Impotence and Immortality

My initial impression was that this poem was humbling man in the face of nature/God.  However, one should read the supplemental material, as two tidbits…severely damaged this reading.

“The two [Shelley and Hogg] collaborated on a pamphlet, The Necessity of Atheism, which claimed that God’s existence cannot be proved on empirical grounds and, provocatively, they mailed it to the bishops and heads of the college at Oxford” (749).

Yeah, they got expelled.  I'm a Christian, but I got to admire their chutzpah. Stupid authorities.

Number two: “he published his first important work…which owes much to Godwin’s optimistic conviction…that the regeneration of the human species was at hand and that in these modern times ‘the phalanx of reason’ would prove ‘invulnerable’ in its advance” (749)

Yeah, no.

So, upon a second reading, I picked out a few details.

Although “Nothing beside remains” the statue remnants (12), despite the king’s boast, and though “boundless and bare/The lone and level sands stretch far away (13-14) – gah! alliteration! – the statue remnants are there.

In fact, Shelley praises the artist for his craftsmanship: “[the features] Tell that its sculptor well those passions read/Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things/The hand that mocked them” (6-7).

But what is the artist memorializing?

Hmm…“frown” (4), “wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command” (5), not pretty.

This, as it turns out, fits in well with Shelley’s political views, which were largely revolutionary (749).

So, instead of man being impotent, maybe it’s the tyrant, whose own artistic expression – “I am Ozymandius, King of Kings!” etc. (10), render not his works immortal, just his arrogance and the pungent irony accompanying them with the poem’s conclusion.

“Look upon my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!” indeed (11).