Jason Lieblang

It is undeniable that Hopkins’s style of poems are distinct. It can be seen as metaphysical and intricate as seen in As Kingfishers Catch Fire where Hopkins jumps from one image to another in order to portray the individuality and uniqueness of one as well as reflecting itself throughout all. Through the concentration of images, it is possible for him to communicate the instress of the poet’s perception of an inscape to the reader. Due to the fact that Hopkins was a supporter of linguistic purism in English, his dedication to learning Old English highly influenced his writing.

His added sophistication comes from regularly using alliteration, assonance, onomatopoeia and rhyme as seen for example in the first stanza of As Kingfishers Catch Fire:

As kingfishers catch fire, dragonflies draw flame;
As tumbled over rim in roundy wells
Stones ring; like each tucked string tells, each hung bell’s
Bow swung finds tongue to fling out broad its name;

The reliance of same sounding words are fully emphasised when read aloud. It can also be said that Hopkins’s poems are better understood when also read aloud. The idea of inscape is uncertain and typically known to be one of Hopkins own ideas. This idea is expressed through the individual essence and uniqueness of a certain object. Through the inscape as seen in his poem The Windhover, it aims to describe not only the bird in general but the one instance and the relation to the breeze. Without a doubt, The Windhover was one of the most proudly written poems according to Hopkins he has ever wrote.

“I wake and feel the fell of dark, not day” is a poem that describes the wait for the second coming of Christ. In the first line, Hopkins illustrates the heaviness of the darkness with the use of alliteration in “feel the fell” (1). The weight of the metaphorical shadows is repressive and constrictive. The darkness is the manifestation of a world without God. In the dark, the speaker is unable to see clearly as one is blind without the guidance of God. The “black hours” (2) that the speaker has wasted, denotes to the hours on Earth one spent stumbling. In the third line, the poet mentions the heart. Hopkins believes that the heart is the organ that can truly see. The heart saw where “you” went, referring to where the disappearance of the God in one’s life. The “light’s delay” (4) is an allusion to the second coming that has yet to come, mentioned in the book of Revelation. The light is a metaphor for both God and the second coming of Jesus, as the world is to be consumed by flames. The hours, years and life span mentioned in the sixth line expresses the unknown amount of time that one is waiting for their death to reunite with their God. The uncertainty of time also refers to the indefinite wait for all believers, until the second coming. Those who are “dearest [to] him”(8) will live in the heavens for eternity.

In the second stanza, the speaker expresses the pain of one who was not saved from the depths of Hell after the second coming. The “heartburn” (9) describes the pain and brokenness of one who was rejected at the Gates of Heaven. Had the speaker been subjected to the unfortunate fate, the bitterness would be defined by the speaker’s sadness (10). The “bones built in me, flesh filled, blood brimmed the curse” (11) is a line that is another example of alliteration. Line eleven illustrates the reason for the speaker’s fate in Hell, is not in his control as it is a curse. The curse also implies the negativity and doom one would be subjected to in Hell. The spirit of “a dull dough [is] sour” (12) and the mention of “selfyeast” refers to the lack of change made possible by oneself. “The lost” (13) are a reference to the souls that are trapped in Hell as their “scourge” (13) was cursed upon them. The speaker relates to the pain of the lost souls as the fear of one’s own fate approaches.

In the 21st century, the recognition of the failure of categorization is a prominent subject is any field of study. Interdisciplinary studies are increasingly popular because one category simply is not enough to fully understand and analyze any given topic. Manley Hopkins is the same in this sense. He is a religious poet and yet he communicates this through nature. He resists categorization because he is not a religious poet or a naturalist; he is both. This is what makes him so undeniable unique. This poems are examples of the beauty of tension. The tension between his two passions is prevalent in his work, but this is what makes it so important. When Hopkins uses a bird to describe the beauty of God in his famed poem The Windhover, he is not just describing the splendour of God, he is describing that of the bird as well. This beauty is unique and singular but is present in all parts of the world. This way of looking at the world, through not just one lens but multiple ones, creates a deeper meaning. This meaning is more complex and in the world we live in today it is increasingly necessary. Hopkins serves as an example to proto-interdiscplinary thinking that everyone can benefit from.

When we were looking at the poem London, and Professor Mota pointed out the emphasis on hearing in that poem, I began to think about how Romanticism affected music.

What do mind-forg’d manacles sound like? Metallic, probably. And the Romantic era of music introduced just that to the orchestra- a wider spread use of brass instruments and woodwind instruments that utilized metal valves and keys. The technology of the Industrial Revolution allowed these instruments to become more widespread and incorporated by musicians.

There were many stylistic changes as well. Beethoven is well known as a composer, and also as the bridge between classical and romantic music. His earlier, little known works are similar to those of classical composers, but in the middle stages of his life, he begins to experiment with his music.

Beethoven began putting personal emotions in his music. It does not seem like a radical move today, but much of classical music was god praising or nature praising something of that sort, and rarely introspective. His pieces were original, and he was a genius in manipulating tone and motif to reflect himself and his thoughts. The first symphony he wrote that reflected this change was Eroica. It transitions from a classical piece to a funeral march, then to a lively scherzo and ending in variations of the theme.

Personal emotion was not present in classical music, and the romantic movement changed that.

The most striking thing about William Blake’s ‘The Shepherd’ from Songs of Innocence and Experience is how strong the religious undertones are upon reflection. At first, the poem appears to simply be about the joys that a shepherd takes in his daily duties but there is a lot more going on here than just that. The capitalization of the “S” in “Shepherd” suggests that the shepherd himself is quite important, as Jesus Christ and God are frequently referred to as playing this role – except they shepherd mankind as opposed to sheep. The sheep are happy and content under their watchful gaze, feeling the sort of security that people should feel knowing that God is watching over and protecting them. It is strange that the poem seems imply that the Shepherd is following the flock as opposed to leading them (“He shall follow his sheep all the day”) as this is not traditionally the way shepherds operate, but this is another example of how the relationship here is an allegory for the one between humans and God. It is a very simple poem, both in terms of language and its overall message. Humans are presented as innocent and peaceful, but only when they know the protection of a higher power is nearby. God is seen as a paternal figure who takes great joy in his daily work. It is a symbiotic connection that benefits both parties.

William Blake’s poem “Little Black Boy” is fairly controversial for its time. Written during the 1700s when slavery was still legal, this poem states incredibly progressive views. The poem insinuates that in the eyes of God, all are equal no matter the race. Blake writes, “Look on the rising sun: there God does live”, and later refers to “black bodies and sun-burnt face” implying that blacks are closer to God, and writes that the English have pale and white skin (“I’ll shade him from the heat till he can bear”) making them further from God. Not only is this a criticism of slavery, but a direct call-out to the Christian church for largely excluding blacks. Historically, the Church has not taken kindly to minorities, and Blake makes a different assumption that perhaps whites are not the “elite” and chosen few that earn God’s love. A bold move for the time, I applaud Blake for his efforts, considering the time period that he wrote this in. Blake’s opinions were not widely-spread at that time, since the movement for abolition was barely starting. “Little Black Boy” has a melancholy tone that recognizes the harsh life that slaves endured, a progressive opinion that I am sure did not win Blake much favor. As a lover of politically-correct and social-justice related things, this poem warmed my heart to read.

Songs of Innocence and of Experience was not popular when it was first printed. Well technically it wasn’t mass produced due to difficulty with reproducing the images. But from the limited attention Blake’s other works received, it seems that not many people in Blake’s time viewed him as the great English poet he is today. So here is the question, why was Blake not considered great then but is now? The obvious answer would be to say that Blake was “ahead of his time”, his ideas were so advanced that the future generation found it more relevant than the generation he was with. But what if this is not true? What I am about to say is purely conjecture, and not to be taken seriously, however, I just want to point out the possibility that maybe we all misunderstood Blake.

It is impossible to know what the author of any work of art really meant by producing it. Unless we ask them of course, but even then we don’t really know the exact thoughts and feelings the author felt when he/she made a work of art. This creates a problem, because there is no way to correctly interpret the meaning of a work of art, therefore the standard of measuring the artistic value of works of art become purely subjective. What is great art to one could be a vulgar piece to another. And a piece of art one generation find boring could be extremely compelling to another. Here we can see the problem with Blake, what if the reason he is valued in the present generation is because we gave his poems unintended interpretations based on our society? And because his poems seems to express the feelings of the people in the present generation, we assume that it was intended by him?

One of the greatest abilities humans have is drawing connections between unrelated things. Words have connotations, colours have meanings, and pretty much everything could be a symbol for something else. The ability of humans to draw connection between pretty much everything is fantastic. I read a joke about an English teacher once, the English teacher is analyzing a novel, and he/she starts to talk about the meaning behind a certain blue curtain in a book. Apparently, blue symbolizes the deep depression the character feels. But upon asking the author, the author simply said that “well, the curtain is blue…” Humans love to add meanings to meaningless things, so what if Blake doesn’t really have any particular meanings when he wrote Songs of Innocence and of Experience? What if we are just interpreting his poetry from a modern perspective and forcing upon it modern meanings?

Blake is a member of the Romantic Movement. Romanticism seems to favour emotion over reason. Romantic writers like Rousseau have said that they have sudden violent bursts of emotions that give them ideas and help them write things. Could it be that Blake was in a similar situation? He felt a violent emotion overcoming him and had to let it out by writing poems. Perhaps he didn’t even knew or thought about what he was writing, he simply wrote his poems and felt that they were good enough to be published.

It seems that great works often have a lot of ambiguity in their comprehension. Perhaps that is the reason they are great, not because their literary value or theme, it’s the ambiguity in their comprehension that makes them great. They can be interpreted by countless generations each with an interpretation that fits their time. And the interpretation doesn’t seem to be complete for all the generation that tries to interpret it. People love to obsess themselves with things they don’t understand. So the more ambiguous something is, the harder they are to understand, the more artistic value they seem to have. This is especially true with paintings, I feel some of the paintings that are considered great are just the artist doing random things. Like seriously, what is a piece of paper being splashed with paint supposed to mean anything?

Overall, I just want to say that maybe, maybe, we all misunderstood Blake, maybe he didn’t really have the meanings we interpreted in his poems, perhaps we just think too much as humans. Of course I won’t say that I just have no idea what he or Hopkins is talking about…

One of the most joyful and freely expressed poem in Blake’s Songs of Innocence, I found to be the Laughing Song. William Blake’s expression of nature is very strong and soothing in this particular piece. The poem in itself contains a lot of different yet harmonious beings. From the grasshopper to the birds to the children, it seems that everyone is having a “merry” time, even Merry (however coincidental that is). There is a carefree expression in this poem that greatly correlates with Blake’s theme of Innocence. The very first lines are joyful and they relay a happiness that seems to be universal with all of nature.

“When the green woods laugh with the voice of joy,
And the dimpling stream runs laughing by;
When the air does laugh with our merry wit.
And the green hill laughs with the noise of it;”

This metaphor for laughter personifies nature and ultimately adds an overwhelmed audible sensation in the poem and acts as a reflection on the delight and ecstasy of all Natural objects. This poem celebrates the innocence of joy and beauty. What is even more enchanting is that the audience is welcome to join. The very last lines of this poem directly speak to the reader and offer them a spot among the joyful festivities that nature and youth bring. The laughter unites each aspect and character of the poem, creating a pure atmosphere.

“Come live and be merry, and join with me
To sing the sweet chorus of “Ha, Ha, He!”

Also, here is a very enjoyable Russian melodic version of Blake’s Laughing Song.

Last lecture, we talked at length about the poem ‘London’ and the image it carves of a broken and corrupted city. William Blake’s view of a port town in England wasn’t great, and it bore some odd similarities to a much later view of a similar city by a robust Belgian named Jacques Brel.

Jacques Brel sang in French, but has been covered masterfully by David Bowie, Nina Simone, Ray Charles, Frank Sinatra and Scott Walker. Both Bowie and Walker have done takes on ‘Amsterdam’, a powerful song about a grim and depressing topic. There are many differences, but the bottom line is that both Blake and Brel’s vision of their city is one of crushed hopes and abundant venereal disease. The contrast deserves analysis.

Both the poem and the song have a cyclical slant, with ‘London’ showing a ‘curse’ (venereal disease) being passed on through a family, and Brel saying that in the same night, sailors die and are born in the port of Amsterdam. There is, within the cyclical, a touch of the binding and hopeless – Blake explicitly states the presence of ‘mind-forg’d manacles’, while Brel’s rantlike list of vices strongly implies a stagnation in the low life of mariners and those who service them. The feeling in both is a pervasive hopelessness, the people of the respective cities locked into a grimy life. Children are brought into the world staring down the barrel of this hopelessness, with Blake’s child cursed for its father’s venality and Brel’s young lad born into a class of drunken, whoremongering sailors.

The difference is mainly sympathy, as Blake was significantly more humanistic (and more sex-positive) than Brel. In Blake, the only person really at fault is the father of the child, who has passed the illness he took for his gratification to his unknowing wife and child. In Brel, one can be fairly sure that the acerbic Belgian hates the city of Amsterdam and its inhabitants to his core. He paints a picture of the sailors as unilaterally grotesque, vulgar and brutal, and no kinder to the prostitutes, who he describes as ‘bargain[ing] their bodies and virtue’ to them for ‘a few dirty coins’. Looking at Brel’s discography, it’s hard to find people that he actually likes (his view of the Catholic Church and the upper class in general was very snide), but his most stinging barbs seem to be hurled at women, either specific women in his life or the gender as a whole (that said, he seems to have deeply valued his male friends, as in ‘Jef’, where he talks his buddy out of suicide). Brel’s attitude towards sex seems extremely bitter and distrustful, which makes an exceptionally sharp divide with Blake’s indictment of a time where ‘sweet love was thought a crime’.

In that way, ‘London’ has a more sympathetic set of circumstances, but also a more saddening conclusion when one realizes that even the innocent among them is screwed straight out the gate. If ‘Amsterdam’ sounds like the brandy-abetted rant of good old boy who feels cheated and/or disgusted by their town, ‘London’ rings more like somebody who can feel the Jacob Marley-esque weight of those self-made chains on their body, and opts to take a look around to see that they’re not the only one. I’ll try to end this post on a lighter note (this material is hitting me like a fistful of Seconal, which I definitely wouldn’t recommend in practice) so I’ll say this: Brel and Blake were both brilliant manipulators of language and emotion, and I’m just tickled to be enjoying their work as a graded exercise.

I’ve noticed that in William Blake’s Songs of Innocence and Experience, he uses a variety of animals in both his poems and illustrations. A few of these that caught my eye were the lamb, the tiger, lion, and fly (specifically in Songs of Experience). I begin to wonder why these few were chosen for their own composition and what their significance could possibly be, if any at all.

The Lamb

It is very common to find lambs symbolizing a childish state of nature, whether they be in fables or in Blake’s compositions. The first mention of the lamb is found in the eighth plate of Songs of Innocence, titled,”The Lamb” (Big surprise, right? ha..haa). The poem starts off with questioning how the lamb has come to be and who has created it. Interestingly enough, in Songs of Experience, “The Tyger”, the same question of who the identity of the creator belongs to, appears again (but more on that later). “I a child and thou a lamb” (line 17). The speaker here is clearly not Blake, but rather the child on the plate. The child asks questions out of curiosity only to answer them in response. Because both child and lamb are present in the composition of “The Lamb”, it is safe to say that both the lamb and child represent innocence, as seen with the description of both of them to be “meek” and “mild” on line 5.

In “The CLOD & the PEBBLE”, there is no mention of the lamb in text, but the image shows a variety of animals. There are frogs, ducks, cattle, and the lambs which have grown older into large sheep. So what is their significance in this piece? Well,the most obvious statement one could make is that they demonstrate maturity…or as Geoffrey Keynes interprets it as “selfish love” (144) where the sheep are not as “innocent” as they once had been as a lamb. But as Professor Mota mentioned in lecture, Blake’s pieces are not meant to be interpreted as polar opposites or to be solely one interpretation alone. The sheep’s placement in “The CLOD & the PEBBLE” (Songs of Experience) compared to the lambs in Songs of Innocence do suggest some sort of transition from childhood to adulthood, but this does not necessarily mean the sheep (or anybody who goes through this transition) completely lose their innocence. The end of the first stanza reads, “Hell in Heavens” (line 12) and the end of the poem reads the opposite, “Heaven in Hells” (line 14). Perhaps this suggests experience and innocence are in one another alike and a lack of influence from both of these would result in an inability to mature as wholesome adults like the sheep.

The Fly

This is a common parasite we’ve all had to deal with one time or another. The insect’s life-span is short and so it is ironic that flies are most commonly used to represent death. In the fortieth plate, “THE FLY”, the speaker is Blake. He compares himself to the fly in which it is happy in the short time that it it alive. It is as if to say, adults must come to the realization that death is inevitable. In doing so, they may find themselves to be able to live as freely as the fly does and without care of judgment.

The Tiger

Right off the bat, the forty-first plate is deliberately titled “The Tyger”.  I’m not sure sure why “Tyger” is spelt with a “y” instead of an “i”, however, Blake also did not give the image of the tiger as many stripes as it should have. Unlike “The Lamb”, questions made about the tiger’s existence are never answered. Perhaps the absence of such details are the reasons why Blake has included this beast as a part of Songs of Experience. It is perhaps a statement about this feline’s raw strength and size in nature that is perfectly stunning and at the same time, perfectly destructive.

The Lions

Lions are majestic and symbolize courage and monarchy.  In “The Little Girl Found”, the lion is described with features such as a “heavy mane”, “golden hair”, and has a “crown”. There appears to be a mutual relationship between the lions and the “tygers” as they coexist within the lion’s cave. Blake may have decided to use both the tiger and lion as symbols of strength and pride as they are both capable hunters in the wild. Or perhaps he means to convey the importance of having confidence in one’s identity to live in prosperity. For example,when a child transforms into an adult without a solid understanding of who they are, they may become wild and uncontrollable like a hungry tiger or lion. On the other hand, if one is self-aware, one will not be influenced by the world they interact with. Instead, one can learn to become a strong and confident figure in their community and lead a “pride” of their own such as the lion and his pride of both tigers and lions.