Tuesday, January 20, 2026

Achilles' Shield

Friday, January 9, 2026

Another (Shelley) Poem for the New Year

Thursday, January 1, 2026

New Year Poems and Thoughts

 As January rolls around, we want to look ahead to a promising new year. Unfortunately, daily news depresses optimism and dissuades hope.

It steadily sinks the spirit: the immigration policy that detains and deports many immigrants who are simply seeking better lives for themselves; we have a president who brags about this inhumane policy to cheering Maga crowds; there is the pay for play funding scheme to build a garish, ballroom; the new presidential plaques lining the White House wall exalting Trump while vilifying three former presidents whose reputations continue to threaten his childish ego.

Of course, there are the illegal Drone strikes in the Caribbean and the Epstein files cover up.

With all this, and so much more, multitudes still not only support this president, but also worship this appalling narcissist. Why? Why do so many fail to be revolted by his daily mendacity? Why are so many indifferent to the callous cruelty and the conspicuous cupidity of this administration? Perhaps a few poems by Samuel Johnson, William Wordsworth, William Butler Yeats, T. S. Eliot, and W. H. Auden will give us a little insight into why.

Samuel Johnson (1709-1784) is one of the great giants of English literature, was a keen analyst of human nature and a brilliant judge of literature. Having written essays, literary biographyies, poetry, a play, even the first dictionary of the English language, he clearly understood why humans chase their delusive desires, even when common sense thunders the foolishness of their choices. In The Vanity of Human Wishes: The Tenth Satire of Juvenal, Imitated, and its effects. Accordingly, his Dictionary defines vanity as “uncertainty,” “fruitless desire,” and “falsehood,”

The poem’s first twenty-eight lines illustrate how the pursuit and realization of wishes, i.e., dreams of political power, financial success, intellectual achievement, and physical beauty, are futile and never bring true or lasting happiness.

The Vanity of Human Wishes: The Tenth Satire
of Juvenal, Imitated

Let observation with extensive view,
Survey mankind, from China to Peru;
Remark each anxious toil, each eager strife,
And watch the busy scenes of crowded life;
Then say how hope and fear, desire and hate,              5
O’erspread with snares the clouded maze of fate,
Where wav’ring man, betray’d by vent’rous pride
To tread the dreary paths without a guide,
As treach’rous phantoms in the mist delude,
Shuns fancied ills, or chases airy good.                          10
How rarely reason guides the stubborn choice,
Rules the bold hand, or prompts the suppliant voice,
How nations sink, by darling schemes oppress’d,
When vengeance listens to the fool’s request.
Fate wings with ev’ry wish th’ afflictive dart,                15
Each gift of nature, and each grace of art,
With fatal heat impetuous courage glows,
With fatal sweetness elocution flows,
Impeachment stops the speaker’s pow’rful breath,
And restless fire precipitates on death.                           20

But scarce observ’d the knowing and the bold,
Fall in the gen’ral massacre of gold;
Wide-wasting pest! that rages unconfin’d,
And crowds with crimes the records of mankind,
For gold his sword the hireling ruffian draws,               25
For gold the hireling judge distorts the laws;
Wealth heap’d on wealth, nor truth nor safety buys,
The dangers gather as the treasures rise.

Johnson establishes straight away his intention. In stanza 1, he tells the readers to open their eyes to see “how hope and fear, desire and hate / Ov’erspread with snares the clouded maze of fate” and “pride,” that architect of high-flown ideas, misleads “wav’ring man” as he pursues “fancied ills, or airy good.” Reason “rarely…guides” decision making, “[r]ules” or “prompts” what men do or say. “[N]ations” are oppressed by the “darling” (favorite) schemes” of their leaders who seek vengeance against perceived enemies. In stanza 2, the speaker observes that the lust for money corrupts even men who should be above reproach: that men “But scarce observe, the knowing and the bold / Fall in the ger’ral massacre of gold.” The desire for gold induces the “ruffian” to rob his victims and the “judge” to distort the “laws.”

Johnson continues his survey to observe and display a world dominated by ambition, cruelty, treachery, pride, arrogance, greed, and, of course, vanity. He develops five categories of the types of wishes that drive men and women: political power (lines 73-134), intellectual achievement (lines 135-174), military glory (lines 175-254), longevity (lines 255-318), and physical beauty (lines 319-344). In lines 345-368, Johnson argues that only Christian humility and prayer can rescue the weak human mind and concludes with the thought that “celestial Wisdom calms the Mind, / And makes the Happiness she does not find.” Here is a link to the full poem.

Perhaps Johnson’s poem overwhelms the reader with its variety of human wishes that delude men and women into pursuing irrational desires. William Wordsworth (1770-1850) simplifies Johnson’s critique of humanity with his sonnet “The World is Too Much with Us.” In it, Wordsworth censures the growing materialism in England in the early eighteenth century.

          The World Is Too Much With Us

The world is too much with us; late and soon,
Getting and spending, we lay waste our powers;—
Little we see in Nature that is ours;
We have given our hearts away, a sordid boon!
This Sea that bares her bosom to the moon;
The winds that will be howling at all hours,
And are up-gathered now like sleeping flowers;
For this, for everything, we are out of tune;
It moves us not. Great God! I’d rather be
A Pagan suckled in a creed outworn;
So might I, standing on this pleasant lea,
Have glimpses that would make me less forlorn;
Have sight of Proteus rising from the sea;
Or hear old Triton blow his wreathèd horn.

In this simple sonnet, Wordsworth exhorts his readers to recognize how their lives are wasted by their obsession with material goods, their “Getting and spending.” Instead of giving in to materialism, that “sordid boon” they value most of all, his readers must take note of the “Sea that bares her bosom to the moon” and “The winds that will be howling at all hours.” Unfortunately, they “are out of tune” with nature and unmoved by its sublime beauty and power. Like Johnson, Wordsworth is repelled by human behavior, specifically the materialism that consumes men and women. Whereas Johnson sees prayer as a means to heal the fallen human soul, Wordsworth reckons no words will rescue society from the power of materialism. Instead, he chooses to imagine himself transported to ancient days where he might see “Proteus rising from the sea; / Or hear old Triton blow his wreathed horn.”

In the lines (1-4) denouncing materialism and loss of spirituality, Wordsworth implies also a rebuke of social conformity. The collective pronouns “us” and “we” coupled with the phrases “The world is too much with,” and “Getting and spending” amalgamate all English citizens as a uniform mass of materialistic beings. This conformity dehumanized, in Wordsworth’s eyes, his fellow countrymen and women. A little more than a hundred years later, William Butler Yeats (1865-1939) saw another kind of conformity, equally contemptible but certainly more destructive.

             The Leaders of the Crowd

They must to keep their certainty accuse
All that are different of a base intent;
Pull down established honour; hawk for news
Whatever their loose fantasy invent
And murmur it with bated breath, as though
The abounding gutter had been Helicon
Or calumny a song.  How can they know
Truth flourishes where the student's lamp has shone,
And there alone, that have no solitude?
So the crowd come they care not what may come.
They have loud music, hope every day renewed
And heartier loves; that lamp is from the tomb.

At the start of this post, I asked why so many support Trump. In Yeats’s poem we find a partial answer. A political leader can be adept at persuading his followers with facile slogans and scurrilous claims about political opponents. Trump has utilized both means to convince millions to support him. Like the “Leaders” in Yeats’s poem, he accuses all who disagree with him of “base intent.” He attempts to create (“hawk”) the “news” through lies and outrageous claims and has been successful at dominating the news’s cycle with his ceaseless bluster. Yeats believed that “Truth flourish[ed] where the student’s lamp has shone,” and maybe he was right. But does such truth have the capacity to shine bright enough to illuminate the minds of the “crowd” swayed by the “loud music" or as Trump has managed to do: “with calumnious art / Of counterfeited truth thus held their ears.” (PL, V 770-771) The poem’s last 6 words leave us uncertain. Are those words spoken by Yeats or do they come from the leaders? If from the leaders, then they are mocking the speaker’s claim, but not necessarily diminishing its truth. If they are the poet’s belief, then Yeats is saying that truth and honor can only exist in solitude or does truth always perish in the loud music of the crowd. I leave it to the reader to decide which interpretation is right.

Tuesday, November 25, 2025

Two Sonnets

One of the most interesting types of poetry to flourish in the time of Shakespeare (1564-1616) was the sonnet sequence. A number of poets wrote sonnets, and three who composed the best sonnet sequences of that period are Sir Philip Sidney (1554-1586), Edmund Spenser (1552-1599), and Shakespeare. These poets inherited the sonnet form from early English poets who in turn adapted the form from the Italian poet Francesco Petrarch (1307-1374). Petrarch was born in Arzezzo, Italy. He initially studied law but chose to become instead a minor ecclesiastic official (a cleric) in the church against his father’s wishes. Together, father and son moved to France and in 1327 he saw Laura de Noves while at mass in Avignon and shortly after began composing sonnets telling of his love for her and his devotion to her. Later, Laura died in the plague of 1348, but Petrarch persisted in his adoration of her until his own death. In all, he wrote 317 sonnets in his sequence. All of these profoundly talented poets explore the subject of love in their sonnets but only Spenser celebrates love as a bliss that is consummated in the happy union (of marriage) between the man and the woman.

An early translation of one of Petrarch’s sonnets is by Thomas Wyatt (1503-1542). It is a dramatic rendition of a timid and intimidated man by an unyielding woman:

   The Long Love that in my Thought doth Harbour
                          

The long love that in my thought doth harbour
And in mine heart doth keep his residence
Into my face preseth with bold pretence
And therein campeth, spreading his banner.
She that me learneth to love and suffer
And will that my trust and lust's negligence
Be reigned by reason, shame, and reverence
With his hardiness taketh displeasure.
Wherewithall unto the heart's forest he fleeth,
Leaving his enterprise with pain and cry,
And there him hideth and not appeareth.
What may I do when master feareth
But in the field with him to live and die?
For good is the life ending faithfully.

The speaker in the sonnet dramatizes the conflict between his desire for the woman he loves and her angry response to his display of passion. With sudden military-like force his passion spreads across his face, revealing for all to see the irrepressible love he feels. Until this embarrassing moment, he seems to have managed to suppress that emotion, clearly surrendering to the ‘command’ she “taught” him about expressing his feelings. Her rebuke instills him with fear and sends him and his “love” retreating into the thickets of his “heart’s forest.” There it will set up camp, but no doubt love will escape again and provoke the ire of the woman who scorns the man she completely subjugates.

Like Wyatt, Sir Philip Sidney understood the anguish of unrequited love. He fell in love with Penelope Devereux (1563-1607), but she married another man. The experience inspired his sonnet sequence Astrophel and Stella. Through the 108 sonnets, Astrophel paints a meditative, self-exploration of his love for Stella that is psychologically complex and also playfully amusing. In the first sonnet of the sequence Sidney introduces the theme of finding the inspiration to write poetry.

                  Sonnet 1

Loving in truth and fain in verse my love to show,
That she, dear she, might take some pleasure of my pain,
Pleasure might cause her read, reading might make her know
Knowledge might pity win, and pity grace obtain,
I sought fit words to paint the blackest face of woe;
Studying inventions fine her wits to entertain,
Oft turning others' leaves, to see if thence would flow
Some fresh and fruitful showers upon my sunburn'd brain.
but words came halting forth, wanting invention's stay;
Invention, Nature's child, fled step-dame Study's blows;
And others' feet still seem'd but strangers in my way.
Thus great with child to speak and helpless in my throes,
Biting my truant pen, beating myself for spite,
'Fool,' said my Muse to me, 'look in thy heart, and write.'

The first line of the sonnet tells the reader two important ideas. First, Astrophel’s love for Stella is genuine and unaffected, “Loving in truth,” and second, Astrophel intends to impart his love through poetry, “and fain in verse my love to show.” Admirable as it is to write love poems to the woman he desires, Astrophel’s means of accomplishing his aim is flawed, even though he perceives a logic to his method. When Stella reads this first sonnet, she might be pleased, which might make her want to read more of his poems. As she does, she will come to know his “pain,” giving her “knowledge” which “might” cause her “pity” and that pity for Astrophel might conceivably her “grace obtain.” After lines 1-4, Astrophel could be on his way to capturing Stella’s love, but in fact, he is only moving himself further from accomplishing his goal. Line 5 produces the crux of his effort, “I sought fit words to paint the blackest face of woe,” but also reveals the flaw in his method. The verb to “paint” perhaps betrays something inauthentic in Astrophel’s manner of composition, something superficial in the way he is attempting to communicate his love. Lines 6-12 reveal an obstacle Astrophel mistook for a way to find those “fit words” to express himself. He searches other poets and poems for suitable “inventions fine” to “entertain” Stella with and discovers that plagiarizing other poets cannot engender poetic creation. In fact, searching for the right words from “others’ leaves” only leave him interminably pregnant, unable to give birth to poem(s) that persuade her to love him too. 

Sunday, November 9, 2025

Wordsworth's "Intimation Ode"

  Of all the poetry William Wordsworth (1770-1850) wrote, three stand among the greatest of the 19th century: Tintern Abbey; Ode; Intimations of Immortality; and The Prelude. His Ode has garnered praise and admiration and might even be viewed as his crowning masterpiece. It is a beautiful and fascinating poem that contemplates what is lost as we “mature” from children to adults. Written in irregular Pindaric ode, it takes the reader through eleven stanzas of 204 lines. I have included a link to Michael Sheen’s fine reading of the poem for anyone who wants to also hear the poem read aloud. (If possible, view the poem in desktop mode to see an accurate shape of the text.)

The Duality of Robert Frost

Saturday, September 20, 2025

Andrew Marvell "The Definition of Love

Andrew Marvell was a contemporary and friend of John Milton. He probably saved Milton’s life after King Charles II was restored to the English throne in 1660. He wrote a number of excellent poems, his most popular poem “To His Coy Mistress,” is a witty, carpe diem love-song in which the speaker argues that life is too short for her to put off enjoying sexual intimacy with him. Another interesting poem about love, is his “The Definition of Love.” Unlike “Coy Mistress,” this poem aches with the pain of unfulfilled love:

        The Definition of Love

My love is of a birth as rare 
As 'tis for object strange and high;
It was begotten by despair
Upon impossibility.

Magnanimous Despair alone
Could show me so divine a thing,
Where feeble Hope could ne'r have flown
But vainly flapt its Tinsel Wing.

And yet I quickly might arrive
Where My extended Soul is fixt,
But Fate does Iron wedges drive,
And alwaies crouds it self betwixt.

For Fate with Eye does see
Two perfect Loves; nor lets them close;
Their union would her ruine be,
And her Tyrannick pow'r depose.

And therefore her Decrees of Steel
Us as the distant Poles have plac'd,
(Though Loves whole World on us doth wheel)
Not by themselves to be embrac'd.

Unless the giddy Heaven fall,
And Earth some new Convulsion tear;
And, us to joyn, the World should all
Be cramp'd into a Planisphere. 

As Lines so Loves oblique may well
Themselves in ever Angle greet:
But ours so truly Paralel,
Though infinite can never meet.

Therefore the Love with us doth bind,
But Fate so enviously debarrs,
Is the Conjunction of the Mind,
And Opposition of the Stars.

This interesting little poem immediately compels the reader by its title. We encounter the words “The Definition of Love” and wonder how Marvell will define this all-consuming human passion. The first three words lead us in that direction, with its linking verb “My Love is,” but instead of a specific image representing the emotion of love, he conjures a metaphor of love being born to a father, “despair” and a mother, “Impossibility.”

Marvell then states that “Magnanimous Despair alone / Could show me so divine a thing.” The ironic coupling of these words initially perplexes until we read the rest of the stanza. “Despair is “Magnanimous” in showing him a beauty “so divine,” but tauntingly cruel, since such a love will never be within his reach. To even hope for such a consummation is purely feeble and forever useless. In stanza 3, we see that it is not the lover who rejects him, as is the common theme in countless poems of unrequited love written during this literary period. He believes he “quickly might arrive / Where my extended Soul is fixt.” Spiritually, he and his beloved are united; physically, they remain apart: “But Fate does Iron wedges drive, / And alwaies crouds it self betwixt.

The Fate of stanza 3, with its “Iron wedges,” is impersonal and mechanical. In stanza 4, Fate assumes a human agency, which is not only jealous of the lovers but also jealous of her power to control their lives. The “union” of the lovers would “ruine” her and “depose” “her Tyrannick pow’r.” No less than “her Decrees of Steel” and a separation as great as the North and South poles between the lovers, will ensure Fate retains her power. Stanzas 3,4, and 5 convey Marvell’s feelings of resignation in the hands of Fate. Yet, one line intimates his resistance against Fate’s dictates: “(Though Loves whole World on us doth wheel). The parentheses suggest an aside, a thought secondary to the sentiment presented in the stanza 5. But the meaning within the parenthesis seems to resist the absolute power Fate has exerted over the lovers. How might Fate control their lives if “Loves whole World” revolves around them?

Yet only a cosmic collapse—“Unless the giddy Heaven fall,” and an earthquake, “And Earth some new Convulsion tear”—could possibly bring the lovers together. But such events would reduce the sky and earth to a “Planisphere,” a two-dimensional representation which cannot adequately measure their perfect love. In the next stanza, the perfection of their love is measured in parallel lines, which “Though infinite can never meet.” At this point in the poem, it should become apparent that Marvell’s definition of love is more of a description than a definition, a description that is rendered in abstract images in which Fate is his personified adversary and geometric images represent their perfect love. The poem presents something of a summation: “Love…doth bind” the lovers; “Fate so enviously debarrs” the union of the lovers.” And the final two lines suggest two possible conclusions. The lovers will always have their spiritual love, but Fate will always stand in between them physically: “And Opposition of the Stars.” Or “The Love which us doth bind…” will not only conjoin their minds but also oppose the “Stars” and leaves the reader wondering whether the poem offers a definition or instead a paradox.