William Butler Yeats

For my last post, I am going to focus on William Butler Yeats’s “Leda and the Swan.” Noted beneath the poem, it says that “In Greek mythology, Zeus came to Leda in the form of a swan and raped her; Helen of Troy and Clytemnestra were their offspring.” The poem describes the rape of Leda by Zeus in the form of a swan vividly and leaves me with a chilling feeling. The poem begins abruptly with, “A sudden blow: the great wings beating still / Above the staggering girl” (ln 1-2). Immediately the reader is taken to the scene of the rape and the tension which lies between the swan and the frightened girl. The swan is depicted as hovering above her showing his total control over the situation and the girl. Even though swans are usually associated with happiness and bright images, in this poem, the swan seems to have a darker image surrounding it. His feet are described as “dark webs” and he holds her neck in his bill. The girl is described as “helpless,” “terrified,” and “staggering.” The swan obviously overpowers her. The second stanza consists of two rhetorical questions. He asks:

“How can those terrified vague fingers push
The feathered glory from her loosening thighs?
And how can body, laid in that white rush,
But feel the strange heart beating where it lies?” (5-8).

Compared to Zeus, ruler of Gods, Leda is merely a mortal who has no power over the situation. How could her fingers ever resist the swan’s power when she is just a mortal? The following stanza shows the consequences of this act of rape. Leda becomes impregnated by Zeus in the swan form and gives birth to Helen of Troy and Clytemnestra. Helen of Troy eventually leads to the fall of Troy and a beginning of a new era. He describes, “A shudder in the loins engenders there / The broken wall, the burning roof and tower / And Agamemnon dead. He is referencing the fall of Troy and the death of Helen’s husband, all bad events triggered by the rape described.

The last stanza attempts to get inside Lida’s mind at the time of the raping. It asks, “Did she put on his knowledge with his power / Before the indifferent beak could let her drop?” (14-15). It is asking whether she could see what the swan saw as he was raping her. She was just a pawn in the beginning of a new era. At the time of the raping, she did not realize all that would come from it and how significant it really was. She was too caught up and “mastered by the brute blood of the air” to ever know the purpose. I enjoyed reading this poem because of the striking images and shocking nature of the poem. Such a horrible and terrifying act leads to even more terrible acts. The poem also has a feeling of mystery to it since the names of the two mentioned in the title are never mentioned in the poem. Images of them are painted though throughout helping to further connect the reader with the story.

Wilfred Owen

Along with Siegfried Sassoon, Wilfred Owen’s poetry also touched me deeply. In his poem, “Anthem for Doomed Youth” Owen has a bitter tone about innocent and young men dying in the war. The poem touches me knowing that the men he is talking about are probably the same age that I am. In the beginning of the poem, the men dying in the war are described as “cattle” being slaughtered mercilessly in the battlefield. During the battle, the men’s death seems to have little significance and their humanity is stripped from them. “Only the monstrous anger of the guns. / Only the stuttering rifles’ rapid rattle / Can patter out their hasty orisons” (2-4). It is not the soldiers who contain the anger and evilness that fills war; it is the guns with “monstrous anger.” As prayers are made, all that can be heard are the rifles firing in the air. The soldiers are at that point not significant at all. Even their prayers are shushed by the horrific sounds of the battle. Owen points out in the poem that these young men dying are not given a funeral or proper burial. All they are receiving are “the shrill, demented choirs of wailing shells; / And bugles calling for them from sad shires” (7-8). Even though apparently these men are dying for their country, their death is depicted here as seeming insignificant. Their death initially on the battle field has little meaning and the only thing mourning their loss is the sound of “wailing shells” across the battlefield.

The next stanza gives a little more hope in the memory of these soldiers. Although their death seems insignificant on the battlefield, their memory is carried on with a loved one who suffers from their loss.

“What candles may be held to speed them all?
Not in the hands of boys, but in their eyes,
Shall shine the holy glimmers of good-byes.
The pallor of girls’ brows shall be their pall;
Their flowers the tenderness of patient minds,
And each slow dusk a drawing-down of blinds” (9-14).

The soldiers might not all receive candles and a the type of funeral most would think, but they all receive their own funeral through the grieving of another. They are in someone’s memory and therefore are honored. I think that the last stanza is beautiful because it shows that someone can be honored with more than just candles and a burial. They are honored through someone else’s tears and memory of them. The female mourning in the passage allows the soldier to finally be able to be laid to rest. In the beginning of this poem, the death of the soldiers is made to seem insignificant and forgotten to the rest of the world. The last stanza though makes the point that all the fallen men have somewhat of a funeral even if it’s merely the weeping from his loved ones.

Siegfried Sassoon

I found Stegfried Sassoon’s portrayal of women during World War I in “Glory of Women” interesting. The poem is a sonnet that seems to have a bitter and hateful tone towards women. It is ironic that the poem is titled, “Glory of Women” because the poem does not really glorify women at all. Throughout the poem, women are described as having a sort of romantic and unrealistic view of battle. They love the soldiers for their heroism and the medals which they receive. They love to hear horror stories of the war and to talk about their soldiers’ heroic wounds. The speaker believes that the women of the time are far too removed from the war to ever really understand what the war is like and what the soldiers are going through.

The speaker of the poem begins the poem stating, “You love us when we’re heroes, home on leave, / or wounded in a mentionable place.” (1-2). The speaker uses “we” letting the reader know that these feelings are not only his feelings, but they are the feelings of many soldiers. The soldiers seem to be loved for their apparent heroism only when they come home from war or are wounded in battle. The women “worship decorations,” the medals that the soldiers bring home. Their soldier is something they can show off at home and for which they can be proud. In women’s eyes, the chivalry and heroism of the soldiers justify the horrific war happening away from them. They seem to be blinded from the real atrocities happening. The speaker speaks of a woman’s contribution to the war sarcastically, “You make us shells. You listen with delight, / By tales of dirt and danger fondly thrilled” (5-6). The women thought they were contributing to the war with their shells, but they were still too far away from the situation. They merely contributed to more death atrocity with their shell making. In the next few lines, the speaker seems to get angry at the women for having the audacity to call out the troops for retiring in war. He exclaims, “You can’t believe that British troops “retire” / When hell’s last horror breaks them, and they run, / Trambling the terrible corpses – blind with blood” (9-11). These images left terrible horrifying pictures of what the war might have been like in my mind. Sassoon paints a bloody picture of men running over corpses and describes their situation as “hell’s last horror.” He is attacking the women for questioning their reasoning for wanting to retire in such a situation. In his mind, the women most certainly do not have a place to say such. The last three lines of the poem seemed to change tone a little bit as it focused on a woman from the other side, a German mother. He describes, “O German mother dreaming by the fire, / While you are knitting socks to send your son / His face is trodden deeper in the mud” (12-15). This portion of the poem made me feel sad. Although Sassoon attacks women for not understanding the war, it is also sad and troubling that they were oblivious at what was going on with their soldiers at the time. Ironically, the shells that the British women were described making in the poem, are probably the same shells that killed the son of the German mother described in this poem. Although the women did not fully understand the full affect of the war, they still contributed to the horrific atrocities of it.

Thomas Hardy

As I was reading selections from Thomas Hardy, I really enjoyed “The Convergence of the Twain.” It is an interesting depiction of the sinking of the Titanic, which is an event in history which most know quite well. Hardy depicts the Titanic as a ship which was built in vain. At the same time that the Titanic was being built, the iceberg was being made my God to be able to converge with it one day. The poem describes the two meeting as if it were fate that brought the two together. Both were enormous, filled with vanity and pride. It was only fitting that the two collide and find their destiny together according to Hardy.

In the first few lines of the poem, Hardy mentions that the Titanic, now in the sea, is “Deep from human vanity, / And the Pride of Life that planned her.” (2-3). Although the Titanic was once filled with human vanity and luxury, it is now far from that under the sea. Because of its vanity, it has fallen from humanity. An eerie image is given in lines 7-8. “Over the mirrors meant / To glass the opulent / The sea-worm crawls – grotesque, slimed, dumb, indifferent.” Hardy seems to be mocking the ship in this poem. This ship was built for the most luxurious and wealthy people. It was certainly a privilege to be able to ride on such a marvelous ship. Ironically, the only thing seen in the mirrors now are the sea-worms indifferent to the ship. The ship is not quite so vain now.

Hardy describes a “sinister mate” being prepared for the ship while the ship is being built in following passages. He states:

“Well: while was fashioning
This creature of cleaving wing,
The Immanent Will that stirs and urges everything

Prepared a sinister mate
For her – so gaily great –
A shape of Ice, for the time far and dissociate” (16-21).

The Immanent Will for Hardy is the force that directs events in the way that they are supposed to go. The poem makes the point that the iceberg was made for the Titanic for a reason and the two were bound to collide while they were still being created. As the Titanic grows in “stature, grace, and hue” the iceberg grows as well matching the greatness of the ship. While the two are being created in vanity and greatness, they appear to be “alien” from the other. “No mortal eye could see / The intimate welding of their later history” (26-27). The two were meant to soon be embraced together, yet no one could see this. In the next stanza, they are described as being “twin halves.” Hardy again stresses that the two help to complete each other and were made to “weld” together.

The final stanza appropriately completes the poem. Throughout the poem, Hardy builds up both the iceberg and the Titanic and the fact that the two are meant to be together. In the final stanza, the two final collide. “Till the Spinner of the Years / Said “Now!” And each one hears, / And consummation comes, and jars two hemispheres” (31-33). Finally the two collide and meet their destiny. They are described as “two hemispheres” finally coming together as one. One half is made by God, the other by humans. It is fitting that the two great forces from God and humanity come together.

While reading the poem, it is evident that Hardy believed that the Titanic deserved its fate. Hardy seemed to despise such indulgence and luxury in the boat and saw its vanity as being the flaw that brought it down. Ironically now, the ship is far from being vain. It now lies humbled at the bottom of the ocean away from everything it once was.

Gerard Manley Hopkins

While reading some of Hopkin’s poems, “Spring and Fall” really stood out to me. The poem starts out innocently speaking about a young girl Margaret who is sad because the leaves are falling. An older man, the speaker of the poem asks her, “Margaret, are you grieving / Over Golden grove unleaving?” (1-2). At first seeming innocent, this scene is actually a serious moment for one so young. She seems to be grieving and weeping over the death of the leaves. She understands now what the falling of the leaves mean and now grieves for them. Still, only because of her innocence, she is able to grieve for the leaves, as someone would a man. Anyone older and less innocent would not have grieved for something as simple as a leaf. He tells the young girl:

“Ah! as the heart grows older
It will come to such sights colder
By and by, nor spare a sigh
Though worlds of wanwood leafmeal life” (5-8).

Eventually, everything must die, including all the leaves. As she gets older, she will realize this fact and will not be so affected by the falling leaves. She will not “spare a sigh” by the sight even though all the leaves may lie on the ground eventually. The leaves in this poem can also be like people dying. It is a serious realization that children realize at one point in their lives. Eventually, everyone must die just as everyone in the past has died before. It is inevitable that the leaves will fall just as it is inevitable that eventually people will fall. This point becomes clear in the next lines when the speaker tells her that when she is older she will know why she weeps. Even though she is older, she will weep for the same thing, the only difference now is, she is too young and innocent to fully understand the reason she is weeping. “Nor mouth had, no nor mind, expressed / What heart heard of, ghost guessed.” Her heart knew why she was weeping, but her mind and mouth had not yet figured this out at her age. When she is older, she will know. The last two lines sum up the point of the poem and reveal why Margaret is really mourning. He tells, “It is the blight man was born for, / It is Margaret you mourn for” (14-15). Everyone is born to die, and in seeing the leaves, she mourns because eventually she will die too. For being about such an innocent girl, this poem has a deep and powerful message. Having the realization that life is a cycle, and that to live, means that eventually you must die can be scary and sad. Hopkins’s comparison of life to the seasons of leaves is an appropriate comparison, especially in the eyes of a child. They grow in the spring when they are young, and then in autumn, they fall to the ground and lie amongst all the other leaves that have fallen before them.

John Stuart Mill

John Stuart Mill has a very different view of the role of women than Sarah Stickney Ellis. While Ellis advises women that the best place for them in society is in the home and to be submissive to their husband, Mill has quite the opposite view. With radical views of his time, he advocated sexual equality, the right to divorce, universal suffrage, free speech, and proportional representation. In chapter one of The Subjection of Women, he gives his views of sexual equality. He points out in his writing that:

“the legal subordination of one sex to the other – is wrong in itself, and now one of the chief hindrances to human improvement; and that it ought to be replaced by a principle of perfect equality, admitting no power or privilege on the one side, nor disability on the other.” (521).

Whether it is men or women, no sex should be over the other. In this passage, he does not say distinctly that men should not be over women, he simply says that all should be equal. For instance, if the situation was turned around and women were dominant over men, he would argue equally as much his point that the two should be equal. In addition, he makes an argument that “the opinion in favour of the present system, which entirely subordinates the weaker sex to the stronger, rests upon theory only.” In other words, there is no reason that women should be subordinate to men because there is no evidence that this is the best way for things. It is simply based on theory and people’s beliefs. He points out, “the adoption of this system of inequality never was the result of deliberation, or forethought, or any social ideas, or any notion” (522). He uses excellent arguments next to make his point that theories are not always correct. He refers to the slave-owners in Southern United States and points out that their doctrines were similar. He asks, “Did they not call heaven and earth to witness that the dominion of the white man over the black is natural, that the black race is by nature incapable of freedom, and marked out of slavery?” (522). At this time in England, slavery was not allowed and looked down upon even. He is stating that if people have been wrong before about their theories of submission and yielding to the control of others, than the theories of a woman’s submission to a man are probably wrong as well. Part of the reason he believes people feel this way are because it is how their circle of friends supposedly feels. He states, “A stupid person’s notions and feelings may confidently be inferred from those which prevail in the circle by which the person is surrounded” (524). In other words, even the people who may believe in equality of the sexes will not speak out about it because of fear.

It was interesting reading this work about equality of the sexes from a male’s point of view. Often times sadly enough women write for women’s inequality but it gets passed along as just another feminist complaining. There were actually probably many men who were for woman’s rights that never even spoke up during that time. The ones that did were seen as extremely radical and may have been looked down upon by their male peers. Luckily enough, people like him did speak out. Because of writers like Mill, much advancement has been made in equality of the sexes since today.

Victorian Ladies and Gentlemen

It was very interesting to read about a woman’s role in society during the Victorian period. Middle-class women were expected to be the head of the domestic area, including the home and the family, while the men were expected to take care of the business side of the world. A passage from Tennyson’s The Princess is on page 555 and seems to describe the views of the different roles during the time period well:

“Man for the field and woman for the hearth:
Man for the sword and for the needle she:
Man with the head and woman with the heart:
Man to command and woman to obey:
All else confusion.” (555).

During that time, it was unheard of and quite rude for a woman to be out of the home and working. This idea seems quite absurd in today’s society since it is quite common and encouraged for a woman to work and accomplish whatever she wants. In the introduction describing the different gender roles, it describes women stating, “They could not work outside the home; they could not vote; they had no legal rights, even over their own children; they could not attend university or enter the professions.” (556). Women certainly seemed to be put in a second class during this time. It was thought that the women were there to take care of the men and to make sure that they were kept happy. In today’s society, if a woman wants to do nothing more than to do this, then I definitely support that, but if she desires more, than she should have that right as well.

An interesting work is included in the section from a woman’s point of view supporting their role in society at the time. Sarah Stickney Ellis advised other women to accept their inferior role to men and devote their lives to the happiness of their brothers, husbands, and sons. In addition, she discouraged intellectual ambition and saw it as a waste of time. I thought that this view was interesting to read about since very often we read works from women arguing quite the opposite.

In Ellis’s “The Influence of Women,” from The Women of England: Their Social Duties and Domestic Habits, she gives women many reasons why it is important that they accept their role in the home. She points out, “the influence of woman in counteracting the growing evils of society is about to be more needed than ever” (558). She then continues with asking, “Will an increase of intellectual attainments, or a higher style of accomplishments, effect this purpose?” (558). Women studying and becoming smarter will not solve the problems in the society that she describes as “growing evils.” She feels that women’s engaging in “superficial reading” does not enable them to be able to assist the men in her family. A book is not what can gain a man’s admiration according to Ellis. She states, “And yet what man is there in existence who would not rather his wife be free from selfishness, than be able to read Virgil without the use of a dictionary.” A woman could gain a man’s attention through being able to hold a compelling conversation with him, but studying was not the way. Although I do not agree with these ideas, I still find them to be interesting. Men actually saw this as a woman’s role in this time so in part she is probably right about many things. A man probably would have rather his wife made him happy than spend her time studying. Reading about these roles makes me happy to live in this time where woman can pretty much choose to do whatever they want to do. If they want to be the career woman, they can choose to do so, and if they choose to stay at home with a more domestic role, she may also choose to do that.