nnocence represents the ideal state and experience represents the reality’. Discuss this statement in the light of the poems you have studied so far. Blake’s Songs of Innocence and Experience juxtapose the innocent, pastoral world of childhood against an adult world of disappointment and corruption.
Yet, the two contrasting states are never fully separated in his poems – suggesting it is not possible to be either innocent or experienced. The introduction to Songs of Innocence has a rural background and much pastoral imagery such as ‘valleys wild’.The piper, on the request of a child sitting on a cloud translates his music onto paper, in the form of poetry. Utensil he uses for writing is borrowed from nature (a reed), which reflects the close, ‘innocent’ relationship between music, poetry and nature.
However, the poem is not entirely innocent, there is some reference to experience – the adult is experienced in knowing how to write. Yet this does not seem to prevent him from being innocent. The Shepherd has two stanzas. The first stanza reveals the idyllic state of innocence.
Once again, it contains much pastoral imagery, and biblical symbolism, with the lamb and the shepherd, suggesting the human race is being looked after. However, the second stanza has a sense of foreboding. ‘He is watchful while they are in peace’ suggests that their peace is a temporary state – there is a threat of things changing. This indicates, that whilst innocence may seem like the ideal state, one cannot be innocent forever.
Things will change, experience will come and with it will come the consequences of experience.Even a poem of innocence cannot hide away from this truth. Infant Joy tells the story of a newborn – the best human representation of innocence. This child is free as he/she has not been named and therefore has not got a parent holding any kind of control over him/her.
However, use of the negative sounding word ‘befall’ suggests that the world of experience, and thus the reality of constraint is inevitable, this is emphasised through the repetition of the word. The Ecchoing Green is written from the perspective a child and is an idyllic description of the state of innocence.The children have a reciprocal relationship with members of the rural community and the natural world, and ‘The Ecchoing Green’ is one of the few Songs of Innocence that can be read as pure idyll. Contrary to the expectations of experience, the older members of the community are able to recall their own childhood without being envious.
They seem content that the green is an “ecchoing” place, which has heard their laughter before and will hear other laughter in the future.It could be seen as though ‘Old John’ is attempting to recreate his lost innocence through watching the innocence of the children and by remembering himself in a time of innocence. Although more subtle than the other poems, there is a slight sense of foreboding – that the world of experience is close – in the ending of the poem, ‘the darkening green’. All of Blake’s Songs of Innocence contain this foreboding, the opposition between the states of innocence and experience is almost fully realised in these poems alone.
The introduction to Songs of Experience shows the bad state of mankind and the potential power of the ‘Holy Word’. The religious connotations are huge in this poem, it is implied that the bard is God ‘who Present, Past & Future sees’ – he carries history, comments on the present and projects on the future. The ‘ancient trees’ could be those in Eden (Genesis) and therefore the ‘lapsed soul’ refers to Eve giving in to temptation. Clearly, this poem does not imitate the simplicity of the Songs of Innocence – it demands an experienced reader.
This poem is very important to showing how contrasting experience is with innocence with its implication of the Garden of Eden. Prior to Eve’s sin, she was not aware of the bad things in this world, and then God gave her experience and she was never as happy again. Suggesting that when anyone goes through the transition from innocence to experience although they can never go back to being innocent, it would be preferable. Innocence then, may be naivete.
Infant Sorrow is juxtaposed with Infact Joy.It would appear as though this newborn already has experience, (‘dangerous world’) although is not able to talk as the baby in Infant Joy can. This poem suggests that the nakedness of the newborn is a state of vulnerability, which for someone who is experienced this is true, but a baby should not be aware that he/she is naked. This baby appears to have two parents, whereas in Infant Joy the parents are noticeably absent.
This suggests that the baby has suffered from the feelings of constraint – in Infant Joy, the baby is a ‘free-spirit’. Earth’s Answer, is Earth’s reply to the Bard.The first sentence ‘Earth rais’d up her head’ provides a brief hope that she will respond to the Holy Word’s call, however the rest of the poem dashing those hopes. Earth appears to be the victim of starry jealousy but refuses the burden of achieving her own freedom -‘break this heavy chain’ – she either cannot or will not free herself.
Earth is lost at the hands of God, but she, as the lost soul, cannot rely on an angel or God to be found, but, because she now through experience has self-identification and self-realisation, she must rely on herself to be found and be free of her bondage.This poem identifies some emotions and human traits that are found with experience – ‘Cruel, jealous, selfish fear! ‘ – suggesting once again that experience is not the ideal state. Although on the face, it seems as though innocence is the ideal state in many of his poems, Blake seems to be suggesting that with his own knowledge of the world, this is not the case. Although being innocent, and thereby not having full knowledge of the atrocities of the world means one can live in peace, this is not a permanent state.
Every poem in Songs of Innocence suggests that the character or characters in the poem will at some stage in their lives have to gain experience, thereby losing the idyllic nature of experience. Although not apparent in the poems I have studied so far, it seems as though there is another stage after experience, a stage ‘Old John’ in ‘The Ecchoing Green’ seems to be in. One cannot escape the transition from innocence to experience, but one can choose to be experienced yet remain pure at heart. This stage is a combination of being innocent in one’s actions, but being experienced and wise.
The Chaucerian Miller: Not The Typical Miller
Most people who have closely read Geoffrey Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales will remember the colorful pilgrims on their way to Canterbury: The courtly Knight, the controlling Host, and of course, the drunk, ignorant Miller and his vulgar tale.
Or, is the Miller as drunk and/or ignorant as we are led to believe? The Host sure wants us to believe this when he comments that “Som bettre man shal telle vs first another [tale]” (22) once he sees that the Miller wants to follow the Knight’s tale. Another example of the Host’s attitude is when the Host sees that the Miller is determined to recite his tale, bitterly remarks, “…
Tell on, a deuele wey / Thow art a fool. Thy wit is ouercome” (26-27). However, I believe that actually, Chaucer stands up for the common, working-class society, but does not make that claim explicitly. He wants us to reconsider the way we think about the Miller.
However, the reason for doing this is a bit unclear to me.We are first introduced to the Miller in the General Prologue to the Cantebury Tales, where he is described as a “stout carl” told that “He [is] a ianglere, a golyardeys, / And that [is] moost of synne and harlotryes” (561). We are told about his brute strength, so brute that he is able to tear down doors with his bear hand, or by head butting. Moreover, the wart on the tip of his nose puts the finishing touches Chaucer needs to convince any reader of the General Prologue that the Miller is an unsophisticated man, who has enjoyed the base aspects of life, and gets pleasure out of the more primitive things, such us his sinful, vulgar tales.
In essence, we are set up to have certain, low expectations of the Miller, his intelligence, and his ability to conduct himself properly.With regard to the Miller’s conduct, Chaucer does not let his readers’ expectations down, as the Miller rudely interrupts the Host and stalwartly insists on being the next to tell a tale. When the Host courteously tries to persuade the Miller to wait for his turn, the Miller stubbornly replies “By Goddes soul… that wol nat I / For I wol speke or elles go my wey” (24-25). We see then, as a Andrew Moore put it, “the Miller is as metaphorically strong headed as he is physically” (Moore),After a prima facie reading of the descriptive details, it is easy, and perhaps natural, to conclude that the Miller is the crude figure that we are being directed to view. However, upon closer readings, one is asked to reevaluate those conclusions and give the Miller more credit.
First, the Host, the narrator, and the Miller himself tell us that he is extremely drunk. In fact, according to the nararrtor the Miller “that fordronken was al pale / So that unethe upon his hors he sat” (12-13). In other words, the Miller is so drunk he is pale. However, even after the Miller tries to caution the listeners that his drunkenness may impair his ability to recite his tale, he continues to give us a stylistically and lyrically flawless tale.
Not only that, but he is able to add elements of satire, irony, and other rhetorical features. The Miller is clearly not as drunk as we initially believe. But, why does Chaucer do this?Aside from the Miller’s ability to flawlessly articulate his story, there are other signs that cause us to consider the Miller as an intelligent man. The first sign of the Miller’s intelligence comes from the very first thing he says when he interrupts the host by saying “.
..By armes and by blood and bones / I can a noble tale for the nones / With which I wol now quyte the Knightes tale” (17-19). We see in this instance that the Miller is able to play with the word “quyte,” since his meaning of the word is to “repay” while the Host intended it to mean “match” when he asked the Monk to “.
..quyte with the Knightes Tale” (11). In this case, the Miller is in fact being cleverer than the Host, but that is not noticeable unless one reads between the lines.
Recalling the quote we just considered, we also can see that not only is the Miller being cleverer than the Host, as I mentioned earlier, but in fact, is almost outright telling everyone that he is on the same plane as the Knight. By telling the people that he is capable of “quyting” the Knights tale with a noble tale of his own, he is telling everyone that he is noble himself. For example, in the Book of Job, when Job questions God’s seemingly unjust acts towards him, God lashes out at Job. by questioning God, Job must have believed himself to be on an equal plane as God.
Similarly, the Miller believes to be on a similar plane as the Knight. In fact, their stories are both very similar, except for the details on how the female is won over. I believe that in fact, the Miller’s tale is a more honest tale, and that the Knights is too idealistic. Perhaps this is the Miller’s reason for the rude interruption of the Host.
He cannot keep quite after hearing such an appalling story about love, a love he believes to be too romantic and not the least bit sexual.Once the Knight finishes telling a story about courtly love, where Palamoun, who is the “purer” lover, (he prays to Venus, while Arcite prays to Mars) wins the maiden, Emelye’s heart. However, for some reason unknown to me, the Miller does not like it, and thus will “quyte” the Knight’s tale by telling one, which is almost a complete foil of the Knight’s tale. In the Knight’s tale, we have a tale of the “true love” two cousins, Arcite and Palamoun, share for a fair maiden, Emelye.
In the Miller’s tale, we have “…hende Nicholas / Of derne love he coude and of solas” (91-92), Absolon who is described as “.
..somdel squaymous” (234) and the Alison, “So gay a popelote, or swich a wench” (151).Hence, we have young man, unable to handle his natural urgings, another young man, who would not be able to stomach the realities of such urges, were they attainable, and a young, budding lady.
In the Knight’s tale, it takes Palamoun several long years to finally win Emelye’s heart, while it only takes Nicholas a few lines to win Alison’s heart. In the Knight’s Tale and as I mentioned above, it is Palamoun, who prays to the goddess of love, Venus, eventually winning Emelye’s heart, being the more noble lover. In the Miller’s tale, it is the more crude and straightforward Nicholas who wins Alison’s heart. Generally, in almost all aspects of what love is and how is ought to be obtained, the Miller’s tale challenges the Knight’s.
What appears to be happening is the Miller strongly disagrees with the Knight’s philosophy on love, so he is taking his story, giving a different (and in the Knight’s opinion, repulsive) twist and “stuff it right back down his throat!” (Barrie). Again, only a person of a considerable amount of intelligence would be able to do such a thing on such short notice, with such precision in detail and presentation.Aside from giving such a well-executed story, there are still other signs that the Miller is an educated man. For example, during the description of John, we are told of his marriage and that “He knew nat Catoun, for he was rude” (119).
“The “Distichs” (closed couplets) of Cato were far and away the most popular elementary textbooks in schools during the early Middle Ages and beyond. They were prized not only as a means of teaching Latin but as a repository of valuable moral advice” (Kolve).Hence, in order to make such a remark, one must know of the subject that one makes such a remark about-in this case, the Miller is educated about Cato’s teachings. Someone who feels uneasy about this may argue that it’s simple to just memorize certain things that are considered “educated” amongst society, but I would find this highly unlikely.
Again, from the Miller’s description, we can see he is a down-to-earth fellow, not one who succumbs to such vanity. A second, but perhaps less supporting note is the Miller’s explanation of Nicholas’s astrology tools, and how they are used. For similar reasons to the ones just presented above, the Miller would have had some knowledge about the science.Furthermore, we learn in the General prologue that the Miller is a skilled bagpipe player.
Considering all the facts I have just put forth (the Miller’s sophisticated story, his play with words, his knowledge of Cato and astrology, and his musical talents), it is reasonable to conclude that the Miller is an intelligent, educated man, or at least a substantially more intelligent and educated than one may have assumed after a superficial reading of The Canterbury Tales.Having established that the Miller is not as crude a character as one may have previously assumed, I shall now consider some of his unavoidably “Miller” traits. First, while he is an educated, intelligent man, he nevertheless tells a bawdy story. While I strongly believe that the reason for this is to counter the Knight’s tale, I also believe that there is a side of “the Miller” we expect.
In other words, while we are given a new light in which to consider the Miller, we must not believe that this is a man of supreme intellect, some Rhodes Scholar for example.There are still some expectations that must be met. Jill Mann mentions that in the General Prologue, “the animal imagery in the portraits of the Miller, Pardoner and Summoner persuades us that we are dealing crude or unpleasant characters” (Kolve, 475). Secondly, the Miller is a man who likes to drink, and is said to be substantially drunk.
While I suspect that the Miller is exaggerating the effect the alcohol is having on him to conform to his companion’s expectations, it is most likely that he is tipsy and has a liking for alcohol. If Chaucer does not meet our expectations of what a Miller would be like, The Canterbury Tales would be a false recount of Chaucer’s time, which many Chaucerians believe was one of his reasons for writing them.Now that we have established what kind of man the Miller is, let us speculate on why Chaucer would create such a character. As I hypothesized in the introductory paragraph, I strongly believe that Chaucer was making a social commentary about what was considered to be true and what he believed to be true.
In other words, he is trying to tell people that a person’s social position is not necessarily an exact indicator of his talents or intellect. There are several modern examples in support of this statement, Albert Einstein being the quintessential example.Having been an “unsuccessful” students by professor’s standards, and hence landing a position as patent clerk, he went on to completely revolutionize physics forever. I do not believe the Chaucer was trying to encourage people think this much of the working class, but I think he wanted to give them some credit.
These ideas were probably some social observations, and he happened to write down. He even warns the reader that “eek men shal nat maken ernest of game” (78). B.H.
Bronson reinforces this theory, as he writes “in a time like ours, when the individual artist is often exalted above the statesman, it is next to impossible to reconcile ourselves to the idea that an admittedly very great poet wrote mainly for fun” (Bronson, 5).I had posed a question earlier in the essay, which was: why does Chaucer exaggerate the Miller’s state of intoxication? I believe we are now in a position to consider the reason. In short, I believe that without the fact that the Miller liked to drink, Chaucer’s argument for the Miller being an intelligent man would have been a bit weaker. The ability of the Miller to tell such a tale with such precision and finesse, commenting on Cato and everything else I mentioned above, while being drunk only adds to his intelligence.
Who knows how much better the tale would be had he a clear mind, untouched by the impairments of alcohol.Again, going back to the Einstein example, who knows what other paradigm shifts Einstein would have created if he had the proper facilities and opportunities to conduct some of his research earlier on in his career, rather than having been restricted to a patent clerk’s desk. Perhaps he would have created none, but clearly there would have been the potential to.While this is the Miller’s reason to follow the Knight, Chaucer’s reason is to break up the idea we have about social ranks and positions.
I am not sure why Chaucer is not able to just come out and say it, but that he is making his opinion seems pretty clear to me, as he is constantly not taking responsibility for his ideas by asking stating:And therefore every gentil wight I preye,For Goddes love, demeth nat that I seye,Of evel entente, but that I moot reherce,Hir tales alle, be they better or werseOr elles falsen some of my matere. (63-67)I am not really sure why Chaucer does not want to take responsibility for tales, but that is the topic of another essay.
“Death Of A Salesman” Written By Arthur Mille
“Death of a Salesman” written by Arthur Miller is about a man named Willy who has wife and children. He came to America chasing the “American Dream” in search of fortune, respect and happiness. He had high dreams for his children as well but like with most parents he was disappointed by the truth.
His failures became too great for him and in the end committed suicide. Through the cultural perspective it is clear to see the differences between those who were born in America and those who come here trying to catch the “American Dream” Although many critics see Death of a Salesman, first published in 1949, as a socio-psychological observation on the American family system or as a subversive description of free enterprise and religious convictions, playwright Arthur Miller claims that he wrote the play (in two Acts and the Requiem) in a very uncomplicated way.Miller argues that art must strive for equilibrium with truth. It is not a political bias pretending to be art because it includes the whole gamut of life.
Without doubt, art holds kernels of the author’s values but it must surpass the author’s predisposition to attain its total figure as art” (Edwards).Miller’s drama can be compared to his real life in some ways. “New York-born Arthur Miller’s father, Isidore Miller, was a garment-maker, wrecked in the great depression. The abrupt change in fate had an intense impact on Miller.
The family shifted to a small house in Brooklyn, thought to be the type of Brooklyn home depicted in Death of a Salesman” (Galvin). “This desire to move on, to metamorphose – or perhaps it is a talent for being contemporary – was given me as life’s inevitable and rightful condition”, he wrote in Timebends: A life (Kirasto).The play was developed from common life – a plain-frame house filled with children who would leave on adulthood and outsiders would occupy the house” (Kirasto). Death of a Salesman depicts the story of Willy Lomman, an aging salesman, with his share of fantasies, disappointment and torments, his family relationships, making him a tragic hero.
Miller says, “It is time that we, who are without kings, took up this bright thread of our history and followed it to the only place it can possibly lead in our time-the heart and spirit of the average man” (Ferris).The basic philosophy in Death of a Salesman is that any common man can have as awful a plunge as a king in a tragedy” (Tripod) and this has elements taken from the story of Miller’s father’s financial ruin. Miller says he got ideas from Greek tragedians, mostly from Sophocles -“I think the tragic feeling is evoked in us when we are in the presence of a character who is ready to lay down his life, if need be, to secure one thing-his sense of personal dignity” (Miller). He writes, “From Orestes to Hamlet, Medea to Macbeth, the underlying struggle is that of the individual attempting to gain his ‘rightful’ position in his society” (Ferris).
Willy Loman, the protagonist of the drama, is the symbol of a ordinary man whose suicide at the end is obviously meant as a sign of his victory over situations. It is an feat of love, meant to trade in his house. Willy, the worn out, romantic man has dreams of a magnificent opportunity for his sons that does not really match with truth, but he still holds on to his expectations. To Willy, death is the only solution (revision).
Miller thinks the common man “as apt a subject for tragedy in its highest sense as kings were” (revision). The techniques Miller uses add to Willy’s ‘topsy-turvy’ psychological state.By employing flashback and daydreams, Miller helps the audience to delve into emotional state of Willy Loman and evokes a feeling of compassion for him. He applies many images and recurring beliefs during the play to give the audience an impression of what Willy and his circumstances are.
The emphasis on good looks is a recurring motif. Willy considers that good looks makes one flourishing but his conviction is proven wrong by the accomplishment of Bernard and Charley, the achiever father and his famous lawyer son who, according to Willy, are not good-looking.Other images are arrears, the “boxed-in” mood of Willy, the notion that his life flowing away from him as stated in the line, “The woods are burning,” and Ben’s, the dead elder brother of Willy, a merciless entrepreneur, rich and daring, whom Willy thinks to be his role model and “daydreams” of him, achievement and the traits that caused his triumph (Tripod). “To heighten the puzzled and bewildered state of Willy’s mind, the details of the play’s surroundings are meticulously avoided.
There are no borders between Boston and New York or between past and present for that matter.Typically, stories are told in sequences and actions take place coherently. But when life faces a jerk out from that cool order, experiences may appear to mix together, upsetting the consistent run of “reality. ” Willy has suffered such a shake.
As he attempts to assess and rationalize his life, his past starts sharing his present. As he speaks to Charley, he also talks to Ben, when he sits in the restaurant with Happy and Biff, he also in Boston tricking on Linda and analyzing the doubt and disappointment in Biff’s eyes. Willy looks at his life as an entirety.The order of time and space does not concern him” (Edwards).
“The plot of the play also develops in an artistic than in a coherent form. It is sort of a “stream of consciousness” to remake the past experiences of the hero in the present context. Willy revisits the past to show that, for him, family is very important. In the flashbacks, Willy gives his sons a punching bag and overlooks Biff’s theft, indulges them and one of his sons, Happy, does not approve of the idea that they should part ways for a business trip.
The muddling of the sequential order also depicts the degree of Willy’s disenchantment.It also reveals the emotional disruptions and connections between different characters of the play (revision), In Death of a Salesman, Miller utilizes many characters to compare the disparity between achievement and failure inside the system. Willy’s fantasies outsize his capability while Linda is more realistic. Biff and Happy go after their father’s erroneous beliefs while Ben is the only member of the family who used to have all the traits that success needs for.
The play is uncertain in its approach to the selling -success reverie, but does not indeed denounce it. ‘It is reasonable to ask what Miller is up to.And the response is that he has made a baffled play because he has been reluctant or not capable to place himself to a definite place with regard to American culture’ (Linderholm). In an interview in the Humanities magazine, William R.
Ferris who thinks that besides being a personal tragedy, Death of a Salesman is also a “commentary on society” and asked Miller whether “one person’s story can transcend itself and speak to all of us? ” In reply Miller said, that the “intensification of a work generally leads in the direction of society if it is indeed intense enough” (Ferris).People interpret Willy’s suicide in different ways, some think of it as an act of weakness and others as Willy being a victim of the American Dream . In Act II, Willy, after being fired by his employer breaks the news to Biff saying: Willy: I’m not interested in stories about the past or any crap of that kind because the woods are burning, boys, you understand? There’s a big blaze going on all around. I was fired today.
BIFF (shocked): How could you be? WILLY: I was fired, and I’m looking for a little good news to tell your mother, because the woman has waited and the woman has suffered.The gist of it is that I haven’t got a story left in my head, Biff. So don’t give me a lecture about facts and aspects. I am not interested.
Now what’ve you got so say to me? (Miller, Act II). This clearly depicts Willy as a confused “American Dreamer”, a person who would like to carry on his mission of triumph and success following Ben’s advice that the “The jungle is dark, but full of diamonds” and who would like to give his suicide the hue of a swap and thereby matching the concept of fall essential to a Greek tragic hero.Reality is revealed in the skinny layers of Willy Loman’s American Dream; a dream developed on a life of weak options and fake values. Even though the characters are not of aristocrats nor have gallant traits, many of the factors in Death of a Salesman satisfy the standards of a Greek tragedy.
The Loman’s have impractical thoughts about success. To Willy, achievement is not culture or tough work, but rather “who you know and the smile on your face”.Furthermore, Willy mocks Bernard for his academic success, asserting that his sons, Biff and Happy, will go more in the big business because “the man who makes an appearance in the business world, the man who creates personal interest, is the man who gets ahead. Be liked, and you will never want”.
Willy worships two men: his brother, the cruel and the unscrupulous Ben and an 84-year-old salesman who could “pick a phone in twenty or thirty cities and be remembered and loved, and finally honored by hundred of mourners at his funeral.Linda supports Willy to demand unfair raises, and close her eyes to the truth that Willy scrounges money to run the family expenses. For Biff, the concept of accomplishment is an undemanding loan from an ex- boss; for Happy, achievement is getting a raise by pass the time for “the merchandise manager to die. ” Predictably, the Loman’s out of reach idea about victory is one of the reasons for their ruin.
The Loman family also does not have the aptitude to make the essential and appropriate preferences to track the American Dream.Even though Willy is expert in his profession and considers that “a man who can’t handle tools is disgusting,” he prefers a career as a salesman, founded on the unreal image of his father who dumped another significant reason in the Loman’s ruin is their deficiency in trustworthy values. Thievery, infidelity and deception are the basis of their values. Besides the relation between a character’s collapse and the character’s “harmartias”, acknowledgment of a person’s flaw and the revelation accompanying that is a vital constituent of tragedy.
In the requiem of the play, Biff had a quick look of the self revelation, although Willy, Linda, and Hap never found out the truth about themselves. Biff becomes conscious that Willy had the incorrect dreams. While he finds the truth about his father, Biff could make a resolution about his own destiny founded on a sensible consideration of his skills. Briefly speaking, Death of a Salesman is a new type of tragedy that very much highlights the corruption of the American Dream (Linderholm).
In conclusion, through the cultural perspective Miller’s “Death of a Salesman” shows its audience how immigrants see the America Dream. People who were born in the United States take for granted all the opportunities America has to offer, but those who come to this country for a chance to live see it differently. Like Willy, they see America has a way to make it big and get respect. However, when these people feel they failed it is a bigger disappointment and at times unbearable.
That is a big difference between American citizens who were born in this country and those who come here for a chance at the American Dream.