Lady Lazarus

Lady Lazarus" is a complicated, dark, and brutal poem originally published in the collection Ariel.
Plath composed the poem during her most productive and fecund creative period. It is
considered one of Plath's best poems. It is commonly interpreted as an expression of Plath's
suicidal attempts and impulses.

The standard interpretation of the poem suggests that it is about multiple suicide attempts. The
details can certainly be understood in this framework. When the speaker says she "has done it
again," she means she has attempted suicide for the third time, after one accidental attempt and
one deliberate attempt in the past. Each attempt occurred in a different decade, and she is now
30 years old. Now that she has been pulled back to life from this most recent attempt, her "sour
breath / Will vanish in a day," and her flesh will return to her bones. However, this recovery is
presented as a failure, whereas the suicide attempts are presented as accomplishments - "Dying
is an art" that she performs "exceptionally well." She seems to believe she will reach a perfection
through escaping her body.

The poem can also be understood through a feminist lens, as a demonstration of the female
artist's struggle for autonomy in a patriarchal society. Though Lady Lazarus knows that "Herr
Doktor" will claim possession of her body and remains after forcing her suicide, she equally
believes she will rise and "eat men like air." Her creative powers can be stifled momentarily, but
will always return stronger.

Lady Lazarus addresses a man as "Herr Dokter," "Herr Enemy," "Herr God," and "Herr Lucifer."
She describes her face as a "Nazi lampshade" and as a"Jew linen." So, the poem is full of images.

Summary
"Lady Lazarus" is a poem commonly understood to be about suicide. It is narrated by a
woman, and mostly addressed to an unspecified person.
The narrator begins by saying she has "done it again." Every ten years, she manages to
commit this unnamed act. She considers herself a walking miracle with bright skin, her
right foot a "paperweight," and her face as fine and featureless as a "Jew linen". She
address an unspecified enemy, asking him to peel the napkin from her face, and
inquiring whether he is terrified by the features he sees there. She assures him that her
"sour breath" will vanish in a day.

She is certain that her flesh will soon be restored to her face after having been sacrificed
to the grave, and that she will then be a smiling, 30 year-old woman. She will ultimately
be able to die nine times, like a cat, and has just completed her third death. She will die
once each decade. After each death, a "peanut-crunching crowd" shoves in to see her
body unwrapped. She addresses the crowd directly, showing them she remains skin and
bone, unchanged from who she was before.

The first death occurred when she was ten, accidentally. The second death was
intentional - she did not mean to return from it. Instead, she was as "shut as a seashell"
until she was called back by people who then picked the worms off her corpse. She does
not specifically identify how either death occurred.

She believes that "Dying / Is an art, like everything else," and that she does it very well.
Each time, "it feels real," and is easy for her. What is difficult is the dramatic comeback,
the return to the same place and body, occurring as it does in broad daylight before a
crowd's cry of "A miracle!" She believes people should pay to view her scars, hear her
heart, or receive a word, touch, blood, hair or clothes from her.

In the final stanzas, she addresses the listener as "Herr Dockter" and "Herr Enemy,"
sneering that she is his crowning achievement, a "pure gold baby." She does not
underestimate his concern, but is bothered by how he picks through her ashes. She
insists there is nothing there but soap, a wedding ring, and a gold filling. She warns
"Herr God, Herr Lucifer" to beware of her because she is going to rise out of the ash and
"eat men like air."

In Memory of W.B. Yeats

‘In Memory of W.B. Yeats’ by W. H. Auden is a complex look at Yeats’ life, death, and the power,
or lack thereof, that poetry has to change the world.
The first part of the poem addresses the last days of Yeats’ life and what it was like right after he
died. Auden speaks on the loss and how it impacted and didn’t impact, the world. The second
section of ‘In Memory of W.B. Yeats’ is directed, through a second person speaker, to Yeats
himself. While the third is an elegy meant to sum up that which was spoken about previously
but also make new statements about what poetry can do for humankind, especially in the face
of WWII. 
Structure of In Memory of W.B. Yeats 
‘In Memory of W.B. Yeats’ by W. H. Auden is a three-part poem that is further divided
into stanzas of different lengths. The first part of the poem contains six stanzas, the second: one
and the third: six again. Auden does not make use of a rhyme scheme in the first two parts of
the poem but in the third he does. This makes sense considering the elegiac form of these last
lines. They rhyme in a pattern of AABB CCDD, and so on, changing end sounds as he saw fit.

Poetic Techniques in In Memory of W.B. Yeats 

Auden makes use of several poetic techniques in ‘In Memory of W.B. Yeats’. These
include enjambment, allusion, and alliteration. An allusion is an expression that’s meant to call
something specific to mind without directly stating it. In the second part of the poem, Auden
alludes to some of Yeats’ other works, especially those focused on the Irish Independence
Movement and the Irish Nationalists at the heart of it. The final section alludes to
the tragedies of the Second World War that was brewing in 1939 when Yeats died. 

Alliteration occurs when words are used in succession, or at least appear close together, and
begin with the same sound. For example, “dying day” in the fourth line of the first stanza in
section one, or “Silence” and “suburbs” in stanza three of the same section. 

In Memory of W.B. Yeats by W.H. Auden: Summary

The poem In Memory of W.B. Yeats, by W.H. Auden is divided into three sections of varying
lengths which form separate poetic units within the poem. The relationship among these units is
not very close and organic, as each section is based on somewhat independent strains of
thought.

Section I of the poem describes, in the dramatic setting, the death of Yeats. Yeats died on a day
when it was bitter cold, brooks were frozen and airports were deserted. Auden looks upon the
death of Yeats as an ordinary occurrence. His death did not affect the order of things. And here
Auden introduces an idea which is central to the theme of the poem; a poet’s work ultimately
becomes independent of him because he had no control over the interpretation which posterity
will give it. He becomes what his readers make him. Despite the fact that the general motion of
the first section is toward a valorization of the work and the diminishment of the author, the
refrain at the close of the first section returns to the subject of the elegy to the poem's center
with a conventionally appropriate tone.

Section II introduces another strand of thought. Here, Auden’s expression becomes changed
with psychological overtones. From the description of the mere physical death of Yeats, Auden
proceeds to examine the psychological implications of the work of a poet and assesses the
worth of poetry in terms of modern psychology. Despite the great poetry of Yeats, Ireland had
remained the same. Poetry fails to produce any revolutions or to make changes in society. What
lives after a poet in his style; his manner of saying rather than the subject or the content of his
poetry. And this style, manner and language of the poet come to dwell in the subliminal depth
of the human psyche, ‘where executives would never want to temper’ it. The uniqueness of
poetry lies in the manner in which it objectifies the human condition.

In section-III, the poet universalizes the tragedy of Yeats by relating it to the wider theme of the
artist in society. Time, which is indifferent to the faults of character or physical charm ‘worships
language’. Time does not care for what the poet said, but for something about the way he said
it. The language of a poet redeems his views and oddity of character. The second half of section-
III deals with the imminence of world war-II. The time of Yeats’ death was a terrible one. “It was a
time of ‘intellectual disgrace’ sans pity and compassion.

It is in the final section of the elegy that Auden expands on the meaning of poetry's "way of
happening." In rhymed trochaic tetrameter quatrains, Auden first lays Yeats to rest and then
reinvigorates him as a model for poets. The first stanza of this section is the final farewell to
Yeats, who is here called "the Irish vessel." The death of Yeats, as becomes clear in Auden's
development of the poem in the second and third stanzas of this section, is accompanied not
only by a figurative public unrest as was described in the poem's first section, but by literal
international contention.
The Flea by John Donne: Summary and Analysis
The Flea, composed by a great metaphysical poet John Donne, was first published posthumously in
1633. The title, the flea is a conceit, an extended metaphor in this poem. The flea has sucked little blood
from the speaker and the lady and the mingling of their blood in the body of the flea is regarded as their
unification and marriage by the speaker.

This particular notion of using a metaphor in an unusual circumstance serves as an extended metaphor
in the poem. The speaker’s way of persuasion to the lady to make love is praiseworthy.

The Flea provides a foundation for the love poetry in metaphysical poetry in the sixteenth century. The
speaker in the poem seems a bit jealous of the flea for its freedom of touch on his beloved’s body and
its death by her hand in the sense of contact. In the opening of the poem, the speaker tries to convince
his beloved to make love by stating that they have already been one in the body of a flea. The particular
flea has bitten the speaker first and the lady latter, in that sense their blood is mixed in the body of the
flea. Their mingling in the flea cannot be called sin, so neither their love making.

The body of the flea is regarded as the temple of love in the second stanza. When the lady tries to kill
the flea, the speaker stops her and tells her not kill that small being as it contains three lives: his life, her
life and the flea’s own life. If she murders it, she will be guilty of three murders. Moreover, the flea has
been a sacred temple of love for it has been the holy place of the speaker’s and the lady’s wedding place
and wedding bed. He goes on speaking that despite their parents disliking of mingling of them, they are
already united in the living walls of the flea. So, the speaker concludes the killing of the flea would be a
violation of their love.

In the third stanza, the lady has killed the flea and the speaker being sad, asks the lady what was the
fault of the flea except that it sucked their pinch of blood. He then asserts that she would lose no honor
if she sleeps with him than she loses when she killed the flea.

The poem has three stanzas having nine lines in each stanza and following aabbccddd rhyming patterns.
The speaker’s power of inducement is felt in the first stanza where he asserts that the little mingling of
their blood in the living walls of flea is not considered as an act of sin. So, the greater mingling of their
body (sexual intercourse) is also as holy as the flea. In the second stanza, he tries to spare the flea’s life
arguing that it is their marriage temple and a wedding bed. Killing of flea would be an act of crime of
killing three lives; the speaker’s, the lady’s and the flea’s. But, when she does not listen to him and kills
the flea in the third stanza, he raises a question what was the sin of that little life. After killing the flea
the lady replies that by killing the flea no one of them have become weaker and nothing has been lost.
So, there is no reason to have sex between them. Then the speaker wittingly says that as she has no fear
of flea and no loss of honor after killing flea, then there would not be any loss of dignity if they make
love. Their union would do no harm in her reputation.

According to some feminist, the prime decision on making love depends solely on the lady. The speaker
being a man cannot force her to have physical intimacy. He tries hard to convince her, but she does not
leave her stand and argues back to him. Though he warns not to kill the flea, she kills and exercises her
power of action.