Kubla Khan: The Surreal and the Sublime

I want to start this out by saying that I’m operating on very little sleep, so this posting may not make a whole lot of sense.  Bear with me.  J

In the preface to “Kubla Khan,” Coleridge claims that the poem is incomplete – that he wrote it while high on opium, and after being interrupted, he couldn’t remember the rest of the drug-induced dream he had.  Reading it, I couldn’t decide whether it was a fragment or not.  The ending certainly felt abrupt, but that could be intentional.  It also definitely felt dreamlike, if not nightmarish.

“Kubla Khan” reminded me a bit of the mini-poem within the Poe story, “The Fall of the House of Usher.”  Roderick Usher composes a song – I think it’s called “The Haunted Palace” – about a castle that, once prosperous and joyful, has fallen into gloomy times as its lord goes mad, and its inhabitants with him.  It ends, “A hideous throng rush out forever, and laugh – but smile no more.”  The poem symbolizes the decay of Usher’s mind and sanity, as well as the downfall of their family and the titular house itself.  The similarity between the two poems is in their mood, the way they make the reader feel.  Both come from a dream that the speaker had, and have a surreal quality – vivid, frightening images and bizarre occurences.  In the “Usher” poem, the castle takes on a life of its own, embodying the state of mind of its lord.  In “Kubla Khan,” the balmy “pleasure-dome” has “caves of ice”, and the “chasm” is haunted by a woman mourning her “demon-lover.”  Both poems have elements of magic and the supernatural, and of inanimate things becoming “alive.”  I believe Poe was inspired by the English romantic poets, Coleridge in particular, so I guess the similarities are not surprising.

One thing that stood out to me is how uneven “Kubla Khan” looks on the page.  Some of the lines are much longer than others, and the shorter lines are indented.  The first stanza, “In Xanadu…sunless sea,” has 5 short lines (8, 8, 8, 8, 6 syllables).  The second stanza also has 5 lines, but they’re longer (9-11 syllables).  The third is 19 lines, all at least 12 syllables.  Then the first four lines of the fourth stanza are indented, and shorter; the last two, longer and not indented.  The fifth and final stanza starts indented, with 8 short lines, 6-8 syllables.  The last 4 lines are the same length (6-8 syllables), but not indented.

Shorter stanzas and shorter lines, are meant to be spoken quickly, while long stanzas with long lines force the reader to slow down.  Thus, the tempo of “Kubla Khan” varies considerably.  It starts off quick, with the brief description of Kubla’s “pleasure-dome,” then slows down, describing the chasm and the wailing woman in more detail, then speeds up at the end, as the speaker describes his vision of the “Abyssinian maid” and his longing to recreate the music she played.  In the last lines, the rhyme becomes irregular.  The poem varies between AABB, ABAB, ABBA, and ABAAB.  The last 9 lines, however, are ABAAABCCB.  The irregular rhyme scheme makes those lines stand out, jolting the reader out of complacency and forcing them to pay attention.  The last stanza is in the first person, the speaker referring to himself as “I,” inserting himself into the world of the dream, Kubla Khan’s garden.  The increasing speed and rhyme irregularity end the poem on a high note of emotion, giving the impression that the speaker has grown hysterical or a bit crazy.  The frenzied ending adds to the surreal quality of the poem and lends credence to the possibility that “Kubla Khan” is not a fragment but a complete work, as the poet’s vision of himself with “flashing eyes” telling the story of his dream seem like a real climax.

All in all, “Kubla Khan” definitely seems to be an example of “the sublime.”  The textbook footnote calls it “a visionary poem of demonic inspiration,” and I would say that’s a fair description.  Wordsworth’s definition of poetry as “the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings” is perfect for “Kubla Khan,” which is emotion carefully crafted into words.

That Lime-Tree Bower is His Time Capsule

Woah!  Based on its title, I thought this piece would blow my mind, and it did, but not only in the way that I expected.  For starters, "bower", defined by Oxford as "a pleasant shady place under trees or climbing plants in a garden or wood," has a positive connotation.  But immediately, the speaker shows this is not the case.

In the first two lines of the poem, the speaker shows us why the lime-tree bower is a prison, "Well, they are gone, and here must I remain/This lime-tree bower my prison!" (1-2). So, the speaker is unhappy because his friends left him...understandable.  I suppose I understand why he relates a beautiful lime-tree bower to a prison.

But wait, the rest of the poem is more mind-blowing, as the speaker takes us on a journey through his mind—a journey not bound by time or space.  "Beauties and feelings, such as would have been/Most sweet to my remembrance even when age/Had dimm'd mine eyes to blindness!" (3-5).  Here, the speaker has left his current situation and is fantasizing about what could have been--and not only that, but how he would have remembered what could’ve been, even when he was dead!  Crazy.  He's thinking about remembering something that hasn't even, and won't even, happen.

But wait, there's more.  He goes on to think about what his friends are likely doing in the current moment.  He imagines them, "wandering in gladness" (8), in a dell somewhere.  He is especially interested in thinking about all the fun his friend Charles, who was "in the great City pent" (31), (more prison-like, or maybe even biblical, references?) and had been longing to get in touch with Nature.  Sooo, the speaker thinks of the future, the past, what might have been, and what might be for someone else, without much regard for where he currently is.  Mind blown.  That lime-tree bower is his time capsule.

Tintern Abbey

Composed a Few Miles above Tintern Abbey, on Revisiting the Banks of the Wye during a Tour, July 13, 1798, or otherwise known as simply Tintern Abbey, by William Wordsworth is a poem in monologue form about Wordsworth's return to the Wye Valley after five years.  This poem is written in blank verse which gives it a very fluid and natural flow and as we read it, the poem seems to have been written as a simple dialogue or a flow of thoughts by the speaker, and doesn't seem forced at all.  The language within the poem is also very simple and easy to understand which suggests that Wordsworth wasn't concerned with showing off his breadth of vocabulary, but rather have the readers know that he is simply speaking from the heart and letting the audience gain a good understanding of his thoughts right as they leave his mind and are placed onto paper.

The common shortened title of this poem (Tintern Abbey) has a very small connection to the actual subject matter of the poem.  Instead of the religious undertones surrounding the idea of the Abbey, a religious and spiritual place, which is expected, Wordsworth uses nature in the form of forests, pastures, mountains, and springs as his own type of religious and spiritual place.  I noticed many religious undertones throughout this poem, one of which can be seen in lines 109-111, Wordsworth explains that nature is, "The anchor of my purest thoughts, the nurse,/ The guide, the guardian of my heart, and soul/ Of all my moral being."

The connection to God can be seen through this language as many of us has probably seen before the idea of God being an anchor, a guide, and/or a guardian, however in this case this connection is in reference to nature in Wordsworth's life.  We can again see an example of Wordsworth's spiritual experience in the poem in lines 93-102 where he reflects on feeling a sense of joy from presence that he can feel from simple things such as the light from a setting sun, the air, and the blue sky.  He notes that this "presence" that he feels is in "all thinking things, all objects of all thought,/ And rolls through all things."  He continues on to say that therefore he loves all aspects of nature because of the thoughts it invokes in him.  In this case, nature is being personified almost like God gets personified as more than a spirit but as a creator.

The world is too much with us

The sonnet, "The world is too much with us," written by William Woodsworth argues that the modern people have lost their connection to nature and all that is meaningful.

At the start of the poem (lines 1-2), Woodsworth opens with the complaint that will generally carry throughout the whole piece. This complaint is that society is destroying themselves with consumerism "Getting and spending", and that we are wasting our time and putting burden on the world.

His point is furthered in lines 3-4, "Little we see in Nature that is ours; we have given our hearts away, a sordid boon!" These two lines were the most powerful to me in that I took it as the poems direct call out. He is calling people out on the self-made division generated between humanity and nature. In saying that "We have given our hearts away", he is saying we have lost sight of what is truly important. We have become so wrapped up in materialistic things and have abandoned the significance of all that is true and authentic. At this, I couldn't help but take a minute to think about how valid his argument really was. I have fallen victim to his argument as have so many of my peers. Growing up in the "digital age" if you will, has definitely taken a toll on how I view nature and how I relate to nature and all that is real. I have lost appreciation for some of the little things.

Lines 5-8 further Woodsworth's argument as he draws specific examples of nature and how we have become to susceptible to it's beauty. Society is in fact "out of tune" as he puts it in line 8. No longer are we influenced by the "sea" or the "winds" (as he references).

The turn of the poem came at line 9 because he finally suggests a plan of action. He makes an appeal to God and says he'd rather be Pagan (who at the time of publication followed a rather odd set of beliefs) than be someone who is so far removed from reality (as offered by nature). He continues on in lines 11-12 that if we were Pagan he could look at the land and he wouldn't feel as "forlorn"--thus this seems like a solution to the problem, (sort of?) In the last lines of the poem, 13-14, he gives specific examples into the "glimpses"that would make him feel less alone.

Overall, I felt the poem offered an interesting lesson: despite the advances that we as a society are being hit with, we must take a moment to realize that natural beauty and resources that the world has to offer. We must not become so wrapped up in the ideas of consumerism and must consider what is actually important.

Opposing outlooks of "The Tyger" and "The Lamb"

I've read "The Tyger" and "The Lamb" once before in high school. What always stuck out to me was the two very different outlooks in each poem.

In "The Lamb" Blake links the lamb to Jesus, who is called the lamb of God: "He is called by thy name, For he calls himself a Lamb." Blake is paralleling mild and tame creatures to Jesus, who was also mild and well-tempered. In this poem, Blake believes that it makes complete sense that God would create a lamb for the lamb is gentle and kind. In "The Tyger" Blake is expressing his struggle to believe that the same God that created the gentle lamb could create a beastly tiger. He does not see the equality in the two creatures and cannot understand that the same mind could create such different creatures.

The language in "The Lamb" is much like the creature itself: tame and gentle and soothing. There is almost a nuturing, maternal quality to the poem. Blake is asking that God protect this gentle creature that He created. This poem strives to protect innocence in the lamb--which in turn is asking to protecting innocence in all children. "He became a little child: I a child & thou a lamb"

The language in "The Tyger" is harsh and violent, using words like "hammer" "chain" deadly terrors" and "grasp". Blake is confounded that someone who could create something that needs to be protected could also create something fierce and violent, something that could take the innocence from the lamb. He does not wish to believe that the two such different types of things can coexist in our world, created purposefully, both put here for a reason."Did he who made the lamb make thee?"

I feel as though "The Lamb" portrays a very naive outlook. Saying something along the lines of: Bless the innocent children, who are so cute and fragile, and they will all be fine." "The Tyger" expresses a much different person, on the path to realization that not everything in this world is soft and beauitful. The speaker of "The Tyger" is on his way to an epiphany that will mature and age him. It is, I think, I realization that all children have as they grow up. The speaker of "The Lamb" calls himself a child, but I think that "The Tyger" is from the point of view of the same person, but the person has grown and learned to question the world more. He is learning that not all edges are curved. Some are sharp.

Based on what we talked about in class the other day regarding sublime and the beautiful, I would say that "The Lamb" is an example of the beautiful (oh, the little baby lamb is so cute) and "The Tyger" is an example of the sublime (a terror inducing beast that instill awe on all of those who gaze upon it!).

Visit the Blake Archive!

The Blake Archive is an excellent resource full of images by Blake and others that comprise what he called his "illuminated books." Take a gander at some of the strange and beautiful images and think about the ways in which the visual impacts the verbal (and also, maybe, think back to what our friends Burke and Dryden say about painting and writing).

Here's the site: http://www.blakearchive.org/blake/

"Did he who made the Lamb make thee?"

"The Tyger" is one of my favorite poems and I've always thought of it as a thing of beauty, but after reading Burke's essay on the sublime, I think of it a little differently.

The speaker spends the entirety of the poem asking the question, "What immortal hand or eye/Could frame thy fearful symmetry (3-4)?" He wonders how such a fearsome yet beautiful creature could have been created. What does this Tyger mean to the world? The creature inspires a sense of lurid fascination. If we encountered it we would find ourselves enraptured, in the state that Burke would have described as the moment of astonishment when we find that we've gone blank in the face of something greater than we are.

We are presented with vividly dark imagery. The tyger is "burning bright/In the forests of the night (1-2)." Images of fire recur throughout, which call to mind the idea of not being able to tear your eyes away from something dangerous, but nonetheless enticing. There are images of sinews along with objects such as a hammer, chain, anvil, and spears, which all have connotations of foreboding. They could be used as tools to inflict pain. The speaker asks, "What dread grasp/Dare its deadly terrors clasp (15-6)?" This Tyger instills fear. We don't know what to expect from it, so we are stuck asking the questions of where it came from.

I always thought that "The Tyger" was the antithesis of everything light and, with Burke in mind, everything beautiful. The speaker questions how two such opposing entities can exist, this balance between lightness and darkness, which is exemplified in what I find to be the defining line of the poem: "Did he who made the Lamb make thee?" Unlike the poem of "The Lamb," the speaker is not asking God to bless the creature, rather he is asking how God could have created a world where both beings exist. How can this balance maintain itself and why does it exist? The poem leaves this up in the air, but Burke might have called it a necessary thing.

What I found most affecting at the end was the way Blake changes one word to drastically change the question in the beginning from one of wonder to a loaded demand: "What immortal hand or eye/Dare frame thy fearful symmetry (23-4)?" 

The Tiger

In reading the title, it is clear that The Tyger in Songs of Experience is the counterpart of The Lamb in Songs of Innocence. The two animals could not be any more different from one another: the lamb is gentle, kind, soft, and fragile, while a tiger is powerful, built, intimidating, and beastly. The two "songs" (classifications of) could not be any more different from one another, too: innocence is pure and unknowing, while experience is transformed and informed.With this in mind, Burke's beauty versus the sublime was clear. The Lamb is an object of beauty while The Tyger is undoubtedly sublime (when strictly comparing the two).

My focus here is on the tyger. He is placed in a dark environment (the forests of the night), which gives the reader an eerie, obscured feeling. Yet, he is shining bright (I assume a shine that comes from the bright orange of his stripes). Thus, it is evident that the tyger is an object of both beauty and destruction. His beauty poses awe, yet his placement in the forest hints at his destructive nature. this beauty and destruction make up his "fearful symmetry." I think it is important that we note the use of adjective "fearful" makes the tyger a sublime being, even while it is beautiful. It is therefore envisioned that this creature is, simply stated, a beautiful beast.

Yet, who could and would make a creature like this? The narrator questions this in the third stanza: "And what shoulder, & what art / Could twist the sinews of thy heart?" Sinews by definition means "source of power, strength, and vigor," or "tendons." I think both definitions could work here. The reader gets this sense of an evil, perhaps unintended, creation of a creature who encompassed both beauty and destruction...

And, more importantly, "Did he smile to see his work?" (line 19). I especially loved this line, and for some reason envisioned Victor Frankenstein creating The Wretch and smiling upon first completing the construction but then being paralyzed by fear and regret. What have I done, he thought. Even though Frankenstein was by no means beautiful on the outside, like the lamb he was innocent, gentle, and kind internally. Perhaps the tyger has these characteristics on the inside, too, although it is more perceived as a beast, like Frankenstein, for its physical powers. I think an important distinction has been made here: internal versus external beauty and sublimity.

If God had indeed created the tyger, like he did the lamb, I believe he would smile upon its creation. the tyger is truly an awe-inspiring creature with both subliminal and beautiful features. It seems a gentle, beautiful, destructive, beast. The reader is led into believing that God creates and within the universe exists unexplainable things, and that evil and power are ever-present and undeniable forces. And, why does God "dare" create the creature? What is a world without beauty and sublimity? The reader cannot simply have this innocent faith in the existence of a benevolent universe, as seen in the lamb's creation. A world like that just doesn't...exist.

There is only one problem in reading this poem now: the reader knows what a tyger looks like. I think this takes away from Burke's assertion that the sublime is obscure and imagined entirely by us, in using words and not images. The original copy of this poem had an image of a tiger on the bottom, so even then the reader was presented with the visual of what a tyger was. I think that took away from the subliminal aspect of both the creature and the poem for limiting the way in which we could imagine a creature both beautiful and destructive.

And, it's really "tiger," not tyger. I suppose in knowing how to spell "tiger" now the reader is at a somewhat disconnect with the  eeriness and obscurity surrounding the intentional use of the word "tyger."

The Garden of Love-William Blake

    In “The Garden of Love” by William Blake, Blake is generally commenting on the orthodox church and the observations he makes as a result of its presence. First off, the title itself made me think of Adam and Eve, and the temptation they experienced. These themes of temptation and natural desire come alive in lines 1-2. Blake explains how he “saw what I never had seen.” Besides the fact that some kind of physical change has taken place to the area in which he used to play as a child, there are some other things being acknowledged here. There are a few instances throughout the poem in which he expresses his general distaste toward the Church, and in his first two lines here, it almost made me think of the invasion of Christianity onto these lands, and the invasion of Christianity and religion in general onto the innocent, pure mind of a child. I might have been reading into it too much, but maybe he is also hinting towards the transition from childhood into the adult world of temptation and sin?

    Moving along to Line 5 where Blake makes the observation that the chapel doors were shut, I found another instance where the theme of human access to to Christianity is shown; he is expressing his dissatisfaction with organized religion because of that inaccessibility. The doors are physically shut, and read words such as “Thou shalt not” on the door. His description of “priests in black gowns” completes the overall image in my head of an area being described with negative dark undertones, representing his unhappiness with Christianity.

    The word use and imagery in lines 6-7 where he transitions from the description of the Garden of Love, and describing flowers as “sweet” to describing the “grave filled tomb stones” was an abrupt change in mood from light to dark. Could this possibly nod at the “lightness” of the purity of childhood being invaded by the darkness of progressing age and discovery of sin? I would think so. As a child, who's mind is pure and innocent and rid of bad things, he never realized he had all along been playing in a graveyard.

    In line 12, where he describes the priests in black gowns making their rounds “and binding with briars my joys and desires,” the image that came to mind of being “bound” to something was another negative connotation in my opinion, and made me think of the way people bind themselves to religion, and for Blake, religion binding itself to an individual robs them of their joys and desires, because they sacrifice themselves and their happiness to a deity they have no idea how to access directly.

    Lastly, the fact that Love was capitalized could possibly reference Jesus Christ and the access people have to him. Direct contact with God is impossible, so we turn to a “Garden of Love” to communicate that Love indirectly.  Overall, Blake's commentary on the Church, religion in general, changes, childhood and repression of desires really makes this short poem go a long way.

The Sublime

The Sea of Ice, C. D. Friedrich )1823-24)

Alnwick Castle, J. M. W. Turner (1829)

Wanderer above the Sea of Fog, C. D. Friedrich (1818)

Voyage of Life, T. Cole (1842)

"The Woman of Colour" Teaches us We're All Related

The protagonist, Olivia, is half white, half black.  Her mother was a slave who died during labor, and her father is a more privileged white man.  As a black woman, Olivia is the victim of prejudice comments, and people even call her “dirty”.  In one particularly disturbing scene, a boy named George tries to wash Olivia’s skin, and she explains to him that she is not actually dirty, that that is just the color of her skin.  This helps Olivia feel like less of a victim, and forces George to show her some respect.  In the end, the two of them end up being rather good friends.

Along with experiencing her own prejudices, Olivia also sees injustice committed against her fellow African Americans.  Olivia empathizes with them, and, though her mother, who would have been the only direct black influence in her life has passed away, she still feels very connected to, and proud of, her black heritage.  She’s not ashamed at all of her heritage, and, thanks to her faith in God, she is able to take pride in the fact that she is related to everyone she meets.  Olivia says, “I am not ashamed to acknowledge my affinity with the swarthiest negro that was ever brought from Guinea’s coast! –All, all are brethren, children of one common Parent!” (53).

While Olivia experiences her fair share of frustrations throughout the story, even with her own father’s failure to stand up for her and other blacks, her faith allows her to stay strong and to hold true to her identity.

Burke "A Philosophical Enquiry"

One of the points that Burke makes that caught my attention is where he compares pain and pleasure.  He is talking about the power of the sublime and how the strength of it factors into whether pain or pleasure is a greater force.  He says that some people might think that pain and pleasure are equal but, "we must remember that, that the idea of pain, in its highest degree, is much stronger than the highest degree of pleasure.." (602).  At first I was confused of why plain was a stronger force, but Burke went on to describe that pain is stronger because "we never submit to pain willingly" (602).  I can relate this to me own life because I am far more inclined to work hard on my homework it it will get me a better grade than if I did not.  However if i was to get a decent grade without doing any work than I am less likely to put in all the effort to have the pleasure of getting a perfect grade.  A human is far more likely to respond to the fear of pain rather than the satisfaction of pleasure.

 Another one of Burkes points that appealed to me was when he talked about the best way of communicating an idea.  He wrote about how painting allows the visual component of the idea to be clear, but painting only allows you to give your imitation on something that is real.  Writing however "...raises a very obscure and imperfect idea of such objects; but then it is in my power to raise a stronger emotion by the description than I could do by anything in the best painting" (600).  Burke is saying that no matter how beautiful a painting is, reading a description about it will evoke a stronger emotional reaction than just looking at a painting.  This made me think about the limits of communication and the difficulty of  communicating an idea.  I thought of the short story "The Minister's Black Veil" by Nathaniel Hawthorne after I read this section.  In the short story Hawthorne makes the point that humans can never truly know each other, but they can acknowledge this which allows people to become closer.  Going back to "A Philosophical Enquiry" the concept of communicating an idea is the most difficult thing to do because it is impossible to actually communicate to someone else an idea that you have because another person can never get into your head and think the same way.

I enjoyed reading Burke and I agreed with many of the things the said, but I know there is more to this piece that I did not pick up on.

-Daniel Pietaro

Obscure Things and Light Things

After reading through Burke’s enquiry on the sublime and the beautiful several times and I began to enjoy his philosophy more and more.

            The ideas of obscure darkness and clear light were present throughout these passages, connecting them all together.  This is what I got about obscurity and light –

Obscurity makes us think. Obscurity causes part of the idea or object to be in the dark, but that leaves room for imagination or our own thoughts. And it is in this way that obscurity/darkness evokes more emotion than say an idea that is clear and understandable. His talk of a physical image vs. description helped me to see this clearly. 

This was one of my favorite quotes from the passages  - “the proper manner of conveying the affections of the mind from one to another, is by words; there is a great insufficiency in al other method of communication;” This particular paragraph reminds me of the phrase, a picture is worth a thousand words because you can look at an image and get details, or you can hear a description from someone who has been there or experienced it and you will get so much more than just the basics.

Darkness also is associated with fear, while light is the opposite – I’m not too sure if it’s security, the ability to understand, or whatever. Darkness causes us to feel, be it pain or terror. Darkness, much like obscurity, causes our mind to wander and think.

Light, to me, is the basic knowledge of life, like things we know from the day that we are born. Things that are meant to be enjoyed and not comprehended or questioned, I guess. The beautiful is light. They are small. They are refined and delicate and smooth. The beautiful are things we realize and come to know and admire. There is nothing to figure out. Beauty is just as it is. Let it be. It affects us little.

The sublime is then darkness and obscurity. And darkness, in my blog, has more of the focus because it was, at least to me, more obscure. Burke says that the obscure idea, when properly conveyed, should be more affecting than the clear. And I’d have to say I agree. The obscure idea, to me at least, is like a puzzle that can’t be solved. It’s something that takes a lot of thinking, in order to uncover what is being obscured, what is in the darkness. It causes us to reflect and think, there for affecting us in ways that beauty does.

"A Philosophical Enquiry" Leaves Much to Inquire

I don’t believe opposites exist in nature—black or white, good or bad, ugly or beautiful.  This is not to say that I think everything is subjective; as a science enthusiast, I enjoy studying the objective components of life, and I believe most things in life are objective.  The fact that they are objective, however, does not mean that they are simple, nor that we can define objects in nature by reducing them to mere opposites of each other.  Life is much more complex than this.

A pileated woodpecker, for example, preys on insects—in this instance, he is the predator.  However, he is not only a predator.  The next day, a gray fox may eat this same woodpecker for dinner.  In one instance, the pileated woodpecker is the hunter; in the other, the hunted.  This same phenomenon is true to all living beings—it’s The Circle of Life, and it isn’t solely based on size or capability of any living thing.

Burke has a slightly different perception, but he touches on the idea that just because two things, in this case, the sublime and the beautiful, may have common qualities, does not mean that these things are the same, but nor does it show that they are opposites.  Burke also argues that when two different things, that, for these purposes, let’s just say, of different color, unite, the resulting color is not as strong or as impactful as it is when the two colors stand alone.

One can interpret this in two ways:
1) Burke believes that when you literally mix black and white, it becomes gray, so obviously the black and the white are not as strong as they are when they stand alone.
2) OR, Burke believes that in order for, for example, beauty, to have the most powerful and meaningful impact, it must stand alone.  There must not be any other characteristics interfering with its light.

I like the second interpretation, because it’s different from what we normally hear, which is, “You have to experience the bad before you can know the good.” The idea that you need to know “bad” to know “good”, or “ugly” to know “beautiful”, reinforces the notion that these words define each other, and I don’t think that’s how it works…nice to see Burke, back in the 1700s, may have had a similar idea!

Blaaarg, I am out of words.  Final comments:  I really, really dug this essay, for many reasons, not just the one mentioned in this post.  Very thought-provoking, and it begs for analysis and conversation.  Let’s talk about it some more!

"Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard" by Thomas Grey: A Sometimes Grim, but Hopeful look at Death

When reading through Thomas Grey’s “Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard” for the first time, I first needed to look up just what an “elegy” was.  After looking up that an “elegy” is a poem written for or to lament the dead, what I wanted next to figure out who this poem was for or who it is lamenting.  Through a few key stanzas in the poem, I was able to figure out who this poem was for. 

            I will say, however that at the start of my investigation to figure out who this poem was for, the first stanza that had an impact on me was from lines 33-36 when it states,

“The boast of heraldry, the pomp of power,

And all that beauty, all that wealth e’er gave,

Awaits alike the inevitable hour:

The paths of glory lead but to the grave.”

So basically what Mr. Grey is saying here is that we will all die eventually, regardless of who we are, no matter how rich, how powerful or how beautiful.  All of these paths will eventually lead to the grave.  Wow, let me apologize for how serious this just got and ask you to please be patient as we reach the part that will hopefully lift your now saddened spirits.

            Later on in the poem we reach the stanza where in the author discusses how the poet is honoring the common people, or the people that are usually that fade from memory when they die.  People that did not have any claims to fame.  In lines 93-96 he states,

“For thee, who mindful of the unhonoured dead,

Dost in these lines their artless tale relate;

If chance, by lonely contemplation lead,

Some kindred spirit shall inquire thy fate.”

The author refers to himself as “thee” in this part, so he states, he is aware of all the “unhonoured” dead and says that he is writing about them in this poem (their artless tale relate). So while most of the world may forget about these people, the author has taken time to remember all these people.

            The last important stanza is the last stanza itself, where Grey makes his most powerful point in my opinion.  In the last stanza he states,

“No farther seek his merits to disclose,

Or draw his frailties from their dread abode,

(There they alike in trembling hope repose)

The bosom of his Father and His God.”

Basically what he is saying here is when someone passes onto death, no one should further question what they accomplishments, their failures or weaknesses because in death they are all the same. Grey states here that when we die all we wish is to be embraced by God.  That is the hope of all people; powerful, wealthy, even down to the most common of people.  So in death, we are all the same, all wishing for eternal life.  Perhaps this is why earlier Grey had to bring up that we all die, so basically he could come back at the end and say, fear not, for when we die, we will all be judged the same, so do not worry what you have or have not accomplished in your life, we will all find peace in life after death.  So who is this poem for then? Everyone.  To everyone who has passed on and is trying to find peace, with this poem they have not been forgotten.  This poem commemorates all lives because in the eyes of Grey, all of them were worth something.

Fantomina: Female Empowerment in a Male Dominated Society

So I'm reading Fantomina by Eliza Haywood and find out that this fictional piece has a lot to do with prostitutes.  After figuring that out, I was a little disappointed that we were going to again see a female portrayed as someone who serves a man to make him happy, satisfied, aroused, you get the picture.  Although slightly annoyed at this portrayal of women as servants basically, I realized that although the woman in the book (whose name we never figure out) tries increasingly hard to please Beauplaisir and to keep his interest in her, she uses her intelligence for her own gain.  

Now I'm sure while reading this in the early 18th century, men were going wild over the radical idea of a woman being sexually aware and in charge of her own affairs, and manipulating a man using her own intelligence.  The story of Fantomina showed readers of the time that women were wise to the thought processes of men and that women were smarter than any man thought.  “Fantomina” was clever enough to never actually reveal her true identity, which mocked how men can be so easily fooled by a scantily clad, flirtatious woman.

I do believe however, that the story ended the way it did so that although these fresh ideas of women were in the thoughts and minds of all the readers (men), Eliza Haywood would still be in good standing as an author.  She was after all one of the few female authors of the time. 

While I'm on this female empowerment kick, I thought Beyoncé said it better than anyone else…

So many possible interpretations of "An Epistle to a Lady"

So basically, Leapor, or Mira, seems extremely indecisive and depressed throughout the poem. Yes, I do believe that Mira is Leapor's poetic representation of herself. This line lead me to that conclusion, "Yet Mira dreams, as slumbering poets may" (21). Within this same stanza the depression becomes more evident. Most specifically, when Mira awakes from her blissful dreams to continue with her cleaning and other dreary chores.

The following stanza is more gloominess, introducing death within the poem. It seems to me that as her happiness fades, her life is also ending. I'm not completely sure if this is a literal death or more symbolically the death of her spirit.

And now for my favorite stanza:

"But how will this dismantled soul appear,
When stripped of all it lately held so dear,
Forced from its prison of expiring clay,
Afraid and shivering at the doubtful way?" (45-48)

I like this stanza because it can be interpreted in many different ways. The imagery here is also very strong. I pictured the "expiring clay" to be the soul's body that it has finally escaped. Following this interpretation, now that the soul is free it is unsure of what to do. The freedom seems overwhelming, especially compared to its previous situation.

After re-reading this section, the prison could more broadly be referencing women's oppression within society. Mira is realizing that it is possibly a societal flaw. The women are molded like "clay" to fulfill certain expectations and are limited to only these options. The issue that I have with this symbolism is that I do not fully understand this stanza according to these guidelines. If the soul is being forced out of its previous role within society, why is it also being "stripped of all it lately held so dear?"

I think I've been staring at this poem for too long... All of the different options are starting to blend together and confuse me even more...

Now here is my second favorite section:

"Or shall I wish to stretch the line of fate,
That the dull years may bear a longer date,
To share the follies of succeeding times
With more vexations and with deeper crimes?" (55-58)

Side note: I just realized that both sections I chose are questions. Additionally, they are placed ten lines apart from each other. I wonder if there is some reasoning for this placement.

Anyways, these lines stood out to me because they seemed to capture the entirety of the poem. Mira pondering her life and options. This is the ultimate question, should she hope for life or death? It seems that she has a very pessimistic view of the future, that the crimes of future societies will be even worse.

How did you guys interpret this poem or these specific sections?

Oh, the IRONY.

After reading this lovely story, I am now truly a fan of Eliza Haywood.  After I got over the shock factor of how vivid she was in her sexual scenes of the story (I’m not reading Fifty Shades…right?), I found myself wanting to read this story again and again, because of its subtle wit, humor, and irony, as well as her main character’s obvious focus on women’s power.  Like we said in class, this story shows the power that women can have in the theater, which can be somewhat “dangerous” to the world.

Fantomina, the first character that the main character portrays, struck me as somewhat of a whim for the main character, but as the story went further it became obvious that this woman soon became too obsessed with having control over Beauplaisir. Her acting tricks soon became an addiction.

Haywood gives us hints of her inevitable character-playing from the beginning, telling us that this woman is, “naturally vain, and received no small pleasure in hearing herself praised,” (2567) which signals to us that this woman could easily find having power over a man a delight, since she does not need a man to actually make her feel comfortable with herself.  We know that the woman is of strong wit, and carries herself with pride right away, because Beauplaisir finds her to be unlike other loose women who are “for the most part gentlewomen by necessity, few of ‘em having had an education suitable to what they affect to appear” (2567).  The main character finds this role easy to take on because she has the smarts and wits to act out the part.

She deceives him beautifully, yet the irony is that she practically ruins her life by trying to ruin his.  Her actress-like ways have caused her to become pregnant, which causes her mother to exile her to a Monastery, where we are unaware if she will continue her ways as a performer.

It struck me as extremely amusing when she blames Beauplaisir for her sadness, when she is the maker of her own doom.  Obviously, in the end of the story she possibly understands that she has created something that she should be ashamed of, but right off the bat she blames Beauplaisar:

“No, my dear Beauplaisir, (added she) your love alone can compensate for the shame you have involved me in.” (2570)

Really?  The shame that he involved you in?  I’m pretty sure the shame is yours my dear.

It is equally as interesting later when her mother “commanded her to reveal the name of the person whose insinuations had drawn her to this dishonor,” (2583).

And later: “to whom you owe your ruin? Or have you deceived me by a fictatious tale?” (2584)

Oh the irony.

She might as well just say her own name, in my opinion, because she has drawn herself to her own dishonor.

What is also ironic and almost humorous is when Beauplaisir signs the letter to Incognita, “Your everlasting slave,” (2580).  We know as readers, this is the truth for him, but also for her who devotes her life to her acting throughout all of these women just to deceive him.  I had to laugh when Beauplaisir answers her letter with, “Never was woman formed to charm like you: never did any look like you,- write like you, -bless like you,” (2576).  It cannot get any more ironic than this statement.  Poor Beauplaisir.

I cannot say that I don’t find her way with this man extremely powerful and intelligent, as I believe Haywood hopes to portray about theater, especially that she could deceive him that these are different women actually having sex with him, but it is still wrong.  I started to think throughout the story that he may not have been much more of a “player” than any other man, and that her acting as these women was the very source of his demise to a scum of a lover.

She believes that she is living the dream by making up these characters, “How do some women (continued she) make their life a hell, burning in fruitless expectations, and dreaming out their days in hopes and fears,” but really she is the one living without actually knowing real love (2577).

I was on her side at some points when he was proven to be very dishonorable towards his many “women”, but in the end when he practically offers up his life for the baby of this woman that has deceived him, I found myself no longer on her side, and hating the artful treachery that she tricked him into.

As a woman of “class” from the country, she cares much more about reputation than virtue, shown in the beginning of the story when she would rather have sex with him than have her name around town:

“at the worst, have the private vexation of knowing I have lost him; -the intrigue being a secret, my disgrace will be so too.-  I shall hear no whispers as I pass.”

This parallels with many of the stories that we have read thus far, and shows how important this was, especially to women of this time.

To end my elaborate comments on Fantomina, I would like to bring up an interesting and highly ironic quote from the beginning of the story:

“He had no reason to distrust the truth of this story, and was therefore satisfied with it; but did not doubt by the beginning of her conduct, but that in the end she would be in reality the thing she so artfully had counterfeited,” (2570).

Here Beauplaisir talks about how she will most likely have sex with him because she has feigned to be a prostitute- but I think this line speaks multitudes about her fate as an actress.