Many scientists suggest that time is merely a human construction of ordering events sequentially. It is innately built in our minds to order events this way, so without that connection, time itself is nonexistent.

T.S. Eliot must have thought the same, but probably not with as much scientific influence. He expresses these feelings in the following lines:

"Time present and time past
Are both perhaps present in time future,
And time future contained in time past.
If all time is eternally present
All time is unredeemable."

Eliot also touches on events, as hinted in that last line of the stanza. He considers that if time is "unredeemable," then what could have happened only has value in a "world of speculation." Eventually, it all comes back to the present. But I like how Eliot constructs those "what-if" scenarios almost as other worlds -- like the paths we did not take are actually taking place in some other reality somewhere.

But if we were down that imaginary road, we'd still be questioning the other road not taken, in which case this means that no matter what events happen, there will always be an alternate present that may or may not exist adjacent to our reality.

Follow-up to Friday's Discussion

I thoroughly enjoyed last Friday's discussion over Hemingway's "Big Two-Hearted River." I was especially enlightened when Scott posed the possibility of Nick Adams being gay. I thought that this could definitely be the case.

I originally read the line about Hopkins giving his gun away and thought it said that Nick gave Hopkins his gun and then never heard from him again, so I thought this meant Hopkins had committed suicide. I didn't think much else about the matter. After being corrected, I see the multitude of possibilities for this character and his relationship to Nick, and he obviously played an important role in his life if he was one of the only people Nick reminisced about during his trek into nature.

One scene in particular is when he's talking about their argument over how to make coffee the right way. Hemingway says Nick laughs at it, but he makes the coffee Hopkins' way, rather than his own. Why would he do that? I think it was a sentimental action, one that brought him closer to this person he obviously cared so much about.

"Big Two-Hearted River"

“Big Two-Hearted River,” by Ernest Hemingway, at first seems like a simple story of a man finding peace in the wilderness. Upon further scrutiny, however, there are great allusions hidden within the text.

Nick Adams is a soldier returning home from war, where he finds his home completely burnt to the ground. He decides from there to take a hike into the wood. We don’t know much about Nick Adams since the story focuses on his actions more than his thoughts, but as the story continues, we learn more about the troubled life the young man seeks to escape. Reading Hemingway’s biography, we know that Nick, a frequent character in much of his work, is an autobiographical character in many ways. In this story, Nick finds solace in nature, as did Hemingway.

One thing I noticed was that as Nick traveled uphill, he was happy and delighted by his surroundings. Whenever he stopped his hike, however, and sat down, he began to think about the tragedies in his life, like the suicide of his friend Hopkins and an execution he once witnessed, as well as other gruesome scenes he probably witnessed in the war. Noting these two stark contrasts – the traveling Nick who basks in the glee of the natural setting, and the Nick who sits and ruminates those depressing memories – I think the big, two-hearted river is a metaphor for Nick’s lightheartedness and happiness, as well as his pain and turmoil.

I also found that the heavy backpack he carries is a metaphor for the emotional burden he carries. He carries it with him wherever he goes, even as he ascends the river. Even in a happy escape, the burden of life is present and heavy. It can be taken off from time to time, like the backpack, but ultimately it still sits beside you, ready to be worn yet again.

The river acts as a guide for Nick. He is seeking a sense of solace in this outdoor oasis, somewhere he can distract his mind by fishing and cooking and hiking and wading in the river. It acts as a sort of other world for him, away from his horrible reality, the demolished hometown he found when he stepped off that train.

The town being totally abandoned adds to the weight any soldier carries upon return to normal life. They feel alone since nobody else can understand the terrors they’ve experienced. Nick is undoubtedly a lost soul and can find little comfort, even from his birthplace. The only happiness he feels is when, exercising his newfound freedom, he ventures upstream.

A few discussion questions I have:
1. What or who do the grasshoppers represent? Are they representative of the soldiers, blackened by war, or are they a metaphor for a type of tool being used to catch fish (which really seems like a struggle between Nick and something/one else).

2. What about the swamp? He has already exhausted himself climbing this river and catching trout, so it seems acceptable that he would be weary of such a challenge like the swamp. But is there more to it? Does the swamp represent the emotional mess that he must, at some point, confront? Is it representative of his memory of the war, somewhere he would not like to return to just yet? Or is it just a swamp?