T. S. Eliot the Poems, Volume 2

by T. S. Eliot

  The first British trade printing of the poem was in 1925, Faber & Gwyer’s first poetry book. Other printings collated here: 1932, 1936 proof (King’s), 1936 (and later impressions), Sesame, Guild, Penguin / Sel Poems 1954, US 1952, Mardersteig (1962) (all these, from Guild, as 1936 except where noted), 1963, US 1963, 1969, 1974 (all as 1963 except where noted), and “Text of the First Edition” in WLFacs (1971B) (which is as Boni except where noted). A marked proof of Mardersteig kept by David Bland of Faber has also been collated (Susan Shaw collection). Sel Poems pbk (1961) is a reprint of Sel Poems 1954 with [III] 263 corrected.

  [Poem I 53–61, 323–46]

  5. THE “FRESCA COUPLETS”

  ms1924 (Bodleian): the “Fresca couplets” relating to the original opening of Part III (c. 624 fols 107–108). Two leaves (similar to but slightly larger than The Death of Saint Narcissus ms2), one side blind-ruled (lines impressed but no ink).

  In typescript, Part III originally opened with seventy lines of pastiche in couplets, 229–98, beginning with the awakening of Fresca. Valerie Eliot noted (WLFacs 127) that “Vivien Eliot contributed an article, Letters of the Moment II, over the initials FM” to the Criterion of April 1924, and that it contained a run of couplets reminiscent of these about Fresca. Valerie Eliot reproduced F. M.’s couplets in full, and in a footnote on another page (WLFacs 23) she mentioned “Vivien Eliot’s use of an earlier draft”, although she did not identify this as the two leaves among the papers Vivien had bequeathed to the Bodleian Library in 1947.

  More than thirty-five years were to pass between Valerie Eliot’s mention of this pencilled manuscript by TSE and its publication by John Haffenden in PN Review May–June 2007:

  Eliot told his patron John Quinn on 21 September 1922, “I have gathered together all of the manuscripts in existence”—by way of preparing to post the lot to Quinn in the USA. He must have missed out these pages, for they somehow ended up in Vivien’s hands; maybe he had sent them to her from his sanatorium in Lausanne, so they became mislaid among her papers and were not included in the bundle.

  These manuscript leaves, Haffenden wrote, “enable us to establish a simple stemma: these two hitherto unexamined autograph sheets represent a prior state of the typescript of ‘The Fire Sermon’ · · · and also of the version that Vivien incorporated”.

  There was, however, a problem. The typescript, ts3, was made by TSE on TSE’s new machine in London before he left for Lausanne (where he wrote out parts IV and V of the poem by hand for want of a typewriter). In this typescript, an arrow and an asterisk mark the place where the additional couplets of ms4 (beginning “From which a Venus Anadyomene”) are to be inserted. These couplets, which begin with the answering asterisk, were hastily written in Paris on Pound’s distinctive quad-ruled paper (WLFacs 28–29). In it, the first three words of the line “But Fresca rules even more distinguished spheres” were the outcome of four stages of drafting, and clearly did not derive from the manuscript in the Bodleian which has, without hesitation: “But Fresca rules even more exalted spheres”. The finished line cannot have preceded the drafting that produces it, and this and other details show that the Bodleian manuscript must be later than ms4, which is itself later than ts3.

  [Poem I 53–61, 323–46]

  Fortunately, there is an explanation. Among the jumble of drafts preserved from the brief period in 1924–25 when, with TSE’s help, Vivien Eliot was writing for the Criterion, many are written on the same distinctive paper as this manuscript of the “Fresca couplets”, which is blind-ruled on one side only. TSE used this paper when helping to draft part of Letters of the Moment I (1924), and Vivien Eliot used it for two manuscript stories. Although TSE had used similar paper for the fair copies of both The Engine and The Death of Narcissus (1915–16), it is unlike any of the papers used for the drafts of The Waste Land itself (and there are no marks by Pound). Apart from a quite separate collection of correspondence from a decade or so later at the back, there is no reason to suppose that anything in the bound volume of Vivien Eliot’s papers belongs other than to 1924–25. If this applies also to the Fresca leaves, then this manuscript was not written until after publication of The Waste Land and is not “a prior state of the typescript of The Fire Sermon”. On the contrary, its very considerable differences of wording and arrangement from the typescript suggest that TSE’s letter to Quinn was accurate and that having sent all the drafts, TSE no longer had sight of the couplets when he wrote this manuscript in 1924 and had to reconstruct or reimagine the scene from memory. As he told Donald Hall: “As a rule, with me an unfinished thing is a thing that might as well be rubbed out. It’s better, if there’s something good in it that I might make use of elsewhere, to leave it at the back of my mind than on paper in a drawer. If I leave it in a drawer it remains the same thing but if it’s in the memory it becomes transformed into something else”, Paris Review, Interview (1959). Accordingly ms1924 is part memory and part re-imagining.

  TSE would not have written the scene again for his own use elsewhere. Valerie Eliot quoted his Introduction to Pound’s Selected Poems (1928): “Pound once induced me to destroy what I thought an excellent set of couplets; for, said he, ‘Pope has done this so well that you cannot do it better; and if you mean this as a burlesque, you had better suppress it, for you cannot parody Pope unless you can write better verse than Pope—and you can’t.’” The lesson sank in, and TSE repeated it (see note to 229–300). However, he often wrote prompts for his wife to work up into sketches, as is the case with Letters of the Moment II, which was compiled from numerous fragments of writing in her exercise books and scrapbook. One of Vivien Eliot’s exercise books (d. 936/3) contains a pencilled first draft of the Letter, headed “March 1924” and “For Criterion of April 15th”. The recto and verso of the first leaf sketch out the first two paragraphs, after which Vivien leaves a space and writes simply “Verses”, where the “Fresca couplets” were to appear in the next surviving draft, a typescript probably made by Vivien Eliot. TSE did not write the verses in this cramped space, although he did make a short and deleted addition that suggests a very different direction which the scene might have taken: “Ah yes, Fresca, but wd you have the courage to stick a hypodermic morph. cocaine needle into yrself—wd you take a risk once—as the gos did every day?” (see McCue 2016). The next stages of composition were a typescript (tsLM1), in which the verses appear, somewhat modified, followed by a typescript apparently made by TSE, and certainly marked up for the printer by him.

  In the collation below, TSE’s manuscript draft, ms1924, appears separately, after the Fresca section of the typescript of Part III which Pound deleted (following 298). There is also a collation of the typescripts and the final text published by “F. M.” in Letters of the Moment II.

  6. OTHER WITNESSES

  WLLetter (Houghton): TSE to Pound [26? Jan 1922] suggesting emendations to the poem. Published Hudson Review Spring 1950 and in Letters of Ezra Pound; tentatively dated [24? Jan 1922] by Valerie Eliot in Letters (1988), but evidently in part a response to Pound’s letter of that day. Pound annotated WLLetter and apparently returned it to TSE, as an enclosure with his own further letter of [28? Jan 1922], which answers TSE’s remaining points. Printed in Commentary headnote, 1. COMPOSITION.

  Clarabut’s Criterion (U. Delaware): C. E. R. Clarabut’s copy of Criterion Oct 1922, signed by TSE and with three corrections.

  [Poem I 53–61, 323–46]

  Hogarth proof (Berg, bought from Bertram Rota, 5 Feb 1974): proof, trimmed after correction close to the block of text (TSE’s emendation to “were suggested” in the first of the Notes has been shaved) and bound in black and white dappled boards. A single gathering (pages 25–32, giving [V] 419–33 and Notes as far as 276, ending at “why they”) has author’s corrections and has been folded, presumably for posting, which suggests that this is not the entire author’s proof but an amalgam of corrected and uncorrected gatherings. Additionally, pages 6 and 7 are blank, so [I] 17–68 are missing. As Hogarth excep
t where noted.

  Valerie’s Own Book: fair copy on 25 pages with two-line spaces in many places where other texts have only a single line space. Only those of special interest are listed below.

  ms1960 (Texas): autograph copy on 24 pages (including title-page) made to raise funds for the London Library, of which TSE was President. Two pages are illustrated in An Exhibition of Manuscripts and First Editions of T. S. Eliot (Texas HRC, June 1961). Rupert Hart-Davis to George Lyttelton, 27 Feb 1960: “T.S.E. has been laboriously copying out The Waste Land in Morocco, and yesterday I got a postcard from him, beginning: Oh Chairman, my Chairman, The fearful task is done!” (The Lyttelton–Hart-Davis Letters V, 1983). (Whitman: “O Captain! my Captain! our fearful trip is done”, O Captain! My Captain! In 1944, according to Gallup 1985, TSE “called this poem a low point for Whitman but, unfortunately, of the correct size and shape for makers of anthologies”.) Hart-Davis to Lyttelton, 26 June 1960: “When the T.S.E. manuscript was knocked down for £2800, the audience clapped and cheered and the old boy beamed modestly.”

  7. A TYPESCRIPT NOT COLLATED

  Not included in the collation below is an amateurish fair copy typescript on foolscap (without watermark) from the library of John Hayward (King’s). Decades after publication, TSE endorsed the first leaf: “An early typing [add: by myself] of this poem T. S. Eliot”. On a flyleaf, he added: “This typescript certainly antedates the first publication of the poem, and may be the copy used by the printers of The Criterion of Oct. 1922”. A pencilled note declares “This is not so. The text disproves it. J. H.” In a letter to Daniel H. Woodward, 16 Aug 1963 (before the discovery of the drafts now in the Berg collection), Hayward wrote: “I would infer that it was the penultimate copy from an earlier draft before the copy text was finally typed out.” Almost certainly this typescript is not by TSE and dates from after the poem’s publication.

  In 1930, Albert Boni, formerly of Boni & Liveright, printed The Waste Land in an anthology of Prize Poems 1913–1929 (ed. Charles A. Wagner, with an introduction by Mark Van Doren). TSE’s poem was included without his authorisation but headed “The Dial | 1922 | T. S. ELIOT | The Waste Land”. The poem was eligible for inclusion because TSE had been awarded the Dial prize in 1922, which is a prima facie reason for supposing that the anthology would follow the Dial text; wherever the Dial text is distinctive, it is followed by Prize Poems, not least in printing “If there were only water amongst the rock” as both [V] 335 and [V] 338.

  [Poem I 53–61, 323–46]

  The setting in Prize Poems was careless, however, and introduced many new idiosyncrasies, almost all of which are shared by the King’s typescript (which in turn has many of its own, including the omission of ten lines, so that Prize Poems cannot have been copied from this typescript). The King’s typescript matches Prize Poems in reading “Shakesperian Rag” ([II] 128), “With my hair down so …” (adding ellipsis, [II] 133), “thinking of poor Albert” (for “think of poor Albert” [II] 147), and “fortnight dead” (omitting “a”, [IV] 312). Like Prize Poems, it capitalises “Zu” ([I] 32), “King” ([II] 99), “Lidless” ([II] 138) and “Leia” ([III] 277 and 290). Like Prize Poems, it runs on at what are manifestly breaks in the poem where the other texts leave line spaces, after [I] 18, [II] 138, [III] 248 and [V] 330. In Prize Poems, [V] 358 is the last line on a page, so the line space is invisible, and in the King’s typescript the line space is lost. Perhaps the most misleading error in Prize Poems is the setting of [III] 306—“la la”—as a centred line in small capitals, in precisely the same style as the titles of the Parts of the poem (which it does not number). It occurs on the same page as “DEATH BY WATER” and “WHAT THE THUNDER SAID” and appears to have exactly the same status, and is even indexed by the volume as a title. For whatever reason (and unfortunately for bibliographical clarity) this error is not replicated by the King’s typescript, but its omission of the line altogether may be telling.

  If, as these details suggest, the King’s typescript is a copy from Prize Poems, the mystery about it becomes a question of why anyone should type out the poem after publication, let alone from such an unreliable source.

  Although Hayward left no record of how it came into his hands, practically all of his collection of TSE’s papers came as gifts from the author, and it is hard to imagine how else he could have acquired what would, by the 1940s, have been a very expensive document had it been sold. The absence of word spacing in “Mrs. Equitone”, “Mrs. Porter” and “Mr.Eugenides” is characteristic of TSE’s typing, but whereas he usually left two or more spaces between sentences, the typist here left one or none. Nor are the dashes typed as TSE typed them. Some of the errors are of a kind that he could hardly have made, most strikingly the running on of Part II, without title, immediately after the last line of Part I. A secretary, such as TSE occasionally employed privately, would be unlikely to type “Bestwos” for “Bestows”, or to produce such an uneven, chaotic typescript as this. If, however, it was once among his papers, there is another person who might have been the typist: Vivien Eliot.

  As her papers show, during 1924–25, TSE not only helped her with her writing, but proposed—even assigned—things for her to write (see above 5. THE “FRESCA COUPLETS”). He wrote simple French words on widely spaced lines, apparently for her to begin sentences. Also, she made a French translation of Preludes III (see McCue 2016). It appears, both from his interventions and from her descriptions of her own boredom and anxiety, that he was finding things to distract her when she was often not well enough to leave their flat. Asking her to type for him may have been another such activity. In early summer 1930, he received a copy of Prize Poems from the publisher. On 13 May, he wrote to his brother: “I knew nothing what ever of this until receiving the book · · · So far as I am concerned the poem has simply been lifted from me for Boni’s profit.” He asked Henry to “get a copy of the book in New York if you can” and to consult a lawyer. The action taken by Henry was, in the end, “ineffectual” (TSE to Henry, 28 July 1931), and this breach of copyright was outdone by publication of a new edition of The Waste Land later that year by Liveright—the second following the lapsing in 1927 of his right to publish. TSE considered “bringing out in New York a new edition of ‘collected poems’, so as merely to kill the sale · · · This would be the only economical way to act. I had not wanted to bring out another collected edition for some time” (to Henry, 3 Sept 1931).

  [Poem I 53–61, 323–46]

  Although this is only speculation, it is at least possible that the King’s typescript is a copy made by Vivien from Prize Poems. Unlike those made for Quinn and Watson, this typescript is far removed from the story of the transmission of The Waste Land.

  8. METHOD OF TEXTUAL DESCRIPTION

  For the original printings, this collation follows the presumed order of typesetting: Boni, Dial, Criterion, Hogarth. Of these, Boni was preferred by TSE as setting copy for 1925. Variants found in the post-publication mss Valerie’s Own Book and ms1960 are listed at the end of collations, as these are presumed to have had no influence on printed texts, though they may be said to represent the latest evidence of TSE’s engagement with the poem.

  In his account of the editing of WLFacs, Donald Gallup writes: “Determining whether Eliot or Pound had been responsible for a particular cancellation was difficult, even with the manuscript before us. Fortunately, Pound had used a softer pencil and his slashes tended to be more emphatic than Eliot’s, but there were instances where distinguishing between the two was just not possible” (Gallup 1998 283–84). A few marks have been re-attributed, mainly to Pound or Vivien Eliot, but the attribution in WLFacs is also recorded. Marks were made in pencil, crayon and ink, but neither all the pencil nor all the ink marks were made on the same occasion, and it is rarely possible to establish priority. In a few cases, an expository account of an aspect of the text’s history is given with the relevant lines.

  Where a reading appears in both the published text and WLComposite, the lemma us
es the form of the published text, giving the WLComposite line number in bold:

  [I] 62 = 116 flowed] flow ts1 over London Bridge] under London Bridge Hogarth

  In this instance, the published text in all editions is “flowed”, but the earliest known reading is “flow”, which is therefore the reading of WLComposite. “over London Bridge” is the text in all drafts and editions except the Hogarth Press edition.

  Where a reading in WLComposite has no equivalent in the published text, the lemma uses the WLComposite form, with the line number in bold:

  288 From] For ts3 1st reading

  Proposed readings by others are attributed:

  277 Or] Now Pound ts3a

  Likewise comments:

  379 Perhaps] ringed with “Perhaps be dammed” Pound ts3b

  The order in which witnesses are listed is: ts1, ts2a, ts2b (or combined as ts2), ms1, ms2, ts3a, ts3b (or combined as ts3), ms3, ms4, ms5 ts4, ms6, ts5, WLLetter, Q, T, W (or combined as T/W), Boni, Boni later impressions, Dial, Criterion, Hogarth proof, Hogarth, 1925, 1932, 1936 proof, 1936, US 1936, Sesame, Guild, Penguin, Sel Poems 1954, Sel Poems pbk (1961), Washington copy 1954, 1936 17th imp. (1959), 1936 18th imp. (1961), Mardersteig, 1963, US 1963, 1969, 1974, Valerie’s Own Book, ms1960, 1971B, other posthumous printings.

  Because Boni is taken to be the earliest setting of the poem in type, Boni+ indicates all printed editions.

  [Poem I 53–61, 323–46]

  Section-title page] 1925+

  Poem title] on section-title page only 1936+ ‖ on top sheet only, ts title, Q ‖ not T/W ‖ on title-page only Boni ‖ above poem only Dial, Criterion ‖ on section-title page and above poem Hogarth, 1925

  Unadopted epigraph The horror! the horror!] The horror! the Horror! ts1 1st reading Attribution. CONRAD.] ts1 addition (ink, imitation of type). The epigraph from Conrad was then dropped in favour of Petronius, TSE writing to Pound, 12 Mar 1922: