The Necklace by Maupassant

Setting:

 The story is set in late 19th-century France, primarily in Paris. The socio-economic backdrop
of the story plays a significant role in shaping the characters' lives and decisions.

Characters:

 Mathilde Loisel: The protagonist, who is dissatisfied with her middle-class life and
longs for wealth and luxury.

 Monsieur Loisel: Mathilde's husband, a clerk in the Ministry of Education. He is

content with his modest lifestyle but loves his wife deeply.

 Madame Forestier: A wealthy friend of Mathilde's, whose jewelry Mathilde borrows

for a fancy event.

Plot

 Introduction: The story begins with the introduction of the protagonist, Mathilde Loisel, a
young woman married to a clerk in the Ministry of Education named Monsieur Loisel. Despite
her husband's modest income, Mathilde harbors deep-seated dissatisfaction with her middle-
class life and yearns for luxury and opulence.
 The Invitation: Monsieur Loisel comes home one evening with an invitation to a prestigious
ball hosted by the Ministry. Mathilde, thrilled at the prospect of attending such a grand
event, is immediately distressed by the realization that she lacks appropriate attire for such
an occasion.
 Borrowing the Necklace: Mathilde's husband suggests that she borrow jewelry from her
wealthy friend, Madame Forestier. Reluctantly, Mathilde agrees and borrows a stunning
diamond necklace from Madame Forestier.
 The Ball: At the ball, Mathilde is transformed into a vision of beauty and elegance, attracting
admiration and envy from the other guests. She revels in the attention and the illusion of
wealth and status that the borrowed necklace provides.
 The Loss: After the ball, as Mathilde and her husband return home, she realizes with horror
that she has lost the necklace. Despite their frantic search, the necklace remains
unrecovered.
 The Descent into Poverty: Fearful of the consequences of revealing the loss to Madame
Forestier, the Loisels decide to replace the necklace secretly. They borrow a vast sum of
money, exhausting their resources and plunging themselves into debt.
 Years of Hardship: The Loisels spend the next ten years working tirelessly to repay their
debts, sacrificing their comfort and happiness to rectify Mathilde's mistake. They move to a
smaller apartment, live frugally, and endure hardship.
 The Revelation: Eventually, Mathilde encounters Madame Forestier, who fails to recognize
her former friend due to the toll that poverty has taken on Mathilde's appearance. When
Mathilde confesses to losing the necklace and reveals the sacrifices, she and her husband
 made to replace it, Madame Forestier nonchalantly informs her that the original necklace
was merely a cheap imitation, worth only a fraction of what the Loisels had paid to replace it.
 The Irony and Resolution: The story concludes with a bitter irony, as Mathilde realizes the
folly of her obsession with wealth and status. Despite her years of suffering, she ultimately
learns that the necklace, the symbol of her downfall, was of little value. The revelation
underscores the theme of appearance versus reality and the deceptive nature of societal
values.
 Reflection: "The Necklace" serves as a cautionary tale about the dangers of pride, vanity, and
the pursuit of material wealth. It leaves readers contemplating the consequences of living
beyond one's means and the true meaning of happiness and contentment.

Themes:

 The theme of appearance versus reality: Mathilde's desire for material wealth and
social status leads her to borrow an expensive necklace to maintain appearances,
ultimately resulting in her downfall.

 The consequences of pride and vanity: Mathilde's refusal to accept her modest
circumstances and her desire to impress others lead to her downfall.

 The deceptive nature of wealth: The necklace, a symbol of wealth and status,
ultimately proves to be fake, highlighting the superficiality of societal values.

Irony:

 The irony of Mathilde's desire for wealth and luxury leading to her descent into
poverty.

 The revelation that the necklace, which Mathilde sacrificed so much to replace, was
merely an imitation, accentuating the futility of her pursuit of materialism.

Conclusion:

 The story concludes with a twist, as Mathilde encounters Madame Forestier years
later and learns that the original necklace was merely an imitation, worth only a
fraction of what she and her husband had sacrificed to replace it.

 This revelation serves as a bitter reminder of the consequences of Mathilde's vanity

and pride, highlighting the theme of the deceptive nature of appearances and
societal values.

"The Necklace" is a poignant tale that explores the themes of ambition, pride, and the consequences
of living beyond one's means, leaving a lasting impression on readers with its powerful narrative and
thought-provoking conclusion.
‘The Necklace’: analysis

In ‘The Necklace’, Guy de Maupassant explores the relationship between appearance and reality. The
necklace, of course, is the most explicit example of this: it looks like a genuine diamond necklace but
is an imitation or fake. And this final twist in the tale leads us to think more carefully about the other
details of the story.

But ‘The Necklace’ is more specifically about the dangers of not being happy with what one has, and
always wanting more. The nineteenth century saw a rise in the prevalence of consumerism, with
many middle-class people seeking to improve their lot and keep up with their friends and neighbors
in terms of their possessions, clothes, and social status.

Although Maupassant’s story is hardly searing social satire, the fate of the female protagonist does
act as a cautionary tale about the dangers of chasing consumerist gratification in order to impress
and be admired by others. The Loisels have a perfectly comfortable lower-middle-class life, and
Mathilde has one servant to help around the house.

But this isn’t enough. She dreams of having more. Her food is not enough for her and she wants to
dine on finer dishes. One would think she was living a life of poverty from how dissatisfied she is.

This constant desire for more is her undoing, of course – and her husband’s. Her insistence that she
have some jewels to wear to the ball is what leads her to find out what real poverty is like, when she
and her husband have to downsize from a modest flat to a small garret, and Mathilde has to learn
how to work as a servant in her own house. She also loses the natural beauty she had as she has to
work so hard at scrubbing the floors.

The critic Rachel Mesch, in her book Having It All in the Belle Epoque, has pointed out that ‘The
Necklace’, among other stories, is a kind of Cinderella story gone awry: whereas Cinderella begins by
scrubbing floors and ends up going to the ball in all her finery, Mathilde goes to the ball and, as a
result of losing her necklace (not her glass slipper), is reduced to a life of scrubbing floors.

Because she longed for more than she had, she ended up with less than she had to begin with. But
the delicious ironic twist at the end of the story shows that her reduction to a life of poverty was all
for nothing: just like the admiration she was foolishly and vainly chasing, the necklace she was
working to replace was, after all, a sham.

Modern consumerism, then, is a con, with anyone able to afford a cheap imitation necklace able to
pass themselves off as a member of the upper classes. Maupassant seems to be suggesting that the
‘finer things’ in life which tempt us are often, at their core, hollow and worthless.

At the same time, however, even when she is reduced to a life of grinding poverty, Mathilde still
remembers that one night at the ball when she was admired. It is almost as if she thinks it was worth
it, despite what happened next. She wonders what would have happened if she’d never lost the
necklace.

Of course, at this stage of the narrative she hasn’t learned that the diamonds she was wearing that
night were fakes; perhaps that revelation would make her revise her opinion. And yet, knowing they
were imitation diamonds raises further ‘what if’ questions.
If they cost five hundred francs at the most, as Madame Forestier reveals at the end, Loisel’s husband
could have easily bought her a cheap necklace and nobody – except for the Loisels themselves –
would have been any the wiser. After all, Mathilde was admired at the ball even though she was, it
turns out, wearing fake diamonds.

“Araby” by James Joyce

Setting:

 The story is set in Dublin, Ireland, in the late 19th or early 20th century.

 The narrator's house is situated on North Richmond Street, a quiet and dark
residential area.

Characters:

 The narrator: A young boy who experiences his first infatuation.

 Mangan's sister: The object of the narrator's affection, who lives next door.

 Mrs. Mercer: A woman who lodges with the narrator's family and frequently occupies
their living room.

 Uncle: The uncle of the narrator who promises to take him to Araby, a bazaar.

Plot:

Introduction:

 The story begins with the narrator, a young boy living with his aunt and uncle in
Dublin. He harbors an intense infatuation for Mangan's sister, who lives nearby.

 The boy's fascination with the girl is depicted through his longing stares and
imaginative projections of her as a romantic figure.

Motivation:

 The narrator's infatuation with Mangan's sister becomes a driving force in his life. He
daydreams about her constantly and yearns for an opportunity to express his
feelings.

Promise of the Bazaar:

 The narrator learns about the Araby bazaar, a grand event held in Dublin, and
becomes fixated on the idea of buying a gift for Mangan's sister there.
  He imagines the bazaar as a mystical place filled with exotic wonders, viewing it as a
symbol of the romantic adventures he longs to experience.

Anticipation and Disappointment:

 The narrator eagerly awaits the day of the bazaar, his excitement growing with each
passing moment. He envisions the bazaar as a magical realm where his dreams will
come true.

 However, his anticipation turns to frustration when his uncle, who had promised to
accompany him to the bazaar, arrives home late and intoxicated.

 Despite the delay, the narrator clings to the hope of reaching the bazaar before it
closes, clinging to his belief that it will fulfill his romantic aspirations.

Realization and Disillusionment:

 When the narrator finally arrives at the bazaar, he is met with disappointment and
disillusionment. The once enchanting atmosphere is now dim and lifeless, and many
of the stalls are already closing.

 He realizes the stark contrast between his romantic fantasies and the harsh reality of
the bazaar. The exotic goods he had imagined are replaced with mundane items, and
the bazaar's allure fades away.

 The narrator's final purchase—a simple, meaningless trinket—serves as a painful

reminder of his unrequited love and shattered dreams.

Epiphany:

 As the narrator leaves the bazaar, he experiences a moment of profound realization.

He recognizes the futility of his romantic idealizations and the emptiness of his
pursuits.

 The disillusionment he feels marks a significant moment of growth and self-

awareness, as he begins to understand the complexities of love and desire.

Conclusion:

 The story ends with the narrator returning home, his heart heavy with
disappointment and resignation. He acknowledges the harsh realities of life and the
impossibility of recapturing his lost innocence.

 Despite the pain of his disillusionment, the narrator's experience at Araby serves as a
rite of passage, marking his transition from childhood to adulthood.
Themes:

 Coming of age: The story explores the narrator's journey from innocence to
experience as he navigates his first romantic feelings and encounters disappointment
and disillusionment.

 Romantic idealism versus reality: The narrator's romantic notions about Mangan's
sister and the Araby bazaar clash with the harsh realities of life, leading to a loss of
innocence.

 Paralysis and frustration: The story reflects the larger theme of paralysis that
pervades Dubliners, as the characters are trapped in their mundane lives and unable
to break free from societal constraints.

2. Symbolism:

 The bazaar: Araby represents the narrator's idealized vision of love and exoticism, but
ultimately serves as a symbol of disillusionment and unattainable dreams.

 Darkness and light: The dimly lit streets of Dublin contrast with the bright lights of
the bazaar, symbolizing the narrator's journey from ignorance to awareness.

 The chalice: The narrator's purchase of a trivial item at the bazaar, a cheap gift for
Mangan's sister, symbolizes the emptiness of his romantic aspirations.

3. Narrative Style:

 The story is written in the first-person perspective, allowing readers insight into the
narrator's thoughts and emotions.

 Joyce employs vivid imagery and sensory details to evoke the atmosphere of Dublin
and the narrator's inner turmoil.

4. Conclusion:

 The story ends with the narrator's realization of the disparity between his romantic
ideals and the harsh realities of life, marking his disillusionment and loss of
innocence.

"Araby" is a poignant and evocative tale that captures the universal experience of adolescence and
the pain of unfulfilled desires, resonating with readers through its vivid portrayal of Dublin life and
the complexities of human emotion.

Analysis

In “Araby,” the allure of new love and distant places mingles with the familiarity of everyday drudgery,
with frustrating consequences. Mangan’s sister embodies this mingling since she is part of the
familiar surroundings of the narrator’s street as well as the exotic promise of the bazaar. She is a
“brown figure” who both reflects the brown façades of the buildings that line the street and evokes
the skin color of romanticized images of Arabia that flood the narrator’s head. Like the bazaar that
offers experiences that differ from everyday Dublin, Mangan’s sister intoxicates the narrator with new
feelings of joy and elation. His love for her, however, must compete with the dullness of schoolwork,
his uncle’s lateness, and the Dublin trains. Though he promises Mangan’s sister that he will go to
Araby and purchase a gift for her, these mundane realities undermine his plans and ultimately thwart
his desires. The narrator arrives at the bazaar only to encounter flowered teacups and English
accents, not the freedom of the enchanting East. As the bazaar closes down, he realizes that
Mangan’s sister will fail his expectations as well, and that his desire for her is actually only a vain wish
for change.

The narrator’s change of heart concludes the story on a moment of epiphany, but not a positive one.
Instead of reaffirming his love or realizing that he does not need gifts to express his feelings for
Mangan’s sister, the narrator simply gives up. He seems to interpret his arrival at the bazaar as it
fades into darkness as a sign that his relationship with Mangan’s sister will also remain just a wishful
idea and that his infatuation was as misguided as his fantasies about the bazaar. What might have
been a story of happy, youthful love becomes a tragic story of defeat. Much like the disturbing,
unfulfilling adventure in “An Encounter,” the narrator’s failure at the bazaar suggests that fulfillment
and contentedness remain foreign to Dubliners, even in the most unusual events of the city like an
annual bazaar.

The tedious events that delay the narrator’s trip indicate that no room exists for love in the daily lives
of Dubliners, and the absence of love renders the characters in the story almost anonymous. Though
the narrator might imagine himself to be carrying thoughts of Mangan’s sister through his day as a
priest would carry a Eucharistic chalice to an altar, the minutes tick away through school, dinner, and
his uncle’s boring poetic recitation. Time does not adhere to the narrator’s visions of his relationship.
The story presents this frustration as universal: the narrator is nameless, the girl is always “Mangan’s
sister” as though she is any girl next door, and the story closes with the narrator imagining himself as
a creature. In “Araby,” Joyce suggests that all people experience frustrated desire for love and new
experiences.

“The Rocking Horse Winner” D.H. Lawrence

1. Setting:

 The story is set in England, likely during the early 20th century.

 The family home, described as a "big, handsome house," symbolizes wealth and
social status but is plagued by financial struggles.

2. Characters:
  Paul: The young protagonist, who is sensitive to the financial strains within his family
and becomes determined to alleviate them.

 Hester: Paul's mother, who is discontented with her family's financial situation and
perpetually yearns for more money.

 Bassett: The family's gardener, who shares a close bond with Paul and introduces him
to horse racing and betting.

 Uncle Oscar: Hester's brother, who represents the wealthy and successful side of the
family.

3. Plot:

 Introduction: The story opens with a description of a well-to-do family residing in a

grand house, but despite their wealth, there is an atmosphere of discontent and
financial strain. The central character, Paul, is introduced as a young boy who is
sensitive to the tensions within his family, particularly his mother's dissatisfaction
with their financial status.
 Paul's Sensitivity: Paul is portrayed as a perceptive and intuitive child who is deeply
affected by his mother's constant complaints about their financial situation. He
becomes determined to find a way to alleviate his family's financial struggles and to
win his mother's affection, which he believes is tied to their wealth.
 Discovering the Rocking Horse: Paul's connection with the rocking horse in the
nursery is established early in the story. He becomes entranced by the horse's
movements and discovers that he can ride it to enter a trance-like state where he can
predict the winners of horse races.
 Paul's ability to predict race winners becomes a secret obsession as he spends hours
rocking back and forth, seeking out the names of winning horses.
 The Pursuit of Luck: With the help of the family gardener, Bassett, Paul begins placing
bets on the horse races using his predictions. Despite his young age, Paul becomes
deeply involved in the world of gambling, driven by his desire to bring wealth to his
family. Paul's success in predicting race winners leads to a steady stream of winnings,
which he presents to his mother as a gift, hoping to satisfy her desire for more
money.
 Consequences of the Obsession: Despite his apparent success, Paul's obsession with
winning and his relentless pursuit of luck take a toll on his health and well-being. He
becomes increasingly withdrawn and feverish, consumed by his quest to satisfy his
mother's desires. The tension within the family escalates as Paul's mother becomes
increasingly dependent on the money he provides, while his father remains oblivious
to the source of their newfound wealth.
 Tragic Conclusion: The story reaches its climax when Paul becomes determined to
win enough money to finally make his mother happy. In a desperate attempt to
secure a large sum, he places a high-stakes bet on a race, risking everything he
has.The race results in a tragic outcome, as Paul's horse wins but he collapses in a fit
of exhaustion and dies shortly afterward. The story ends with Paul's mother
 discovering the truth about her son's death and realizing the devastating
consequences of her greed and materialism.

4. Themes:

 The destructive nature of materialism: The story critiques the insatiable desire for
wealth and the detrimental effects of prioritizing material possessions over human
connections and emotional well-being.

 The elusive nature of luck: Lawrence explores the concept of luck as a fleeting and
unpredictable force, highlighting its inability to provide lasting happiness or
fulfillment.

 The sacrificial love of a child: Paul's selfless devotion to his mother underscores the
theme of sacrificial love, as he sacrifices his own well-being in his quest to satisfy her
desires.

5. Symbolism:

 The rocking horse: Symbolizes Paul's desperate attempt to find luck and validation in
a world consumed by materialism and greed. It serves as a conduit for his intuitive
powers and becomes a metaphor for his relentless pursuit of wealth.

 The whispering house: Represents the suffocating atmosphere of greed and

discontent within the family home, where material possessions are valued above all
else.

6. Narrative Style:

 Lawrence employs a third-person omniscient narrative perspective, allowing readers

insight into the thoughts and motivations of multiple characters.

 He uses vivid imagery and symbolism to evoke the oppressive atmosphere of the
family home and the inner turmoil of the characters.

7. Conclusion:

 The story concludes with Paul's tragic death, resulting from his frenzied pursuit of
luck and his inability to satisfy his mother's insatiable desires.

 Despite his efforts to bring financial prosperity to his family, Paul ultimately becomes
a victim of the very forces he sought to conquer, highlighting the destructive
consequences of greed and materialism.

"The Rocking-Horse Winner" is a haunting and thought-provoking tale that delves into the
complexities of human nature and the destructive power of unchecked desires, leaving readers to
contemplate the true cost of wealth and happiness.
Analysis of the rocking horse

Children are greatly affected by the unresolved issues of their parents.

The story puts forth the idea that parents who are plagued with unresolved issues are destined to
pass those issues down to their children. Paul’s mother has three healthy children and a fine house,
but the shame of not being wealthy prevents her from enjoying the relative comfort of her life. Her
worries over money and social class fill the house and every moment of the children’s lives with the
refrain “There must be more money!” The children may have first overheard their parents speaking
this sentiment aloud, but over time the voice metaphorically interrupts any opportunity the children
have for joy. When the house fills up with gifts, the children hear the voice louder than ever, signaling
that even though the gifts are the parents’ way of covering up their money problems, they make
these problems worse.

Paul internalizes this need for wealth, which is why he turns to gambling on horses as a way to
procure money for the family. Despite the boy’s many successes picking winning horses, his desire for
more money is never satiated, mirroring his mother’s own pathological relationship to wealth. His
mother’s brother Oscar is also a gambler, which signifies how this pathology has been passed down
to young Paul. Whatever the mystery of Paul’s rocking-horse, it’s clear that the boy is doomed to
suffer the way his mother has suffered. In the end, Paul dies for the sake of accumulating wealth, the
very goal that eluded his mother and made her heart “into a stone.”

Greed makes people unhappy and inhumane.

Through the examples of Paul, Paul’s mother, and Uncle Oscar, the story illustrates the idea that greed
for money makes people unhappy and ultimately inhumane. Every time Paul’s mother reaches one
financial goal, more distant, unattainable goals appear. Even when she earns money at a job, she
can’t be happy, comparing herself to the boss who earns more. Instead of being happy for what she
has, Paul’s mother is unhappy about what she doesn't have, blaming her unhappiness on luck and
God, thereby deflecting blame from herself. As a result, she is totally distracted from the needs of her
family, and especially Paul’s worsening mental and physical health. Hence, greed has drained the love
from Paul’s mother’s familial relationships and made her not only unhappy, but also inhumane. Uncle
Oscar is warmer and kinder to Paul, enthusiastically helping young Paul place bets, but this only
encourages Paul’s destructive and inappropriate behavior. Blinded by greed, Uncle Oscar uses Paul to
make more money for himself, rather than noticing and putting a stop to Paul’s decline. Bringing the
inhumanity of the adult characters to a horrifying climax, Oscar even seems to rationalize Paul’s death
as necessary for the family’s financial success.

Luck is a matter of perspective.

At first glance, Paul’s mother’s lamentations over her bad luck ring true, and Paul’s uncanny ability to
pick winners seems like an incredible stroke of luck. However, on closer examination, luck in the story
is a matter of perspective. Paul’s mother identifies “luck” as the thing that dooms her to a life of
want, but from an outside perspective, she appears to want for nothing. She has a handsome
husband whom she married for love, a nice home, and beautiful children. She even began life with
beauty and privilege, which an outside observer might call exceptionally lucky. The problem isn’t that
Paul’s mother has bad luck but rather that she has good luck and refuses to see it.
Paul appears to possess a tremendous gift: an ability to predict the result of horse-races, a sport that
typifies the notion of luck. Uncle Oscar reinforces the assumption that Paul is lucky by encouraging
his horse-race betting and by financially profiting from Paul’s winning picks. But as the story
progresses, and Paul’s obsession worsens and his health declines, it becomes clear that Paul is not
such a lucky boy after all. Paul thinks he has found luck, and Uncle Oscar thinks Paul is lucky, but in
the end, Paul is still a boy with an absent father and a mother who does not love him, and he is
surrounded by adults who encourage his unhealthy behavior. The absurdity of the characters’ skewed
perspective of luck is on ghastly display in the final scene when Paul feverishly and excitedly tells his
mother with his dying breath that he is lucky after all. Paul perceives his winning as luck, even in the
face of his fatal illness, because the adults in his life have taught him that good luck is equal to
wealth. His mother’s emotional detachment during Paul’s death, when she learns that his efforts have
brought her a large sum of money, suggests that her perspective on luck remains intact despite the
tragic loss of her child.

“Shooting an Elephant” George Orwell

1. Setting:

 The essay is set in British-controlled Burma (now Myanmar) during the early 20th
century, when Burma was a colony of the British Empire.

 Orwell, who worked as a police officer in Burma, provides vivid descriptions of the
colonial environment, including the oppressive heat, the presence of the native
Burmese population, and the tension between the colonizers and the colonized.

2. Narrative Perspective:

 The essay is written in the first-person perspective, with Orwell serving as both the
narrator and the central character.

 Orwell recounts his personal experience of a moral dilemma he faced while serving
as a police officer in Burma, offering insights into his thoughts and emotions at the
time.

3. Plot:

George Orwell works as the sub-divisional police officer of a town in the British colony of
Burma. Because he is a military occupier, he is hated by much of the village. Though the
Burmese never stage a full revolt, they express their disgust by taunting Orwell at every
opportunity. This situation provokes two conflicting responses in Orwell: on the one hand, his
role makes him despise the British Empire’s systematic mistreatment of its subjects. On the
other hand, however, he resents the locals because of how they torment him. Orwell is
caught between considering the British Raj an “unbreakable tyranny” and believing that
killing a troublesome villager would be “the greatest joy in the world.”

One day, an incident takes place that shows Orwell “the real nature of imperialism.” A
domesticated elephant has escaped from its chains and gone berserk, threatening villagers
and property. The only person capable of controlling the elephant—its “mahout”—went
looking for the elephant in the wrong direction, and is now twelve hours away. Orwell goes to
the neighborhood where the elephant was last spotted. The neighborhood’s inhabitants give
such conflicting reports that Orwell nearly concludes that the whole story was a hoax.
Suddenly, he hears an uproar nearby and rounds a corner to find a “coolie”—a laborer—lying
dead in the mud, crushed and skinned alive by the rogue elephant. Orwell orders a
subordinate to bring him a gun strong enough to shoot an elephant.

Orwell’s subordinate returns with the gun, and locals reveal that the elephant is in a nearby
field. Orwell walks to the field, and a large group from the neighborhood follows him. The
townspeople have seen the gun and are excited to see the elephant shot. Orwell feels
uncomfortable—he had not planned to shoot the elephant.

The group comes upon the elephant in the field, eating grass unperturbed. Seeing the
peaceful creature makes Orwell realize that he should not shoot it—besides, shooting a full-
grown elephant is like destroying expensive infrastructure. After coming to this conclusion,
Orwell looks at the assembled crowd—now numbering in the thousands—and realizes that
they expect him to shoot the elephant, as if part of a theatrical performance. The true cost of
white westerners’ conquest of the orient, Orwell realizes, is the white men’s freedom. The
colonizers are “puppets,” bound to fulfill their subjects’ expectations. Orwell has to shoot the
elephant, or else he will be laughed at by the villagers—an outcome he finds intolerable.

The best course of action, Orwell decides, would be to approach the elephant and see how it
responds, but to do this would be dangerous and might set Orwell up to be humiliated in
front of the villagers. In order to avoid this unacceptable embarrassment, Orwell must kill the
beast. He aims the gun where he thinks the elephant’s brain is. Orwell fires, and the crowd
erupts in excitement. The elephant sinks to its knees and begins to drool. Orwell fires again,
and the elephant’s appearance worsens, but it does not collapse. After a third shot, the
elephant trumpets and falls, rattling the ground where it lands.

The downed elephant continues to breathe. Orwell fires more, but the bullets have no effect.
The elephant is obviously in agony. Orwell is distraught to see the elephant “powerless to
move and yet powerless to die,” and he uses a smaller rifle to fire more bullets into its throat.
When this does nothing, Orwell leaves the scene, unable to watch the beast suffer. He later
hears that it took the elephant half an hour to die. Villagers strip the meat off of its bones
shortly thereafter.

Orwell’s choice to kill the elephant was controversial. The elephant’s owner was angry, but, as
an Indian, had no legal recourse. Older British agreed with Orwell’s choice, but younger
 colonists thought it was inappropriate to kill an elephant just because it killed a coolie, since
they think elephants are more valuable than coolies. Orwell notes that he is lucky the
elephant killed a man, because it gave his own actions legal justification. Finally, Orwell
wonders if any of his comrades understood that he killed the elephant “solely to avoid
looking a fool.”

4. Themes:

 The essay explores themes of imperialism, power dynamics, and moral ambiguity, as
Orwell reflects on the complexities of colonial rule and the dehumanizing effects it
has on both the colonizers and the colonized.

 Orwell highlights the destructive nature of imperialism and the moral compromises it
demands of those who uphold it, depicting the damaging impact of oppressive
systems of power on individual conscience and integrity.

 The essay also examines the psychological toll of conformity and the pressure to
conform to societal expectations, as Orwell grapples with the internal conflict
between his personal beliefs and his professional obligations.

5. Symbolism:

 The elephant serves as a powerful symbol of the oppressive forces of imperialism and
the violence inherent in colonial rule.

 Orwell's decision to shoot the elephant reflects the larger themes of power,
authority, and the moral complexities of navigating oppressive systems of control.

6. Conclusion:

 The essay concludes with Orwell reflecting on the profound sense of guilt and
disillusionment he experiences in the aftermath of the shooting, as he confronts the
harsh realities of colonialism and the moral compromises it demands.

 Through his personal experience, Orwell offers a searing critique of imperialism and
the corrosive effects of unchecked power on individual conscience and humanity.

Analysis of Shooting an Elephant George Orwell

‘Shooting an Elephant’ is obviously about more than Orwell’s killing of the elephant: the whole
incident was, he tells us, ‘A tiny incident in itself, but it gave me a better glimpse than I had had before
of the real nature of imperialism – the real motives for which despotic governments act.’

The surprise is that despotic governments don’t merely impose their iron boot upon people without
caring what their poor subjects think of them, but rather that despots do care about how they are
judged and viewed by their subjects.
Among other things, then, ‘Shooting an Elephant’ is about how those in power act when they are
aware that they have an audience. It is about how so much of our behaviour is shaped, not by what
we want to do, nor even by what we think is the right thing to do, but by what others will think of us.

Orwell confesses that he had spent his whole life trying to avoid being laughed at, and this is one of
his key motivations when dealing with the elephant: not to invite ridicule or laughter from the
Burmese people watching him.

To come all that way, rifle in hand, with two thousand people marching at my heels, and then to trail
feebly away, having done nothing – no, that was impossible. The crowd would laugh at me. And my
whole life, every white man’s life in the East, was one long struggle not to be laughed at.

Note how ‘my whole life’ immediately widens to ‘every white man’s life in the East’: this is not just
Orwell’s psychology but the psychology of every imperial agent. Orwell goes on to imagine what grisly
death he would face if he shot the elephant and missed, and he was trampled like the hapless coolie
the elephant had killed: ‘And if that happened it was quite probable that some of them would laugh.
That would never do.’

The stiff upper lip of this final phrase is British imperialism personified. Being trampled to death by
the elephant might be something that Orwell could live with (as it were); but being laughed at? And,
worse still, laughed at by the ‘natives’? Unthinkable …

And from this point, Orwell extrapolates his own experience to consider the colonial experience at
large: the white European may think he is in charge of his colonial subjects, but ironically – even
paradoxically – the coloniser loses his own freedom when he takes it upon himself to subjugate and
rule another people:

I perceived in this moment that when the white man turns tyrant it is his own freedom that he
destroys. He becomes a sort of hollow, posing dummy, the conventionalized figure of a sahib. For it is
the condition of his rule that he shall spend his life in trying to impress the ‘natives,’ and so in every
crisis he has got to do what the ‘natives’ expect of him. He wears a mask, and his face grows to fit it.

So, at the heart of ‘Shooting an Elephant’ are two intriguing paradoxes: imperial rulers and despots
actually care deeply about how their colonised subjects view them (even if they don’t
care about those subjects), and the one who colonises loses his own freedom when he takes away
the freedom of his colonial subjects, because he is forced to play the role of the ‘sahib’ or gentleman,
setting an example for the ‘natives’, and, indeed, ‘trying to impress’ them. He is the alien
in their land, which helps to explain this second paradox, but the first is more elusive.

However, even this paradox is perhaps explicable. As Orwell says, aware of the absurdity of the scene:
‘Here was I, the white man with his gun, standing in front of the unarmed native crowd – seemingly
the leading actor of the piece; but in reality I was only an absurd puppet pushed to and fro by the will
of those yellow faces behind.’

The Burmese natives are the ones with the real power in this scene, both because they are the
natives and because they outnumber the lone policeman, by several thousand to one. He may have a
gun, but they have the numbers. He is performing for a crowd, and the most powerful elephant gun
in the world wouldn’t be enough to give him power over the situation.
There is a certain inevitability conveyed by Orwell’s clever repetitions (‘I did not in the least want to
shoot him … They had seen the rifle and were all shouting excitedly that I was going to shoot the
elephant … I had no intention of shooting the elephant … I did not in the least want to shoot him …
But I did not want to shoot the elephant’), which show how the idea of shooting the elephant
gradually becomes apparent to the young Orwell.

These repetitions also convey how powerless he feels over what is happening, even though he
acknowledges it to be unjust (when the elephant no longer poses a threat to anyone) as well as
financially wasteful (Orwell also draws attention to the pragmatic fact that the elephant while alive is
worth around a hundred pounds, whereas his tusks would only fetch around five pounds).

But he does it anyway, in an act that is purely for show, and which goes against his own will and
instinct.

“The Werewolf” Angela Carter

1. Setting:

 The story is set in a rural French village during a time when superstition and fear of
the supernatural are prevalent.

 The village is depicted as isolated and surrounded by dense forests, enhancing the
atmosphere of mystery and danger.

2. Characters:

 The protagonist is an unnamed young girl, depicted as innocent and naive, who is on
her way to visit her grandmother.

 Grandmother, referred to as "Granny," is portrayed as a wise and experienced figure

who is aware of the dangers lurking in the forest.

 The werewolf, a mysterious and alluring figure who preys on unsuspecting victims in
the forest.

3. Plot:

 Introduction: The story opens with a young girl, whose name is not mentioned,
traveling alone through a dense forest in rural France. She is on her way to visit her
grandmother, known affectionately as Granny.
 Encounter with the Werewolf: As the girl continues her journey, she encounters a
mysterious man in the forest. Despite feeling a sense of unease, she is drawn to his
captivating presence and begins to engage in conversation with him.
  The man reveals himself to be a werewolf and attempts to seduce the girl with his
charm and allure. Despite her initial fear, she finds herself unable to resist his
advances.
 Journey to Granny's House: The werewolf persuades the girl to accompany him
deeper into the forest, promising to lead her to her grandmother's house. As they
travel together, the girl becomes increasingly entranced by the werewolf's presence
and begins to lose herself in the thrill of the moment.
 Arrival at Granny's House: As they approach Granny's house, the girl's sense of
unease intensifies, and she begins to suspect that there is more to the werewolf's
intentions than meets the eye. However, she is unable to resist his influence and
continues to follow him to Granny's door.
 Confrontation with Granny: Upon arriving at Granny's house, the girl is greeted by
her grandmother, who is initially delighted to see her. However, Granny quickly
realizes the true nature of the girl's companion and attempts to protect her
granddaughter from the werewolf's influence. A tense confrontation ensues between
Granny, the girl, and the werewolf, resulting in a violent struggle for control ove r the
girl's fate.
 Revelation: In a shocking twist, it is revealed that the young girl herself is the
werewolf, and Granny is her intended victim. The story ends with the girl embracing
her true nature and embracing her power as a creature of the night.

4. Themes:

 Transformation and duality: The story explores themes of transformation and duality,
as the protagonist grapples with her own inner desires and the external forces that
seek to control her.

 Sexuality and desire: Carter uses the werewolf as a symbol of male sexuality and
desire, highlighting the dangers of succumbing to temptation and losing oneself in
the pursuit of pleasure.

 Power dynamics: The story examines power dynamics between men and women, as
well as the tensions between innocence and experience, highlighting the ways in
which society seeks to control and regulate female sexuality.

5. Narrative Style:

 Carter's prose is rich and evocative, with vivid descriptions that create a sense of
foreboding and suspense.

 She employs elements of magical realism to blur the boundaries between the natural
and supernatural worlds, enhancing the story's sense of mystery and intrigue.

6. Conclusion:

 "The Werewolf" concludes with a shocking twist that subverts traditional fairy tale
conventions, challenging readers' expectations and leaving them to contemplate the
deeper meanings of the story.
  Carter's exploration of female sexuality and agency in "The Werewolf" reflects her
broader feminist themes and her reimagining of classic fairy tales through a modern,
subversive lens.

‘The Werewolf’: analysis

In The Bloody Chamber, Carter’s collection of stories inspired by classic fairy tales and folktales, ‘The
Werewolf’ precedes another tale of lycanthropy or werewolves: ‘The Company of Wolves’. However,
whereas the latter story uses the trope of the werewolf, and the Little Red Riding Hood tale, to
explore male-female relationships and sexual power dynamics, ‘The Werewolf’ does not contain
these elements.

Nevertheless, the little girl in ‘The Werewolf’ shows herself as steely and resourceful as the heroines
in Carter’s other stories in the collection.

As the final word of the story has it, she ends up prospering: a verb which aligns her with a decidedly
male world of trade and the mercantile, the world of money, which was – in the medieval or early
modern peasant society described in the story – usually reserved for men. (Indeed, one of the ironies
of the end of this story which taps into the hysteria surrounding witches is that the granddaughter
ends up in exactly the kind of position which might arouse suspicion or envy from the wrong
neighbors: a woman, independent and presumably unmarried, with money to her name.)

The little girl shows courage and pluck at two crucial moments in the story, and these two moments
are designed to dovetail with each other, one mirroring or complementing the other one. First, when
she is attacked by the wolf (which lunges at her throat in a grim echo of the vampiric Erl-King’s neck-
biting in another Bloody Chamber story), she turns to face it and succeeds in wounding it. The knife
she uses, symbolically, is her father’s: this little girl can handle a man’s knife and defend herself with
it.

Second, when she realizes her grandmother has some connection to the wolf’s ‘hand’, and suspects
she is a witch with the ability to change her form into that of a wolf, she pins down the woman to
examine her. The narrator tells us that she is ‘strong’ and thus able to do this easily; she also has her
father’s hunting knife, as we are reminded, so she can use this to threaten her grandmother into
keeping still.

And yet we would do well to observe that, unlike in ‘The Company of Wolves’ where the girl tames
the male werewolf by herself, this little girl relies on the forest community, with their moblike
suspicion of witches, to oust the woman from the woods. Indeed, the girl utters a loud cry – which is
much more what we expect a little girl to do in such a situation – which brings the neighbors to the
house.

In other words, what Carter presents us with in ‘The Werewolf’ is two women who both present
themselves to the outer community as fairly conventional types of womanhood (grandmother, little
girl), but who turn out to be, in effect, wolves in sheep’s clothing. The grandmother is quite literally a
werewolf, while the granddaughter, clad symbolically in ‘sheepskin’ as she makes her way through the
cold landscape, harbors a steely courage and determination to prosper which are more aligned with
ideas of masculinity in the world Carter depicts.
“The Doll’s House” Katherine Mansfield
1. Setting:

 The story is set in New Zealand during the early 20th century, in a small rural
community.

 The Burnell family's home serves as the primary setting, while various scenes take
place at school and in the village.

2. Characters:

 The Burnell sisters: Isabel, Lottie, and Kezia, who receive a beautiful doll's house as a
gift from their wealthy aunt.

 The Kelvey sisters: Lil and Else, from a poor family in the village, who are ostracized
by their classmates due to their lower social status.

 Aunt Beryl: The girls' wealthy aunt who gives them the doll's house.

 Mrs. Hay: The girls' schoolteacher, who unknowingly perpetuates the class divisions
among her students.

3. Plot:

A doll’s house arrives at the Burnell home as a gift. The dollhouse smells so strongly of paint
that Aunt Beryl thinks it could make someone sick. Isabel, Lottie, and Kezia, the Burnell’s
three daughters, do not mind the smell, however, and couldn’t be more delighted by the
house. Kezia, the youngest sister, notices a small lamp, which she thinks it the best part of it.

The next morning, the Burnells are excited to boast to the other girls at school. Isabel, the
oldest, forbids her sisters from saying anything before she’s had a chance to describe the
doll’s house to the others. She also reminds Lottie and Kezia that she is allowed to choose
which two girls will visit first to see the house.

At playtime, all the little girls gather around to hear Isabel’s talk about the house except
for Lil and Else Kelvey—the daughters of the village washerwoman and the poorest girls at
school. Everyone in the village gossips about the Kelveys, saying that their father is in prison,
and many children, the Burnells included, aren’t allowed to talk to them. As such, the Kelveys
can only eavesdrop as Isabel proudly describes the doll’s house. Kezia reminds her sister to
mention the lamp, though no one else seems to care about it. Isabel chooses Emmie
Cole and Lena Logan as the first two girls to come see the house.

Kezia asks her mother if she can invite the Kelveys to see the doll’s house, but Mrs. Burnell
refuses and tells Kezia she knows why. More days pass, and by now everyone has seen the
house except the Kelveys. At school the other girls cruelly taunt the sisters, who react only
with silence. Later that afternoon, Kezia is at home swinging on the big white gates of her
family’s courtyard. When she spots the Kelveys walking down the road, she decides to swing
 the gates open and invite them inside. Lil shakes her head and reminds Kezia that they aren’t
supposed to talk to one another. Kezia assures Lil that it doesn’t matter. Lil still doesn’t want
to go, but Else, standing behind her, tugs on her dress and looks at her pleadingly.

Kezia leads the Kelveys inside. While she is showing the Kelveys the doll’s house, Aunt Beryl
spots them and shouts furiously at Kezia. She shoos the Kelveys away and slams the doll’s
house shut.

It is revealed that earlier that afternoon Aunt Beryl had received a letter from Willie Brent. In
the note, Willie had threatened to come knock on the door if Aunt Beryl didn’t meet him that
night in Pullman’s Bush. Aunt Beryl is terrified by the idea of Willie coming to the door. After
yelling at the girls, however, she feels better, and hums as she walks back into the house.

The Kelveys, meanwhile, run off and sit by the side of the road. Else inches closer to her sister
and smiles. She speaks for the first time in the story, saying, “I seen the lamp.”

4. Themes:

 Class consciousness and social hierarchy: Mansfield explores the rigid class divisions
and social prejudices that exist within the community, highlighting the ways in which
wealth and social status determine one's place in society.

 Empathy and compassion: The story contrasts the kindness and empathy shown by
Kezia towards the Kelvey sisters with the cruelty and indifference of her classmates,
prompting readers to consider the importance of empathy and understanding in
breaking down barriers and bridging social divides.

 Appearance versus reality: The doll's house serves as a symbol of material wealth and
social status, masking the underlying tensions and inequalities that exist within the
community.

5. Symbolism:

 The doll's house: Symbolizes the wealth and privilege of the Burnell family, as well as
the class divisions and social hierarchies that exist within the community.

 The Kelvey sisters: Symbolize the marginalized and excluded members of society,
whose poverty and lower social status render them invisible to their wealthier peers.

6. Narrative Style:

 Mansfield employs a third-person omniscient narrative perspective, allowing readers

insight into the thoughts and feelings of multiple characters.

 She uses vivid imagery and descriptive language to evoke the sights, sounds, and
emotions of the rural New Zealand setting, immersing readers in the world of the
story.
"The Doll's House" is a poignant and thought-provoking exploration of class, privilege, and empathy,
offering a powerful commentary on the social dynamics and inequalities that shape the lives of its
characters.

The Doll’s House | Analysis

Katherine Mansfield, born and raised in New Zealand, was one of the most famous writers of her
time. She often wrote in third-person and portrayed elements of her personal experiences. The
theme of her work usually matched the situation she was undergoing in her own life. The Doll’s
House is written in third-person using an omniscient narrator, and it translates the nuances of very
deep elements in an insightful yet simple way. The main themes are class prejudice, social hierarchy
and ostracization, and innocence. Because the main characters are young schoolgirls, these topics
are put forth in a rather straightforward manner- after all, young children have far less direct
awareness or conscience, and their way of thinking is often precise. However, we also see the cruelty
of this forthrightness in the way the children do not hesitate to bully and mock their classmates of a
lower social sphere. This shows the normalization of treatment based on hierarchy, as well as
the influence of society on children’s mindsets. Similes, metaphors and imagery are employed
throughout this piece.

Mansfield also uses object symbolism to portray key aspects of the story. Starting from the very
beginning, when the Burnell girls are gifted a dollhouse, Mansfield establishes the concept of social
class. The dollhouse is a direct representation of the Burnell’s own house– it is large, the girls are
thrilled by it, and it seems furnished to the detail. However, its description is not entirely
flattering- “a dark, oily, spinach green, picked out with bright yellow” and “the smell of paint coming
from that doll’s house was quite enough to make anyone seriously ill.” Further, it is important to note
“When dear old Mrs. Hay went back to town after staying with the Burnells, she sent the children a
doll’s house.” This implies that the Burnells themselves do not live in the central part of town, but in
the outskirts. Hence, the dollhouse symbolizes that though the Burnells may not be extremely rich on
a large scale, they are well-to-do and of a higher social class within their area of residence.

The fact that when the sisters went to school and Isabel talked about the dollhouse is also a portrayal
of the automatic respect and flattery given to those with more money or at a higher rank :

“The girls of her class nearly fought to put their arms round her, to walk away with her, to beam
flatteringly, to be her special friend.”

This emphasizes the superficiality of these advances- none of the girls wanted to spend time with
Isabel because they liked her as a person. They did not want to be her ‘special friend’ because they
enjoyed her company. It was simply out of eagerness to see the magnificent dollhouse. At this time,
the Kelvey sisters being left out represents the lower rung of the social hierarchy. The fact that it is
the other children’s parents who forbid them from mingling with Else and Lil showcases how society
and adults can impact a child’s behavior. For example, “For the fact was, the school the Burnell
children went to was not at all the kind of place their parents would have chosen if there had been
any choice.”– this automatically instills in the Burnell children a superiority complex.
Else never spoke and stuck close to her sister Lil- “Where Lil went, our Else followed.”- which shows
the demure nature. It also emphasizes a level of acceptance from both of them- they never tried to
fight back or defend themselves as they knew nothing would come of it, but simply ignored the
mocking and jeers and moved on. They seem to have realized that things will not change, and they
are stuck in the social class they were born into. The fact that these girls have understood this and
cope with it at such a young age makes the reader realize how normalized it is, which is quite
unfortunate. The description of Lil and Else sitting outside the circle of schoolgirls and constantly
having to listen in is a direct depiction of being socially ostracized– closed off, on the outside looking
in.

Kezia, the youngest Burnell sister, is the only one of the family- of the whole school, maybe-
who questions the social ostracization of the Kelveys. She wants to invite the sisters home to show
them the dollhouse, as well- her youth and innocence put everyone on a level playing field. While
the rest of her family sees things from the perspective of social status and financial importance, she
simply sees everyone as people. She views the world in a more wholesome manner. When she sees
the Kelvey sisters near her house, she is swinging on the white gate of her house. This white gate is
what separates the Burnells from the outside world, trapping them in their bubble of greater wealth
and societal class. As a material divide between the Burnells and the rest of the area, the
gate represents the separation of the social spheres. Kezia swings on it back and forth, teetering on
the edge of this imposed border, which symbolizes her different outlook. Unlike her family, she does
not understand why the Kelveys are kept at a distance.

This lamp is symbolic of innocence and hope. It does not stand out extraordinarily, which is why
none of the older sisters or adults find it interesting. Yet its gentle, modest appearance is what draws
Kezia to it- this highlights a younger child’s perspective. The lamp is a form of hope for Kezia and the
Kelvey sisters- for after being chased away by Aunt Beryl, Else smiles for the first time and says, “I
seen the little lamp.” It is an unspoken bond between Else and Kezia- that they are able to see beyond
the discrimination of the adults in the society. They notice and appreciate the same things- a small
detail like a lamp, rather than the grandeur of the rest of the dollhouse. Their youth stops them from
fully comprehending the reason for this class divide, but their innocent and open-minded attitude
forms a ray of hope that even when they are older, they will be able to see everyone as human rather
than by social status.
 The sun rising by John Donne
Why dost thou thus,
Through windows, and through curtains call on
us?
Must to thy motions lovers’ seasons run?
Saucy pedantic wretch, go chide
Late school boys and sour prentices,
Go tell court huntsmen that the king will ride,
Call country ants to harvest offices,
Love, all alike, no season knows nor clime,
Nor hours, days, months, which are the rags of
time.
Thy beams, so reverend and strong
Why shouldst thou think?
I could eclipse and cloud them with a wink,
But that I would not lose her sight so long;
If her eyes have not blinded thine,
Look, and tomorrow late, tell me,
Whether both th’ Indias of spice and mine
Be where thou leftst them, or lie here with me.
Ask for those kings whom thou saw’st
yesterday,
And thou shalt hear, All here in one bed lay.
She’s all states, and all princes, I,
It is immediately obvious that personification is going to play
an important role in this poem when the titular object — the
sun — is referred to as an “unruly,” “busy old fool.” The sun is
calling to the narrator of The Sun Rising “through windows,
and through curtains” — which is what the sun does, after all.
It rises, and shines through the edges of curtains. The
“calling,” then, is simply the narrator and whomever they are
with, that it is morning. The narrator begins to list off all of the
other things the sun could be doing — reminding oversleeping
schoolchildren that they are going to be later for school,
beginning the day for noblemen, anything other than waking
up the speaker and reminding that they need to begin their
day. The last two lines, as well as the “us” in the third line,
suggest that the speaker is not alone, but are rather waking
up alongside a lover, and that because love is timeless, the
rising sun should leave them alone, rather than force them to
leave each other’s company in the bed.
The structure of The Sun Rising is noticeably unusual.
Although it does rhyme, it does not follow any particular
pattern from beginning to end. The first four lines, for
instance, follow an ABBA pattern, but each line has a different
syllable count. The result is a poem that does not flow
especially well, but does properly convey the frustrated
mindset of the narrator who only wants to be with his
beloved.
The narrator wants to shut the sun out of existence; it is easily
possible to simply close the eyes, clear the mind, and forget
that day has even come. Unfortunately, now that the speaker
sees the person they spent the night with, they no longer
want to close their eyes and not be able to see; grudgingly,
they are forced to accept the presence of the rising sun.
The rest of the verse questions the worth of leaving a bed
shared with a loved one; they reference the “Indias of spice
and mine,” referencing spice foraging and mining operations
in the Eastern and Western Indies at the time, and seem to
suggest that everything will run exactly as it is supposed to
whether they leave their bed or not — so they can check on a
mission that is, at present, meaningless, or they can remain
with each other.
This verse does much to emphasize the enormous importance
the narrator places on their lover — she is everyone and
everywhere he ever needs to be or know, and nothing else
exists while the two are together. Honour and wealth become
 Nothing else is.
Princes do but play us; compared to this,
All honor’s mimic, all wealth alchemy.
Thou, sun, art half as happy as we,
In that the world’s contracted thus.
Thine age asks ease, and since thy duties be
To warm the world, that’s done in warming us.
Shine here to us, and thou art everywhere;
This bed thy center is, these walls, thy sphere.
Paradise Lost (excerpts - Book I - Lines 1 – 26 & 221 – 270 )
Line 1-26
Of Mans First Disobedience, and the Fruit
Of that Forbidden Tree, whose mortal tast
Brought Death into the World, and all our woe,
With loss of Eden, till one greater Man
Restore us, and regain the blissful Seat, [ 5 ]
Sing Heav'nly Muse, that on the secret top
Of Oreb, or of Sinai, didst inspire
That Shepherd, who first taught the chosen
Seed,
In the Beginning how the Heav'ns and Earth
Rose out of Chaos: Or if Sion Hill [ 10 ]
Delight thee more, and Siloa's
Brook that flow'd
Fast by the Oracle of God; I thence
Invoke thy aid to my adventrous Song,
That with no middle flight intends to soar
Above th' Aonian Mount, while it
pursues [ 15 ]
Things unattempted yet in Prose or Rhime.
meaningless, princes seem poor when compared to what they
have. Returning to the personification of the sun, the narrator
addresses it once more, stating that its presence is not
needed, since its purpose is to warm the world, and he feels
warm. The Sun Rising ends on a somewhat cryptic note, but
suggests that the narrator’s universe consists of two people
and one room only — that bed is the centre of the universe,
and the walls of the room are its edge, and so when that room
is warmed, the whole of the world is to them.
John Milton, in recounting the Fall of Man, invokes the
classical Muse, an epic convention used by great pagan
poets such as Homer and Virgil; however, he
specifically mentions that the Muse he calls is the one
that inspired Moses to speak to the Israelites, so he
means the Holy Spirit. Milton demonstrates no false
modesty, as he knows this will be an awe-inspiring
work surpassing those of Homer, Virgil, Dante, etc.,
whose format he knows and has mastered.
Similar in gravity to the Book of Genesis from the Bible,
the opening also echoes ancient Greek and Roman epic
poetry in its form. Although his source of inspiration
(the Holy Spirit) and subject matter is greater than
those stories attempted in the past, he humbly
acknowledges his debt as he reinvents the epic
convention from a Protestant Christian perspective.
Milton uses Biblical mountains and streams to replace
the favorite haunts of the classical Muses. He not only
compares himself to past epic poets but also places
Adam, his arguably primary character, above others.
He makes a pun on the word “fruit” as both a
consequence and the cause of Adam and Eve’s descent
from grace. A monotheist who believed that all things
came out of God, Milton borrowed ideas from Plato
and Hesiod in the concept of unformed matter, or
Chaos. Ariosto’s Orlando Furioso canto 1, stanza 2 must
bear some sarcasm in line 16 from Milton.
Lines 17-18 recalls to mind Christ’s comments and
parables in the New Testament on how God would
rather a man genuinely repent and love him than the
outward show of propriety. The image of a dove comes
from John 1:32, in which the Holy Spirit appeared as a
 And chiefly Thou O Spirit, that dost prefer
Before all Temples th' upright heart and pure,
Instruct me, for Thou know'st; Thou from the
first
Wast present, and with mighty wings
outspread [ 20 ]
Dove-like satst brooding on the vast Abyss
And mad'st it pregnant: What in me is dark
Illumin, what is low raise and support;
That to the highth of this great Argument
I may assert Eternal Providence, [ 25 ]
And justifie the wayes of God to men.
Line 221-270
Forthwith upright he rears from off the Pool
His mighty Stature; on each hand the flames
Drivn backward slope thir pointing spires,
and rowld
In billows, leave i'th' midst a horrid Vale.
Then with expanded wings he stears his flight [
225 ]
Aloft, incumbent on the dusky Air
That felt unusual weight, till on dry Land
He lights, if it were Land that ever burn'd
With solid, as the Lake with liquid fire;
And such appear'd in hue, as when the
force [ 230 ]
Of subterranean wind transports a Hill
Torn from Pelorus, or the shatter'd side
Of thundring Ætna, whose combustible
And fewel'd entrals thence conceiving Fire,
Sublim'd with Mineral fury, aid the
dove. Apparently Milton’s translation from the Hebrew
of “brooding” is better than the commonly read
“moved upon the face of the waters.”
We are to imagine that this divine bird-like creature,
both powerful and gentle, made chaos pregnant.
Milton here requests God to improve in him what is
base and to make him worthy of this great self-
appointed task, to create an epic for the English
language as Virgil for the Romans and Homer for the
Greeks, but better. He asks that his perception be
corrected from what is wrong so as to best explain God
to mankind.
He wishes to explain the reasons for God’s actions,
heretofore inscrutable to man, so that the latter will
understand Him. The regularity of the iambic
pentameter indicate the overall order of a God-
ordained universe; as well, as Milton was blind when
he composed Paradise Lost, the consistency may have
assisted him in “seeing” the form and shape of the
poem, in a way he could not have done with free style
verse.
In this excerpt from John Milton's "Paradise Lost,"
Satan, the fallen angel, emerges from the depths of
Hell, towering above the infernal landscape with his
"mighty Stature" and "expanded wings." Milton's vivid
imagery portrays Hell as a place of eternal torment,
with flames and billows surrounding Satan as he
surveys his new domain. Despite the desolation and
horror of Hell, Satan remains defiant, refusing to
submit to God's authority and declaring his intention to
make Hell his kingdom. He reflects on his fall from
Heaven and questions whether Hell is the region he
must accept in exchange for celestial light. However, he
ultimately accepts his fate, acknowledging that God, as
sovereign, determines what is right. Satan finds solace
in the idea that he can still assert his autonomy and
reign in Hell, viewing freedom as preferable to
servitude in Heaven. He expresses disdain for the idea
of returning to Heaven and rallying his followers,
instead choosing to embrace his role as ruler of Hell.
Through Satan's monologue, Milton explores themes of
rebellion, free will, and the nature of evil, drawing on
biblical and classical sources to create a rich and
complex portrait of the fallen angel. The poem's
historical context, written during a period of political
and religious upheaval in England, reflects Milton's own
experiences as a Republican and Protestant, as well as
his engagement with contemporary debates about
power, authority, and the human condition. "Paradise
 Winds, [ 235 ] Lost" continues to be regarded as a masterpiece of
English literature, offering profound insights into the
And leave a singed bottom all involv'd
complexities of human nature and the eternal struggle
With stench and smoak: Such resting found the between good and evil.
sole
Of unblest feet. Him followed his next Mate,
Both glorying to have scap't the Stygian flood
As Gods, and
by thir own recover'd strength, [ 240 ]
Not by the sufferance of supernal Power.
Is this the Region, this the Soil, the Clime,
Said then the lost Arch-Angel, this the seat
That we must change for Heav'n, this mournful
gloom
For that celestial light? Be it so, since he [ 245 ]
Who now is Sovran can dispose and bid
What shall be right: fardest from him is best
Whom reason hath equald,
force hath made supream
Above his equals. Farewel happy Fields
Where Joy for ever dwells: Hail horrours,
hail [ 250 ]
Infernal world, and thou profoundest Hell
Receive thy new Possessor: One who brings
A mind not to be chang'd by Place or Time.
The mind is its own place, and in it self
Can make a Heav'n of Hell, a Hell
of Heav'n. [ 255 ]
What matter where, if I be still the same,
And what I should be, all but less then he
Whom Thunder hath made greater? Here at
least
We shall be free; th' Almighty hath not built
Here for his envy, will not drive us
hence: [ 260 ]
Here we may reign secure, and in my choyce
 To reign is worth ambition though in Hell:
Better to reign in Hell, then serve in Heav'n.
But wherefore let we then our faithful friends,
Th' associates and copartners of our loss [ 265 ]
Lye thus astonisht on th' oblivious Pool,
And call them not to share with us their part
In this unhappy Mansion, or once more
With rallied Arms to try what may be yet
Regaind in Heav'n, or what more lost in
Hell? [ 270 ]
John Keats “When I Have Fears”
When I have fears that I may cease to be
Before my pen has gleaned my teeming
brain,
Before high-pilèd books, in charactery,
Hold like rich garners the full ripened grain;
When I behold, upon the night’s starred face,
Huge cloudy symbols of a high romance,
And think that I may never live to trace
Their shadows with the magic hand of
chance;
And when I feel, fair creature of an hour,
That I shall never look upon thee more,
Never have relish in the faery power
Of unreflecting love—then on the shore
Of the wide world I stand alone, and think
Till love and fame to nothingness do sink.
In "When I Have Fears," Keats turns to the
Shakespearean sonnet with its abab, cdcd, efef,
gg rhyme scheme and its division into three
quatrains and a concluding couplet. It was
written after Keats made a close study of
Shakespeare's songs and sonnets and, in its
development, it imitates closely one of
Shakespeare s own sonnet patterns. The three
quatrains are subordinate clauses dependent on
the word "when"; the concluding couplet is
introduced by the word "then." The sonnet, like
"On First Looking into Chapman's Homer," is
constructed with care. Like "Chapman's Homer,"
it is concerned with the subject of poetry, to
which Keats adds another favorite theme, that
of love.
The sonnet is distinguished by Keats'
characteristic melodiousness and by his very
distinctive style, which is marked by the
presence of archaic words borrowed from the
Elizabethan poets. The first line, "When I have
fears that I may cease to be," appeals at once to
the ear and is a compelling invitation to the
reader to go on with the poem. "Before high-
piled books, in charact'ry, / Hold like rich
garners the full-ripen'd grain" contains two
words, charact'ry and garners, that are quite
remote from the kind of language
recommended by Wordsworth in his famous
preface to the second edition of Lyrical

William Shakespeare Sonnet 116 (Let Me Not To The
Marriage Of True Minds)
Let me not to the marriage of true minds
Admit impediments; love is not love
Ballads and quite remote from the language
used by Keats in conversation with his friends.
"When I Have Fears" is a very personal
confession of an emotion that intruded itself
into the fabric of Keats' existence from at least
1816 on, the fear of an early death. The fact
that both his parents were short-lived may
account for the presence of this disturbing fear.
In the poem, the existence of this fear
annihilates both the poet's fame, which Keats
ardently longed for, and the love that is so
important in his poetry and in his life. As it
happened, Keats was cheated by death of
enjoying the fame that his poetry eventually
gained for him and of marrying Fanny Brawne,
the woman he loved so passionately. This fact
gives the poem a pathos that helps to single it
out from among the more than sixty sonnets
Keats wrote. The "fair creature of an hour" that
Keats addresses in the poem was probably a
beautiful woman Keats had seen in Vauxhall
Gardens, an amusement park, in 1814. Keats
makes her into an archetype of feminine
loveliness, an embodiment of Venus, and she
remained in his memory for several years; in
1818, he addressed to her the sonnet "To a Lady
Seen for a Few Moments at Vauxhall." "When I
Have Fears" was written the same year. One of
his earliest poems, "Fill for Me a Brimming
Bowl," written in 1814, also concerns this lovely
lady. In the poem, he promises that "even so for
ever shall she be / The Halo of my Memory."
Along with Sonnets 18 (“Shall I compare thee to
a summer’s day?”) and 130 (“My mistress’ eyes
are nothing like the sun”), Sonnet 116 is one of
the most famous poems in the entire sequence.
The definition of love that it provides is among
the most often quoted and anthologized in the
poetic canon. Essentially, this sonnet presents
the extreme ideal of romantic love: it never
changes, it never fades, it outlasts death and
admits no flaw. What is more, it insists that this
ideal is the only love that can be called “true”—
if love is mortal, changing, or impermanent, the
 Which alters when it alteration finds,
Or bends with the remover to remove.
O no, it is an ever-fixèd mark
That looks on tempests and is never shaken;
It is the star to every wand'ring bark
Whose worth's unknown, although his height
be taken.
Love's not time's fool, though rosy lips and
cheeks
Within his bending sickle's compass come.
Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks,
But bears it out even to the edge of doom:
If this be error and upon me proved,
I never writ, nor no man ever loved.
William Wordsworth “The Solitary Reaper”
Behold her, single in the field,
Yon solitary Highland Lass!
Reaping and singing by herself;
Stop here, or gently pass!
Alone she cuts and binds the grain,
And sings a melancholy strain;
O listen! for the Vale profound
speaker writes, then no man ever loved. The
basic division of this poem’s argument into the
various parts of the sonnet form is extremely
simple: the first quatrain says what love is not
(changeable), the second quatrain says what it
is (a fixed guiding star unshaken by tempests),
the third quatrain says more specifically what it
is not (“time’s fool”—that is, subject to change
in the passage of time), and the couplet
announces the speaker’s certainty. What gives
this poem its rhetorical and emotional power is
not its complexity; rather, it is the force of its
linguistic and emotional conviction.
The language of Sonnet 116 is not remarkable
for its imagery or metaphoric range. In fact, its
imagery, particularly in the third quatrain (time
wielding a sickle that ravages beauty’s rosy lips
and cheeks), is rather standard within the
sonnets, and its major metaphor (love as a
guiding star) is hardly startling in its originality.
But the language is extraordinary in that it
frames its discussion of the passion of love
within a very restrained, very intensely
disciplined rhetorical structure. With a
masterful control of rhythm and variation of
tone—the heavy balance of “Love’s not time’s
fool” to open the third quatrain; the
declamatory “O no” to begin the second—the
speaker makes an almost legalistic argument for
the eternal passion of love, and the result is
that the passion seems stronger and more
urgent for the restraint in the speaker’s tone.
In the First stanza of “The Solitary Reaper,”
Wordsworth describes how the Reaper was
singing all alone. During one of his journeys in
the countryside of Scotland, he saw a Highland
girl working in the field all alone. She had no
one to help her out in the field. So she was
singing to herself. She was singing without
knowing that someone was listening to her
song. The poet doesn’t want to disturb her
solitude so requests the passerby’s go without
 Is overflowing with the sound.
No Nightingale did ever chaunt
More welcome notes to weary bands
Of travellers in some shady haunt,
Among Arabian sands:
A voice so thrilling ne’er was heard
In spring-time from the Cuckoo-bird,
Breaking the silence of the seas
Among the farthest Hebrides.
Will no one tell me what she sings?–
Perhaps the plaintive numbers flow
For old, unhappy, far-off things,
And battles long ago:
Or is it some more humble lay,
Familiar matter of to-day?
Some natural sorrow, loss, or pain,
That has been, and may be again?
Whate’er the theme, the Maiden sang
As if her song could have no ending;
I saw her singing at her work,
And o’er the sickle bending; –
I listened, motionless and still;
And, as I mounted up the hill,
The music in my heart I bore,
Long after it was heard no more.
disturbing her. She was immersed in her work of
cutting and binding while singing a melancholy
song. For the poet, he is so struck by the sad
beauty of her song that the whole valley seems
to overflow with its sound.
In the second stanza of “The Solitary Reaper,”
the poet compares the young woman’s song
with ‘Nightingale’ and ‘Cuckoo’ – the most
celebrated birds by the writers and poets for
the sweetness of voice. But, here he complains
that neither ‘Nightingale’ nor the ‘Cuckoo’ sang
a song that is as sweet as hers. He says that no
nightingale has sung the song so soothing like
that for the weary travelers. For, the song of the
girl has stopped him from going about his
business. He is utterly enchanted that he says
that her voice is so thrilling and penetrable like
that of the Cuckoo Bird, which sings to break
the silence in the ‘Hebrides’ Islands. He
symbolically puts forth that her voice is so
melodious and more than that of the two birds,
known for their voice.
In the third stanza of “The Solitary Reaper,” the
poet depicts his plight over not understanding
the theme or language of the poem. The poet
couldn’t understand the local Scottish dialect in
which the reaper was singing. So tries
to imagine what the song might be about. Given
that it is a ‘plaintive number’ and a
‘melancholy strain’ (as given in line 6) he
speculates that her song might be about some
past sorrow, pain, or loss ‘of old, unhappy
things‘ or battles fought long ago. Or perhaps,
he says, it is a humbler, simpler song about
some present sorrow, pain, or loss, a ‘matter of
to-day.’ He further wonders if that is about
something that has happened in the past or
something that has reoccurred now.
In the fourth stanza, the poet decides not to
probe further into the theme. He comes to the
conclusion that whatever may be the theme of
her poem, it is not going to end. Not only her
song but also her suffering sounds like a never-
ending one. He stays there motionless and
listened to her song quite some times. Even
when he left and mounted up the hill he could
still hear her voice coming amongst the
produce, she was cutting and binding. Though
the poet left that place, the song remained in
his heart, long after he heard that song.
 John Keats “Ode to Autumn”
Season of mists and mellow fruitfulness,
Close bosom-friend of the maturing sun;
Conspiring with him how to load and bless
With fruit the vines that round the thatch-eaves
run;
To bend with apples the moss’d cottage-trees, 5
And fill all fruit with ripeness to the core;
To swell the gourd, and plump the hazel shells
With a sweet kernel; to set budding more,
And still more, later flowers for the bees,
Until they think warm days will never cease; 10
For Summer has o’erbrimm’d their clammy
cells.
Who hath not seen thee oft amid thy store?
Sometimes whoever seeks abroad may find
Thee sitting careless on a granary floor,
Thy hair soft-lifted by the winnowing1 wind; 15
Or on a half-reap’d furrow sound asleep,
Drowsed with the fume of poppies, while thy
hook
Spares the next swath and all its twinèd
flowers:
And sometimes like a gleaner thou dost keep
Steady thy laden head across a brook; 20
Or by a cyder-press, with patient look,
Thou watchest the last oozings, hours by hours.
Where are the songs of Spring? Ay, where are
they?
Think not of them, thou hast thy music too,—
While barrèd clouds bloom the soft-dying
day 25
And touch the stubble-plains with rosy hue;
The poem begins by exploring the positivity of
the rich and mellow Spring, fruit ripening,
flowers blossoming. Keats begins by invigorating
the senses of the reader, emphasizing the
robustness of the fruit in phrases like “ripeness
to the core,” “swell,” and “plump” (lines 6-7). He
is drawing attention to the fruit when it is most
appealing and ripe, yet still subtly alluding to the
fact that it has peaked and a change is due to
come. Keats even ends the first stanza by saying
that “Summer has o’erbrimm’d their clammy
cells,” meaning that the end of the seasons of
growth has pushed the elements past their
points of ripeness (line 11).
The second stanza brings the reader into the
next season, fall, the harvest. In here, Keats
admires the “soft-lifted” hair of the wheat in the
harvest (line 10). The wheat has already been
rooted from the ground, laying on the ground of
a granary. This stage of nature, things being
taken out of the ground yet still providing
nourishment demonstrates the transition from
ripe and plentiful to cold and destitute. This
stanza, much like the season it represents, is a
substantial demonstration of the transitions that
occur.
When the third stanza begins, it represents the
familiar sentiments of yearning for warmer days,
wondering where the days of spring have gone.
However, the speaker immediately dismisses
this, recognizing the beauty within the end of
autumn. Unusual characteristics are attributed to
colder weather, such as “stubble-plains” and a
“rosy hue” in order to provide a warmer side to
Then in a wailful choir the small gnats mourn
Among the river-sallows, borne aloft
Or sinking as the light wind lives or dies;
And full-grown lambs loud bleat from hilly
bourn; 30
Hedge-crickets sing; and now with treble soft
The redbreast whistles from a garden-croft2;
And gathering swallows twitter in the skies.
“Daddy” Sylvia Plath
You do not do, you do not do
Any more, black shoe
In which I have lived like a foot
For thirty years, poor and white,
Barely daring to breathe or Achoo.
Daddy, I have had to kill you.
You died before I had time——
Marble-heavy, a bag full of God,
Autumn, while still communicating that it is
fading.
Keats then describes the “full grown-lambs” and
in the last line “And gathering swallows twitter in
the skies,” he refers to the birds gathering for
migration. This alludes to the inevitable end of
Autumn and beginning of Winter. Though the
poem is about a coming loss, Keats is in the
process of coming to accept something even
greater; that even though death comes to
everyone, accepting mortality is not weak and it
is wise to accept the passing of time and
recognize the beauty of nature and life itself.
True to romantic writers, Keats learns to accept
death by living in beauty. Keats uses true
imagination to describe the setting of nature so
eloquently. There is so much feeling that comes
out of the words that reflects the whimsical
structure of romantic times.
In this first stanza of ‘Daddy’, the speaker
reveals that the subject of whom she speaks is
no longer there. This is why she says
and repeats, “You do not do”. The following line
is rather surprising, as it does not express loss
or sadness. On the contrary, it begins to reveal
the nature of this particular father-daughter
relationship. The speaker compares her father
to a “black shoe”. It seems like a
strange comparison until the third line reveals
that the speaker herself has felt “like a foot”
that has been forced to live thirty years in that
shoe. The foot is “poor and white” because, for
thirty years, it has been suffocated by the shoe
and never allowed to see the light of day.
The last line in this stanza reveals that the
speaker felt not only suffocated by her father,
but fearful of him as well. In fact, she expresses
that her fear of him was so intense, that she
was afraid to even breathe or sneeze.
In the second stanza of ‘Daddy’, the speaker
reveals her own personal desire to kill her
father. The first line states, “I have had to kill
you”. The next line goes on to explain that the
speaker actually did not have time to kill her
 Ghastly statue with one gray toe
Big as a Frisco seal
And a head in the freakish Atlantic
Where it pours bean green over blue
In the waters off beautiful Nauset.
I used to pray to recover you.
Ach, du.
In the German tongue, in the Polish town
Scraped flat by the roller
Of wars, wars, wars.
But the name of the town is common.
My Polack friend
Says there are a dozen or two.
So I never could tell where you
Put your foot, your root,
I never could talk to you.
father, because he died before she could
manage to do it. She does not make this
confession regretfully or sorrowfully. Rather, she
calls him “a bag full of God” which suggests that
her view of her father as well as her view of God
was one of fear and trepidation. She describes
him as a “ghastly statue with one gray toe big as
a Frisco seal”.
Her description of her father as a statue
suggests that she saw no capacity for feeling in
him. A “Frisco seal” refers to one of the sea
lions that can be seen in San Francisco. When
she describes that one of his toes is as big as a
seal, it reveals to the reader just how enormous
and overbearing her father seemed to her. He
was hardened, without feelings, and now that
he is dead, she thinks he looks like an
enormous, ominous statue.
Here, looking at her dead father, the speaker
describes the gorgeous scenery of the Atlantic
Ocean and the beautiful area of “Nauset”.
However, she also uses the word “freakish” to
precede her descriptions of the beautiful
Atlantic Ocean. This reveals that even though
her father may have been a beautiful specimen
of a human being, she knew personally that
there was something awful about him. In the
final two lines of this stanza, the speaker reveals
that at one point during her father’s sickness,
she even prayed that he would recover. The last
line of this stanza is the German phrase for “oh,
you.”
In stanza four of ‘Daddy’, the speaker begins to
wonder about her father and his origins. The
speaker knows that he came from a Polish
town, where German was the main language
spoken. She explains that the town he grew up
in had endured one war after another. She
would never be able to identify which specific
town he was from because the name of his
hometown was a common name. This stanza
ends mid-sentence. The speaker begins to
explain that she learned something from her
“Polack friend”.
Here, the speaker finishes what she began
to explain in the previous stanza by explaining
that she learned from a friend that the name of
the Polish town her father came from, was a
very common name. For this reason, she
concludes that she “could never tell where [he]
 The tongue stuck in my jaw.
It stuck in a barb wire snare.
Ich, ich, ich, ich,
I could hardly speak.
I thought every German was you.
And the language obscene
An engine, an engine
Chuffing me off like a Jew.
A Jew to Dachau, Auschwitz, Belsen.
I began to talk like a Jew.
I think I may well be a Jew.
The snows of the Tyrol, the clear beer of
Vienna
Are not very pure or true.
With my gipsy ancestress and my weird luck
And my Taroc pack and my Taroc pack
I may be a bit of a Jew.
put [his] foot”. It’s clear she will not ever be able
to know exactly where his roots are from. She
had never asked him because she “could never
talk to [him]”.
After this, the speaker then explains that she
was afraid to talk to him. She states, “The
tongue stuck in my jaw” when explaining the
way she felt when she wanted to talk to her
father.
In this stanza, she continues to describe the way
she felt around her father. She felt as though
her tongue were stuck in barbed wire. “Ich” is
the German word for “I”. This reveals that
whenever she wanted to speak to her father,
she could only stutter and say, “I, I, I.”. She then
describes that she thought every German man
was her father. This reveals that she does not
distinguish him as someone familiar and close
to her. Rather, she sees him as she sees any
other German man, harsh and obscene.
In stanza seven of ‘Daddy’, the speaker begins
to reveal to the readers that she felt like a Jew
under the reign of her German father. This is a
very strong comparison, and the speaker knows
this and yet does not hesitate to use this simile.
The oppression which she has suffered under
the reign of her father is painful and
unbearable, something she feels compares to
the oppression of the Jews under the Germans
in the Holocaust. For this reason, she specifically
mentions Auschwitz, among other
concentration camps.
She then concludes that she began to talk like a
Jew, like one who was oppressed and silenced
by German oppressors. Then she concludes that
because she feels the oppression that the Jews
feel, she identifies with the Jews and therefore
considers herself a Jew.
In this stanza, the speaker continues to criticize
the Germans as she compares the “snows of
Tyrol” and the “clear beer of Vienna” to the
German’s idea of racial purity. She concludes
that they “are not very pure or true”. Then, the
speaker considers her ancestry, and the gypsies
that were part of her heritage. Gypsies, like
Jews, were singled out for execution by the
Nazis, and so the speaker identifies not only
with Jews but also with gypsies. In fact, she
seems to identify with anyone who has ever felt

I have always been scared of you,
With your Luftwaffe, your gobbledygoo.
And your neat mustache
And your Aryan eye, bright blue.
Panzer-man, panzer-man, O You——
Not God but a swastika
So black no sky could squeak through.
Every woman adores a Fascist,
The boot in the face, the brute
Brute heart of a brute like you.
You stand at the blackboard, daddy,
In the picture I have of you,
A cleft in your chin instead of your foot
But no less a devil for that, no not
Any less the black man who
oppressed by the Germans. In the last line of
this stanza, the speaker suggests that she is
probably part Jewish, and part Gypsy.
Here, the speaker finally finds the courage to
address her father, now that he is dead. She
admits that she has always been afraid of him.
She implies that her father had something to do
with the airforce, as that is how the word
“Luftwaffe” translates to English.
“Gobbledygook” however, is simply gibberish.
This implies that the speaker feels that her
father and his language made no sense to her.
In this instance, she felt afraid of him and feared
everything about him.
She never was able to understand him, and he
was always someone to fear. She was afraid of
his “neat mustache” and his “Aryan eye, bright
blue”. This description of his eyes implies that
he was one of those Germans whom the Nazis
believed to be a superior race. He was Aryan,
with blue eyes. He was something fierce and
terrifying to the speaker, and she associates him
closely with the Nazis. A “panzer-mam” was a
German tank driver, and so this continues the
comparison between her father and a Nazi.
In this stanza, the speaker compares her father
to God. She clearly sees God as an ominous
overbearing being who clouds her world. This is
why she describes her father as a giant black
swastika that covered the entire sky. The third
line of this stanza begins a sarcastic description
of women and men like her father. She
mockingly says, “every woman adores a Fascist”
and then begins to describe the violence of men
like her father. She calls uses the word “brute”
three times in the last two lines of this stanza. If
these lines were not written in jest, then she
clearly believes that women, for some reason or
another, tend to fall in love with violent brutes.
In the first line of this stanza, the speaker
describes her father as a teacher standing at the
blackboard. The author’s father, was, in fact, a
professor. This is how the speaker views her
father. She can see the cleft in his chin as she
imagines him standing there at the blackboard.
Then she describes that the cleft that is in his
chin, should really be in his foot. This simply
means that she views her father as the devil
himself.
The devil is often characterized as an animal

Bit my pretty red heart in two.
I was ten when they buried you.
At twenty I tried to die
And get back, back, back to you.
I thought even the bones would do.
But they pulled me out of the sack,
And they stuck me together with glue.
And then I knew what to do.
I made a model of you,
A man in black with a Meinkampf look
And a love of the rack and the screw.
with cleft feet, and the speaker believes he
wears his cleft on his chin rather than on his
feet. Her description of her father as a “black
man” does not refer to his skin color but rather
to the darkness of his soul. This stanza ends
with the word “who” because the author breaks
the stanza mid-sentence.
With the first line of this stanza, the speaker
finishes her sentence and reveals that her father
has broken her heart. She says that he has “bit
[her] pretty red heart in two”. The rest of this
stanza reveals a deeper understanding of the
speaker’s relationship with her father. Even
though he was a cruel, overbearing brute, at
one point in her life, she loved him dearly. It is
possible that as a child, she was able to love him
despite his cruelty. As an adult, however, she
cannot see past his vices.
This stanza reveals that the speaker was only
ten years old when her father died, and that she
mourned for him until she was twenty. She even
tried to end her life in order to see him again.
She thought that even if she was never to see
him again in an after-life, to simply have her
bones buried by his bones would be enough of
a comfort to her.
In this stanza, the speaker reveals that she was
not able to commit suicide, even though she
tried. She reveals that she was found and
“pulled…out of the sack” and stuck back
together “with glue”. At this point, the speaker
experienced a revelation. She realized that she
must re-create her father. She decided to find
and love a man who reminded her of her father.
Freud’s theory on the Oedipus complex seems
to come into play here. The theory that girls fall
in love with their fathers as children, and boys
with their mothers, also suggests that these
boys and girls grow up to find husbands and
wives that resemble their fathers and mother.
The speaker has already suggested that women
love a brutal man, and perhaps she is now
confessing that she was once such a woman.
This is why the speaker says that she finds a
“model” of her father who is “a man in black
with a Meinkampf look”. While “Meinkampf”
means “my struggle”, the last line of this stanza
most likely means that the man she found to
marry looked like her father and like Hitler.
In this stanza, the speaker reveals that the man
 And I said I do, I do.
So daddy, I’m finally through.
The black telephone’s off at the root,
The voices just can’t worm through.
If I’ve killed one man, I’ve killed two——
The vampire who said he was you
And drank my blood for a year,
Seven years, if you want to know.
Daddy, you can lie back now.
There’s a stake in your fat black heart
And the villagers never liked you.
They are dancing and stamping on you.
They always knew it was you.
Daddy, daddy, you bastard, I’m through.
she married enjoyed to torture. This is why she
describes him as having “a love of the rack and
the screw”. She confesses that she married him
when she says, “And I said I do, I do.” Then she
tells her father that she is through. This means
that having re-created her father by marrying a
harsh German man, she no longer needed to
mourn her father’s death. She then describes
her relationship with her father as a phone call.
Now she has hung up, and the call is forever
ended.
In this stanza of ‘Daddy’, the speaker reminds
the readers that she has already claimed to
have killed her father. She revealed that he
actually died before she could get to him, but
she still claims the responsibility for his death.
Now she says that if she has killed one man,
she’s killed two. This is most likely in reference
to her husband. She refers to her husband as a
vampire, one who was supposed to be just like
her father. As it turned out, he was not just like
her father. In fact, he drained the life from her.
This is why she refers to him as a vampire who
drank her blood.
It is not clear why she first says that he drank
her blood for “a year”. However, the speaker
then changes her mind and says, “seven years, if
you want to know.” When the speaker says,
“daddy, you can lie back now” she is telling him
that the part of him that has lived on within her
can die now, too.
In this stanza, the speaker reveals that her
father, though dead, has somehow lived on, like
a vampire, to torture her. It is claimed that she
must kill her father the way that a vampire must
be killed, with a stake to the heart. She then
goes on to explain to her father that “the
villagers never liked you”. She explains that they
dance and stomp on his grave. The speaker says
that the villagers “always knew it was [him]”.
This suggests that the people around them
always suspected that there was something
different and mysterious about her father. With
the final line, the speaker tells her father that
she is through with him. While he has been
dead for years, it is clear that her memory of
him has caused her great grief and struggle. The
speaker was unable to move on without
acknowledging that her father was, in fact, a
brute. Once she was able to come to terms with

“The Thought Fox” Ted Hughes
I imagine this midnight moment's forest:
Something else is alive
Beside the clock's loneliness
And this blank page where my fingers move.
Through the window I see no star:
Something more near
Though deeper within darkness
Is entering the loneliness:
Cold, delicately as the dark snow
A fox's nose touches twig, leaf;
Two eyes serve a movement, that now
And again now, and now, and now
Sets neat prints into the snow
Between trees, and warily a lame
Shadow lags by stump and in hollow
Of a body that is bold to come
Across clearings, an eye,
A widening deepening greenness,
Brilliantly, concentratedly,
Coming about its own business
what he truly was, she was able to let him stop
torturing her from the grave.
‘The Thought-Fox’ starts on a silent, clear night.
The poet, sitting alone at his desk, attempts to
write, but has no luck with it. He senses a
second presence – ‘something more near /
though deeper within darkness / is entering the
loneliness’. Here, the night itself is symbolic of
the depths of imagination, standing for the idea
of dormant genius, and the muse, which
typically visits at unorthodox hours. The poet is
alone at night, laboring over his poem, when he
feels the stirrings of an idea.
The idea itself is symbolized by the fox’s
presence, and at first, it is not clear what the
idea is, to the poet. As Hughes writes, ‘a fox’s
nose touches twig, leaf;’ showing, through the
fragmented image of the fox’s nose, that it is
only a very basic view of an idea, not one
stamped out clearly. The fox is shrouded in
darkness; only the pinnacle of it can be seen by
the watchful poet, and likewise, the muse visits
but only leaves him with a fragment of an image
to build into a poem. The fox remains half-
hidden and elusive throughout the entire poem;
the idea, likewise, remains half-hidden to the
poet, allowing him only wisps of imagery to
contend with. There is a certain softness about
the way that Hughes writes his imagery: his
penchant for mythical language comes through
in spades as he talks about the ‘dark snow’, the
‘eye / a widening deepening greenness’. Hughes
has an almost cinematic quality of imagery –
one can very easily imagine the quiet night, the
poet at his desk, the fox touching a leaf in a
separate shot – and he uses this to further
evoke the idea of the playful muse, sneaking in,
and sneaking out of the poet’s grasp.
Gradually, the fox emerges out of formlessness;
a ‘sudden sharp hot stink of fox’, thus showing
that the poet has reached the peak of his
musing, and has managed to write the poem
that has tantalized him throughout the night.

Till, with a sudden sharp hot stink of fox
It enters the dark hole of the head.
The window is starless still; the clock ticks,
The page is printed.
“Dulce et Decorum est” Wilfred Owen
Bent double, like old beggars under sacks,
Knock-kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed
through sludge,
Till on the haunting flares we turned our
backs,
And towards our distant rest began to trudge.
Men marched asleep. Many had lost their
boots,
But limped on, blood-shod. All went lame; all
blind;
The fox is suddenly visible, the idea is suddenly
within the poet’s mind, and has been
immortalized on the page. The poem and the
fox exist as one entity.
Another thing to note is the very pattern of the
poem itself. Ted Hughes writes with a pace that
heightens the anticipation. At the start, only the
fox’s nose is visible. Then two eyes. The choppy
punctuation shows the hesitancy of the
fox/idea, the delicate way that Ted Hughes
writes about the fox leaving prints in the snow
is further emphasized by the sharp, short
phrase ‘sets neat prints in the snow’. ‘The
Thought-Fox’ moves almost like clockwork,
starting out at an hour crawl, and quickening,
the image of the fox becoming more concrete,
until the final staggering end where the fox
comes out in a rush – again, symbolized in the
way that Hughes writes about it – only to dim
back down into quiet – ‘the window is starless
still; the clock ticks; / The page is printed’.
Hughes wrote, in this poem, ‘And I suppose that
long after I am gone, as long as a copy of the
poem exists, every time anyone reads it the fox
will get up somewhere out of the darkness and
come walking towards them’.
The first line takes the reader straight into the
ranks of the soldiers, an unusual opening, only
we're told they resemble "old
beggars" and "hags" (note the similes) by the
speaker, who is actually in amongst this sick and
motley crew.
The initial rhythm is slightly broken iambic
pentameter until line five when commas and
semi-colons and other punctuation reflect the
disjointed efforts of the men to keep pace.
Also note the term "blood-shod" which suggests
a parallel with horses, and the fact that many
are lame, drunk, blind and deaf. The trauma of
war has intoxicated the soldiers.
 Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots
Of tired, outstripped Five-Nines that dropped
behind.
Gas! GAS! Quick, boys!—An ecstasy of
fumbling
Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time,
But someone still was yelling out and
stumbling
And flound’ring like a man in fire or lime.—
Dim through the misty panes and thick green
light,
As under a green sea, I saw him drowning.
In all my dreams before my helpless sight,
He plunges at me, guttering, choking,
drowning.
If in some smothering dreams, you too could
pace
Behind the wagon that we flung him in,
And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,
His hanging face, like a devil’s sick of sin;
If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood
Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,
Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud
Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues,—
My friend, you would not tell with such high
zest
To children ardent for some desperate glory,
The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est
Suddenly the call goes up: "Gas!" We delve
deeper into the scene as chemical warfare
raises its ugly head and one man gets caught
and left behind. He's too slow to don his gas
mask and helmet, which would have saved his
life by filtering out the toxins.
"An ecstasy of fumbling," the poet
writes. The ecstasy is used here in the sense of
a trance-like frenzy as the men hurriedly put on
their helmets. It has nothing to do with
happiness.
Here the poem becomes personal and
metaphorical. The speaker sees the man
consumed by gas as a drowning man, as if he
were underwater. Misty panes add an unreal
element to this traumatic scene, as though the
speaker is looking through a window.
Only two lines long, this stanza brings home the
personal effect of the scene on the speaker. The
image sears through and scars despite the
dream-like atmosphere created by the green
gas and the floundering soldier.
Owen chose the word "guttering" to describe
the tears streaming down the face of the
unfortunate man, a symptom of inhaling toxic
gas.
The speaker widens the issue by confronting the
reader (and especially the people at home, far
away from the war), suggesting that if they too
could experience what he had witnessed, they
would not be so quick to praise those who die
in action.
They would be lying to future generations if
they thought that death on the battlefield was
sweet. Owen does not hold back. His vivid
imagery is quite shocking, his message direct
and his conclusion sincere.
The last four lines are thought to have been
addressed to a Jessie Pope, a children's writer
and journalist at the time, whose published
book Jessie Pope's War Poems included a poem
titled The Call, an encouragement for young
men to enlist and fight in the war.
 Pro patria mori.
“Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening” Robert Frost
Whose woods these are I think I know.
His house is in the village though;
He will not see me stopping here
To watch his woods fill up with snow.
My little horse must think it queer
To stop without a farmhouse near
Between the woods and frozen lake
The darkest evening of the year.
He gives his harness bells a shake
To ask if there is some mistake.
Robert Frost's simple poem, "Stopping by
Woods on a Snowy Evening," offers an
uncomplicated scene wherein a man who was
riding a horse pauses his ride by the roadside
near a wooded area to observe as the snow is
falling and piling up in the woods.
The poem is executed without figurative
language and literary devices such as metaphor
and metonymy. However, the speaker’s claims
do herald questions, as noted in the
introduction.
One is likely to wonder if the speaker would not
have stopped if he thought the owner of the
land would see him. Because the speaker
mentions that fact, the listener cannot help but
wonder why.
My little horse must think it queer
To stop without a farmhouse near
Between the woods and frozen lake
The darkest evening of the year.
The speaker then reports what he thinks his
horse thinks: he claims that his horse must be
thinking it an odd thing to be stopping before
reaching home, and equally strange that the
man would want to stop beside a woodland and
lake while it is becoming dark outside.
The speaker suggests that the time of year is
around December 21, the shortest day of the
year and the beginning of winter in the
Northern Hemispheres. That is the reason it is
"the darkest evening of the year."
It is obvious that it is the speaker himself who
thinks his behavior is odd, stopping in the cold,
dark winter weather to watch snow falling in
the woods. That he projects his thoughts onto
his "little horse" is, of course, merely a ruse that
dramatizes his own actions.
In stanza 3, the speaker reveals that he thinks
the horse has deemed this stopping as odd
because the horse is shaking his head and
rattling his harness. The speaker continues to
speculate about what the horse thinks; this
time, he suggests that his horse thinks he made
 The only other sound’s the sweep
Of easy wind and downy flake.
The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep.
a "mistake." Such speculation about the
cogitation of a horse actually becomes rather
comical.
It has become quite clear that all of the
thoughts the speaker has speculated about
what the horse thinks is simply what the
speaker himself is thinking. He seems to want to
suggest that this stopping to watch snow filling
up the woods is somehow unseemly or at least
"queer"—in the original definition of the term.
The speaker then notices that other than the
rattling of the horse’s harness, it is utterly quiet,
with the only sound he hears being the wind
gently blowing as the snowflakes whirl around
and into the woodland.
In stanza 4, the speaker paints the only pictorial
details about what he is viewing, as he reports
that the woodland is "lovely, dark and deep."
The bulk of the poem simply offers speculation
about who might have seen him and what his
little horse may be thinking.
Finally, the speaker ends his musing by claiming
that he has made promises and he must keep
them. He must still be a fairly great distance
from his residence as he claims that he has
miles yet to travel before he can "sleep."
Those final three lines actually state the reason
that the speaker must cease his musing on the
beauty and quiet of the woodland and continue
on with the journey back home.
But the claim that he "has miles to go before
[he] sleep[s]" because it is repeated offers room
for interpretation. Perhaps the second
repetition has a different meaning from the
first, or just perhaps that is the only way to end
poem.