tirsdag 18. september 2012

William Blake: The Tyger , an analysis

In Blake's “The Tyger” the lamb and the tiger will to many be associated as the symbols of good and evil, but with a closer analysis, in the context of the historical events it came into writing, the good and the evil becomes more intertwined and harder to separate.



The poem which I have chosen is “The Tyger” by William Blake, from “Songs of Innocence and Experience” written in 1794. To help me with proving my statement  I will use the levels of  reading literature from William Withla (2010, p. 42-56): content, form, argument/theme and context.

Content:

One of the major ideas and themes in this poem is to construct an image in the mind of the reader of an animal on this planet which have been give immense powers, and how the creator dared to get the ingredients and stir the mixture to make such an animal. The speaker wonders mostly about the creator and questions the tiger somewhat rhetorically, because it is impossible to get an answer from the tiger. The feelings that arouse when reading this poem are instinctual and commonplace at the same time. The fear and shuddering when thinking of a tiger, with its killer instinct and sharp claws. These feelings can be contributed to the human reactions of commonplace. The instinctual feelings are the wondering and the awe-inspiring sight that the speaker in the poem paints of the daring creator.

Structure:

The poem consists of six quatrains with four trochees in each verse, with its falling duple. With an AABB end-rhyme pattern. The verse is tetrameter. The poem consist of a mixture of run on and full stop verses, with no certain pattern, but the rhythm is simple and holds a dramatic effect. The rhymes used are masculine or single strong rhymes, where the rhyme sound is on one accented syllable (bright/night, spears/tears). The poet has used alliteration with the use of the w-sound (twist, watered, threw) and the softer sound of the word “what”, and also with the recurring use of the soft “s” and “f” (deeps, skies, smile, furnace, fearful, forest). It softens up the language, but at the same time it stands in contrast with the very firm and steady rhythm, giving it a very sensual and comforting tension.

Paraphrase:

Paraphrased the poem is about a person questioning the tiger, about the person who could create the tiger. The speaker refers to this creator as an “immortal hand or eye”. The tiger is described as a creature with a “fearful symmetry”, with a characteristics of something “burning bright”.
The first question that rises in the readers mind is who the speaker is. In “Introduction”, the first poem of “Songs of Experience”, we are introduced to the “Bard” who sees the past, the present and the future. So the speaker is not Blake himself. A bard is a poet, or one who recites poems about heroes, usually the poem will be sung, the recitation of poems was not from reading, but from memory. So we know that the bard is some ancient person, but not the creator himself.  The bard is not the grown up child who is the speaker in “Songs of Innocence”. The bard in Blake's songs might be hired by earth itself, questioning the purpose of not only the living, but also God. In the first stanza we are introduced to the creature, as one stalking in the night. Blake sets the mood and the feeling at once. The creatures that lurks at night “in the forests”. It is commonly known that most night-creatures are carnivores and lives of the flesh of other creatures, attacking from nowhere. An antithesis occurs in the use of something “burning bright” in the “night”, light and darkness at the same time. One might ask why the bard asks the tiger itself, but it would only be natural, because it is the tiger that would know, but God is also omnipresent, but cannot speak through the tiger. So the bard and the tiger is earth-bound, the bard is not somekind of over-natural being, just a very experienced and very old poet on earth. Coming back to the rhetorical questions one might say that the bard only asserts the things he asks. “What immortal hand or eye”, here the bard is asserting that the tiger is made by an immortal or in this instance God. It is possible to use the eye as a symbol of the beholder, as a insight to the mind of God, so the question, also somewhat rhetorically, that is raised is what kind of God “could frame” the “fearful symmetry” of the tiger. So the first stanza paints two characters that stage the poem, the tiger and God.

The speaker continues to question the qualities of the tiger, and who made him, this is ongoing in the whole length of the poem. The speaker asks in what “depths or heights” the qualities of the tigers eyes were gathered. Also on what “wings” this was possible, and with what “hands” dared to “seize the fire” which burns in the tigers eyes? In this stanza Blake uses an antithesis by writing “distant deeps or skies”, high and low. He asks where he got the soul for the tiger, the fire in the eyes as a symbol for the soul, the intertwined soul of God and the tiger. The skies as a symbol for Gods heaven, and deeps as a symbol for hell. “On what wings dare he aspire”.  Aspire meaning reaching for, or be brave enough. One might say the bard questions Gods ulterior motive about the creation of the tiger. Wings may be a symbol for an angel, or an angel with darker ambitions. The wings, depths and heights might also be seen as the Greek mythological story of Icarus and Daedalus. The wings of feathers and wax Daedalus created for his son Icarus to escape the labyrinth created by Daedalus himself for the evil king Minos. Daedalus said to his son not to fly to close to the sun and not to close to the sea, but Icarus flew to close to the sun and fell into the sea and drowned. The lesson of this story is of moderation, and the bard asks if God knows his own limitations. “Dare” is emphasized through repetition, questioning the courage and will of God.

In the third stanza the speaker questions more the qualities of the creator of the tiger, with less stress on the actual tiger. What “shoulder” and “art” could make the strong muscles that is needed in the heart of the tiger, but also the power of God, the muscles as symbols of strength and power. And what “dread hands or dread feet” dared touch the tiger further after giving it life? This stanza along with the fourth can be seen as an comparison with God as a craftsman. One can imagine an artist sculpturing something, the shoulder moving with strength to mold the heart, acting as the main force for the hand. “Heart” may be a symbol for the spiritual, emotional and moral of the tiger. “What dread hand? & what dread feet?”. This works as an antithesis, again it is high and low. “Hand” is repeated three times, but also the words “clasp/grasp” may also be acting as a “hand”. The hand acting is the main symbol of God, and it emphasizes God as a craftsman. Why “feet”? It may suggest that God is standing firm, he does not regret creating this animal, and it is with purpose.

In the fourth stanza the speaker compares the creator with a blacksmith, with “hammer” and “chain”, “furnace” and “anvil”, and the strength of a blacksmith. The speaker again asks who dares, to create the tigers brain and grasp “its deadly terrors”. The “hammer” acts as the force and strength of God. The “chain” may be seen as a symbol of the will, or it may be used as a symbol of the process of creating. The links of a chain coming together to form the chain itself. The “furnace”, with its heat and fire, and burning intensely is very much linked with the tigers colors, burning bright, but also linked with the fire in the tigers eyes, so one might say it is the symbol of the soul. The “anvil” is one of the key elements here, it acts as the opposite force of the “hammer”, the opposite strength of God, or of something darker. They act as an antithesis.


In the fifth stanza the speaker asks if the creator smiled upon his work when “the stars threw down their spears. And watered heaven with their tears”. The speaker asks the tiger if his creator is the same who made “the Lamb”. “When the stars threw down their spears. And Watered heaven with their tears.” This is the part which has proven the most difficult to explicate, but if one sees the rest of the stanza in comparison one would think that the stars laying down their spears as a metaphor for God putting his final touch on the creation of earth, and smiling and resting on the 7th day of creation. Or the stars throwing down their spears can be a symbol or a metaphor of the king of France giving up his powers. And watering heaven with their tears might be a metaphor of the darkness that the crown of England saw coming. The last verse of this stanza is the part which can connect this poem to “The Lamb” in “Songs of Innocence”. When the speaker asks the tiger if his creator is the same who made “the Lamb”, it works as an antithesis, the lamb and the tiger are as far apart as night and day. Here one might also see the wonderful decorations Blake and his wife made for the poems in the songs. The tiger is framed in darkness, lurking under a tree and the lamb is reaching out to a naked child on a sunlit background. In both poems the lamb is a symbol of Jesus. This can be said because Blake emphasizes the lamb with a capitol letter L, but also because of  the poem“The Lamb” works as a opposite poem to “The Tyger”, as an innocence and as an experience.

The sixth stanza frames the previous stanzas and repeats the first stanza with its question of “what immortal hand or eye” created the tiger. But the speaker changes the last question and asks who “dare” to create the tiger, and not “could” as in the first stanza.
Why is the word “could” suddenly substituted by “dare”? If we see the first and last stanzas as frames for the poem one might observe a change in the attitude the bard has for God. It starts more innocently and ends in a sense of awe and a little bit of fear. The reader and the bard is still left in the blue of God's real intentions. Why has God made made a world where one of his creations is food for the next? The tiger might be a symbol for the royal and aristocracy of Great Britain, living of the rest, the Lamb a symbol of the poor. There are of course many more questions that come to mind after reading this poem, but the one which is most clear is the question of what kind of God could make such a powerful animal and make the rest inferior?

Context:

One could read “The Tyger” in the context of the work which it was published, in “Songs of Innocence and Experience”. This poem is a part of the “Songs of Experience”, which can be described as the bards view of the world through eyes of experience and adulthood. And the “Songs of Innocence” expresses the innocent and naive view of the world, with a very cheerful view of the creation, from a child’s perspective. As I have mentioned before “The Lamb” from Songs of innocence stands as an opposite force to “The Tyger”, or at least as another view of faith. The child asks here the lamb who made it, and the child itself responds and tells the lamb, that it was Jesus that made thee. The same question is risen in “The Tyger”, but the questioning of the creator, God/Jesus exhibits a much more darker view of the world, the antithesis of the tiger and the lamb and the rest of the antithesis’s used in the poem reflects the duality the bard sees in his creator.
And the social context here is in Blake's world, Great Britain in the year of 1794, so in an historical context this poem has come to us in the historical era of major revolutionary workings. Only two years prior the Republic of France has been proclaimed, one year prior to the execution of the French king, and in the year of major clashes between French forces and British forces. One might compare the tiger as a scary picture of the influence which the crown of England held at the time, and the firm hand the crown held over its inhabitants in the aftermath of the revolution. In this period the revolutionary ideas spread, and a lot of Brits could see themselves becoming a part of a republic, as America had won their independence 20 years ago, and now the every day to day dealings with America were of trade and commerce. Anti-Jacobian politics by the crown made it dangerous to proclaim support, or agitate for support of the French revolutionaries. Blake himself had attended various republican meetings, “and read and sympathized  with a number of leading British radicals” (Whitla, p.55). Or one might see the tiger as a creature filled with purpose, and a metaphor of the Jacobian movement as one righteous path to salvation of Great Britain, and the fear of the tiger was a fear one could find in the halls of power, not the people. One might see the crown and the Jacobian movement as two extreme opposites, but that could also be said for the lamb and the tiger. So the poem might be a response or a reflection over the propaganda the crown and the Jacobian movement presented to the people. If the tiger is a symbol of the french revolution the poet asks the reader to take make up his or hers mind, a rhetoricly says that we have to be in awe og the people that dared to stand up against the king, appointed by God. Did God smile when the tiger made the stars give up? Did God smile when the French threw their king down? Jesus, the Lamb, tried to make a world for his people in a peaceful matter. The Tiger, the french people, used war and death as a means to salvation. They are both accepted by Blake, but through the bard he expresses an agreement to use force when necessary.


Sources:
Stillinger, Jack and Lynch, Deidre Shauna (2006), Greenblatt, Stephen (editor) “The romantic period” The Norton Anthology: English Litterature, 8 ed. Volume 2 London New York, W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.

Whitla, William (2010). The English Handbook: A guide to Literary Studies Chichester, Wiley-Blackwell

PS! Remember to cite your work!

Jane Austen: Pride and Prejudice , an analysis of Mr. Bennet



Thesis statement:
The narrator handles Mr. Bennet, in Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen, with sympathy because of the narrator’s wish to see him as a developing character, although he may be interpreted as the non-existing static character that leads to the elopement of Lydia. 



The aim of this essay is to discover and expose the complexity of the character of Mr. Bennet, through character development and revelation, and to show how the reader is lead to sympathise with the proud character of Mr. Bennet rather than the prejudiced characters, even though it is the proud characters of this story that drives Lydia into eloping with Mr. Wickham.
Already in the first paragraphs of the first chapter we are introduced to Mr. Bennet. We here meet him as he is forced into a dialogue with his wife. The narrator does not give him a voice in his first utterance in this text. “Mr. Bennet replied that he had not” (Charlotte Brontë, p.05). He is not allowed to utter himself before his wife cries at him. “You want to tell me, and I have no objection to hearing it.” (05) We can by these two sentences extract two traits of our character in question. Firstly, he is not a man of many words, or one might say that his wife speaks most in their relationship. And it is an indirect presentation by the narrator. Secondly, when he actually speaks, he speaks with a pungent voice. The use of the italicized you enforce the reader’s impression, and it is an indirect presentation by Mr. Bennet himself. It also confirms the narrator’s previous presentation.
“How so? How can it affect them?” (06) From this indirect presentation we are presented to how Mr. Bennet behaves before his wife, he teases her. It is not a very flattering presentation.

Mr. Bennet was so odd a mixture of quick parts, sarcastic humor, reserve, and caprice, that the experience of three and twenty years had been insufficient to make his wife understand his character. (07)

This is the narrator’s direct definition of Mr. Bennet, the narrator here clearly shows her affection for Mr. Bennet, she sympathizes with him, and at the same time makes fun of their relationship, which comes out in Mr. Bennet’s favour. So already in the first chapter we have a very clear picture of Mr. Bennet, he is a man of few words, when he speaks he is very sarcastic, and by today’s standards we would call him a mean person. This is extracted by what the narrator says, and by what Mr. Bennet says. “You take delight in vexing me. You have no compassion on my poor nerves” (07). This is said by Mrs. Bennet to Mr. Bennet, and strengthens the previous assumption about him.  To make Mr. Bennet more complex we can see what he says about Mr. Collins letter: “He seems to be a most conscientious and polite young man, upon my word and I doubt not will prove a valuable acquaintance—“(62). Mr. Bennet is not just sarcastic to his wife and daughters, he seems bored and sees his coming like a good opportunity for some self-entertainment.
Mr. Bennet is in the situation of not being able to pass on anything to his girls when he dies, the house and property is entailed to a distant male heir. “They have none of them much to recommend them----they are all silly and ignorant like other girls; but Lizzy has something more of quickness than her sisters.” (06-07) And by what he says about his daughters he seems like someone not caring too much about their future. As one reads this one must also see the setting in which he utters himself, and in this setting it is towards his wife in private. Is he not caring for anyone than Lizzy, or is he teasing his wife? The second chapter he is one of the first to meet up with Mr. Bingley, so it seems he does care about his daughters, although he still thinks of them as silly. So his own actions indirectly reveal him as a man of at least some compassion.  Upon the visit and first proposal of Mr. Collins he reveals his favouritism of Lizzy by stating: “Your mother will never see you again if you do not marry Mr. Collins, and I will never see you again if you do” (110). The reaction of wild Lydia’s wish to go to Brighton is somewhat revealing for the character of Mr. Bennet. On Lizzy’s objection to her going he rejects all her objections by simply saying: “We shall have no peace at Longbourn if Lydia does not go to Brighton.” (223-224)  A simple, and not a very thoughtful, decision by Mr. Bennet. So the complexity of him unravels by this.  This is also confirmed by the narrator’s direct explication about his unhappy marriage “—all his views on domestic happiness were overthrown.” (228).  This is followed by the narrators conveying Lizzy’s thoughts about her parents marriage, and how Mr. Bennet’s actions towards his wife was “so highly reprehensible.” (228), and his talents, used right, “—might at least have preserved the respectability of his daughters, even if incapable of enlarging the mind of his wife.”(229).
The narrator identifies Mr. Bennet’s unhappy marriage, although the reader most likely has figured this out, and Lizzy’s reflections reveals to the reader that the ruined marriage, and the following regression of Mr. Bennet’s mind had not done the girls justice.
By indirect presentation of the character of Mr. Bennet we identify him as arrogant and sarcastic, towards almost everyone, except Lizzy, but at the same time we are lead to sympathise with him when we are presented to his wife, through the direct presentation by the narrator. His action indirectly reveals to us that he cares about his daughters enough to present himself to Mr. Bingley. But he is revealed as simple and narrow minded when he lets Lydia go to Brighton, just to get her away from his own sphere of peace. The direct revelation of Mr. Bennet’s marriage reveals more of his complexity, or simplicity. By Lizzy’s thoughts the reader is indirectly presented to the revelation of Mr. Bennet’s faults as a father. The reader is regaining some of the sympathy for Mr. Bennet by the last development of his character through his actions and speech. He acts at once to the elopement of Lydia, and explains to Kitty that “ If you are a good girl for the next ten years, I will take you to a review at the end of them” (284), in retrospect of his previous passiveness towards his daughters actions.

Works Cited
Austen, Jane. Pride and Prejudice. London: Penguin Books, 2003.

PS! Remember to cite your work!