Katheryn Seal
ENG 320
Essay
December 7, 2015
Essay
Twentieth century British and Irish poets addressed issues surrounding the existence of a god, life and death. They wrestled with these issues by using various techniques. They used imagery and stream of consciousness. These poets were surrounded with different theories and opinions about the existence of God and purpose of life and so on. Britain and Ireland were very religious regions historically, and religious issues carried into the twentieth century. Writers, as well no writers,? pondered questions about life, death, and the afterlife. Because these issues were so prevalent, poets were able to be extremely vivid in their imagery, and much of their work read as though the reader was hearing the author’s thoughts as they came to them. Though many of the writers discussed similar topics and ideas, each has his or her own unique opinion and way of looking at them. Each poem forces the reader to think about very real things. It is easy to see connections amongst their work, which is extremely interesting, but even more interesting is the uniqueness each poet and poem has. They talk about God. Some say he does not exist, others believe he does exist. Some writers who believe in God think him to be a kind and incredible god who deserves worship and praise, while others believe he is cruel and merciless and should be feared. They talk about life, and while some find it monotonous or dictated by chance, others see it as beautiful and governed by God. These poets address human nature when talking about life and death. Many of them color humanity very negatively in terms of their compassion. They talk about death and seem to agree about it. Death is inevitable, and often ignored. Each poet and poem discussed her deals with one or more of these issues in their own beautiful way.
Thomas Hardy contemplated the source of joy and pain, in his poem “Hap.” He wanted there to be some kind of deity who controlled human circumstance, but he concluded that there was none. According to Hardy, everything that happens, good or bad, is the product of chance. His life was plagues plagued with misfortune, and he wanted to be able to direct his anger at the source, or at the very least accept that it was the result of some divine intervention. He creates a balance in this piece. The balance is between his “sorrow,” and the “ecstasy” a deity would gain from his sorrow[j1]. The first line of the poem reads, “If but some vengeful god would call to me,” and the fifth line reads, “Then I would bear it, clench myself and die.” These lines, and the ones between and after, clearly reflect Hardy’s stance. He begins the poem with the word “if” and immediately the reader knows that, in Hardy’s opinion, there is no god. If there were a god orchestrating every circumstance then he would be able to “bear it,” but he concludes that this is “not so.” This poem expresses Hardy’s extremely frustrating realization that chance determines outcomes. He personifies this chance a few times in the poem; one time as “Crass Casualty,” and another as “dicing Time.” Hardy longs for the existence of a god so that he can come to terms with the origin of his suffering. He longs so badly that even after he has concluded that a god does not exist and that everything is up to chance, he personifies chance as if to make it a god. Hardy was compelled to question the existence of a god, because he was sorrowful. The reader has to wonder if this poem would have been written if Hardy’s life was full of joy and good fortune, and if it were written, would it be similar, or would he have come to a different conclusion. William Butler Yeats’ poem “The Second Coming” is very interesting in comparison to “Hap.” Unlike Hardy, Yeats claims there is a god, but according to Yeats this god is violent, cruel, and merciless. One might wonder how Hardy would feel reading “The Second Coming.” He would of course disagree with the existence of God, but could he accept the actions of the god depicted in Yeats’ poem. One would have to assume that he would, based on his poem. (Anthology of Twentieth-Century British and Irish Poetry 2, 40[j2])
Another poet who addressed the existence of a god was Gerard Manley Hopkins. Hopkins was quite different from Hardy. Unlike Hardy, Hopkins believed in the existence of God, and was devoutly religious. Two of his best known poems, “God’s Grandeur” and “Pied Beauty,” express his firm belief in God, and his belief that God should be praised for all he has done. In “Pied Beauty,” Hopkins praises God for the variety in his creation. In “God’s Grandeur” he concludes that God exists and there is evidence of his existence throughout the universe.[j3] Similar to “Hap,” this poem opens with a clear statement of where the author stands. In “Hap” the very first word told reader’s that the author did not believe in the existence of a god; In “God’s Grandeur” the reader knows the author believes in God before he or she even reads the first line. The title itself shows where the author stands. God does exist and this is known, because he can be seen in his creation, or “grandeur.” In some cases this evidence comes in sudden and bright flashes similar to “gold foil shaken.” God’s handiwork is reflected in the nature he created the way metal foil refracts light. In other cases the evidence is more gradual “like the ooze of oil Crushed.” Despite the way God’s existence can be seen all over the universe either suddenly or gradually, man still refuses to notice. Even so, God continually controls everything, or as Hopkins says, he “broods” [j4]over the world. Evidence of God is everywhere and continually renewing. Hopkins discusses man’s tendency to ignore things. Hopkins sets up an interesting distinction between himself and those who do not think like he does. This poem is filled with matter-of-fact statements. The first line says, “The world is charged with the grandeur of God.” Hopkins believes so strongly that he says these things as factual statements. He separates himself from others in the fourth line. “Why do men now not reck his rod,” and continues to widen this separation through the end of the first stanza. For him, a believer filled with this divine knowledge, life is beautiful and covered in evidence of god. However, for those who do not believe, or notice this evidence, life is monotonous and toilsome. The fifth line says, “Generations have trod, have trod, have trod;” the reader feels almost depressed and tired after reading that line. This is how unbelievers live; depressed and tired. Hopkins uses words like “seared,” “smeared with toil,” “smudge,” and “smell.” These words do not exactly evoke positive feelings. One who misses the grandeur of God lives a hard and depressing life[j5]. Hopkins brings the positivity and light back into the poem in the second stanza. He explains that even though nonbelievers have missed out on the beauty of God’s evidence and have almost scarred nature with this, God still takes care of the Earth, and his beauty can still be seen. The statement “nature is never spent” nods to that fact. Hopkins believed in God, and thought that he deserved to be praised. He also claims that those who are too busy with their lives to recognize where their life and everything around them came from, will live monotonous lives because of that. Several other poets from this time and region also wrote about the human tendency to ignore things and go on with the monotony of their lives. (Anthology of Twentieth-Century British and Irish Poetry 15, 17)
W. H. Auden and Stevie Smith focus on the human tendency to ignore the suffering of those around them. Auden eloquently addresses man’s apathy to the misfortunes of others in his poem “Musée des Beaux Arts.” He uses the “thinking out loud” [j6]technique discussed earlier. Auden alludes to the story of Icarus, who fell from the heavens and splashed into the ocean and drowned. Farmers heard the splash [j7]when the boy fell into the water, but they simply continued working. He says in sixteen, “Have heard the splash, the forsaken cry.” The reader can hear the sound of Icarus entering the water, and the cries as he was falling, and imagine himself gasping at the sight, and scrambling to try to help. However, that is not what those who are in the story do. Instead, each one “turns away quite leisurely from the disaster.” Icarus fell in near a ship whose crew saw what was going on, but like the farmers, continued on with their work as if they had seen nothing. They did not rush to find a life preserver to toss to the boy; instead they “had somewhere to get to and sailed calmly on.” Auden creates a very interesting tone in this piece. There is a sense of horror thinking about a boy falling from the sky into the ocean to drown, but there is also this very apathetic and eerily calm feeling [j8]created through the reactions of the farmers and crewmen. This poem forces readers to wonder what they would do in this situation. Readers might even be taken back to a circumstance in which someone was suffering near them and they did nothing to help. This poem paints a sobering picture of human nature. According to Auden society is indifferent to the suffering of those around them.
Stevie Smith’s poem “Not Waving but Drowning” is very similar to this piece by Auden. In Smith’s poem a man’s drowning goes unnoticed by those around him[j9]. The “dead man” here was drowning, but those who saw him were not paying close attention, and assumed he was simply waving. One has to wonder if the witnesses truly mistook his drowning for waving, or if they just convinced themselves that was the case in order to save them the trouble and risk of trying to save him[j10]. Members of society are so distracted and consumed with their own lives that they fail to see when those around them are in desperate need of help, or they simply choose to ignore those in need. (Anthology of Twentieth-Century British and Irish Poetry 266, 313)
Each one of these poems has something to say about life and death. Hardy, Hopkins, and Yeats all discussed life and death in relation to the existence of God, while Auden and Smith took a hard look and society and humanity, and how they handle life and death. Hardy believed everyone’s life is left up to chance. He wanted to have a god to blame and hate, because that would make it easier to deal with the sorrow, and he could die knowing there was a purpose. However, he believed there was no god and consequently no purpose and that realization was the source of a lot of sorrow for him. Yeats believed there was a cruel god who would eventually bring violent judgment on the world. His opinion was no less bleak than Hardy’s. Hopkins, on the other hand, believed in the true God, and saw nature and the universe as beautiful expressions of God. He did believe that humanity as a whole ignores this evidence, and are, as a result, living monotonous and hard lives. Too many people go through life ignoring the things around them, and die having no purpose. Auden[j11] and Smith also buy into the idea that men and women go through life blind to everything and everyone around them. The poets who dealt with the existence of God, saw ignorant people as having no eternal purpose, whereas the poets who did not mention God, saw ignorant people as having no purpose on earth. Auden and Smith both describe a society that is blind to the suffering of people around them, and are not affected by the pain and death of those who they live amongst. The life and death themes of these poems are closely related, but taken on from several different angles. Twentieth-Century British and Irish poets tackled issues in life and death in unique and interesting ways.
[j1]An interesting observation. Part of what Hardy wants is a sense of mathematical order, sorrow balancing out joy
[j2]An idea for a creative kind of essay. Hardy lived long enough to read Yeats
[j3]Earth?
[j4]The figurative suggestiveness of this word helps to transition the mind from one element of the Trinity to another, from Father to Holy Spirit
[j5]Yes, lives 'soiled.'
[j6]Nice sane way of discussing a difficult subject. Following from you, perhaps we should call it "thinking out louder" to indicate when someone else hears
[j7]According to Auden (not Breughel)
[j8]Good-can you explain how Auden gets this effect?
[j9]Good transition. On to Part IV of The Waste Land
[j10]The drowned man is known as a joker—perhaps they thought he was pretending
[j11]Perhaps Auden, despite his reputation for being religious, is the poet, the place where religion starts to get squishy, until it is hard to conceive of a Hopkins for this generation