SDNess
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2004
- Messages
- 233
Give it a read if you feel like it. 
To view the poem this is based on go here.
Gerard Manley Hopkins’s wisely chose the form of a sonnet because of the form’s primary focus on love or philosophy. Many poems show how humans think, but the sonnet possesses a potency for emotion. Perhaps, the critical addition of a conclusion attracts only those who want to discuss intellectual topics in a profound manner. In addition, it is an exceptional method for one to make sense of their feelings. Traditionally sonnets are written using Shakespeare’s rhyme scheme – abab, cdcd, efef, gg. The poet Wordsworth took liberties in writing, however, using the scheme – abbaaccb, dedeff. Hopkins’s scheme is similar to Wordsworth’s, but differs in the second half – abbaabba, cdcdcd. The octet presents the speaker’s situation – he is struggling with the allure of despair – to accept despair and submit. The reader understands the speaker’s frustration. The sextet gradually sums up the speaker’s frustration, but fails to completely conclude. Hopkins’s does this on purpose to leave an uneasy and struggling feeling at the end. In addition, Hopkins’s took another liberty in not using iambic pentameter. The meter in every line in both the octet and sextet is erratic. This enhances the speaker’s emotion because the jolty meter alludes to the speaker’s uneasiness and perturbed mindset. He is not up to the task of following what Richard Wilbur calls the sonnet’s “strict geometries” in his sonnet In Trackless Woods. The lack of a consistent meter creates a thick, clustered feel. As one reads through the poem, the speaker becomes more claustrophobic and thus so agitated that he puts himself in an even more despairing frenzy.
The poem begins with the speaker’s struggle to accept despair. It is a confessional for the speaker. “Not, I’ll not, carrion comfort, Despair, not feast on thee” (1). He brings up grotesque images while saying “carrion comfort,” which literally means “decaying comfort.” “Carrion comfort,” however, is an oxymoron because there is nothing soothing about carrion. A gruesome image also enters the reader’s mind after “not feast on thee” (1), which alludes to the speaker consuming “Despair” as his only source of life – the speaker, a parasite, “Despair,” a host-opiate. This personification, the capitalized “Despair,” treats “Despair” as if this idea is a living object capable of harm. The speaker’s is ambivalent with “Despair.” “…Or, most weary, cry I can no more. I can…” (3). He contradicts himself several times after line one, admitting that he would give in, but rebutting that he will never give up. “Can something, hope, wish day come, not choose not to be” (4). This double negative ultimately saying, “Choose to be,” or that he will choose his own destiny and not be controlled by “Despair.” In addition, by saying “Can something, hope, wish day come…” the speaker changes the tone. He is being optimistic and is looking towards the future as a place of better fortune.
The middle of the poem is an amalgam of different questions pointing at different events in the speaker’s past life. He almost distances himself from the reader – becoming vaguer with each question. The concrete, morbid sincerity of the first four lines is gone. “But ah, but O though terrible, why wouldst thou rude on me” (5). The speaker hints at the, possible injuries “Despair” has given him. “With darksome devouring eyes my bruised bones” (7). The tone changes again, becoming even more macabre because of the evil demeanor of the personified “Despair” – the “devouring eyes” clearly dark, bloodshot, and full of malice. “O in turns of tempest, me heaped there; me frantic to avoid thee and flee?” (8). The speaker becomes cowardly and meek – a figure cowering during a storm, trembling, wanting to run away. He starts to get caught up in these past memories, questioning the usefulness of common things such as work. “Nay in all that toil, that coil, since (seems) I kissed the rod, / Hand, rather, my heart lo! lapped strength, stole joy” (10 – 11). All the “toil” – praising God – which he has labored through in life has taken away his energy and his fun. This keeps the original pessimistic tone – perhaps raising it a notch, since work is such an imperative element of human society, it is absurd to criticize it. The questions continue until the second to last line on which the speaker becomes extremely desperate. “Cheer whom though? The hero whose heaven-handling flung me, foot trod / Me? or me that fought him? O which one? is it each one” (12 – 13). He is perplexed with the practice of praising God. He does not want to “cheer” him because God, the “hero,” has done nothing good for him, only put him into sorrow. The speaker continues to add that maybe he should be the one praised for he was brave enough to challenge the will of God. By saying “is it each one” the speaker returns to his past attitude of ambivalence – he asks if he can, at the same time, praise God and praise himself.
The last line, technically the conclusion, does not sum up the sonnet’s subject matter. Instead, it is a revelation for the speaker and reader. “That night, that year / Of now done darkness I wretch lay wrestling with (my God!) my God” (14). The speaker indicates that the last thirteen lines of the poem were describing his status in the past. He is not toiling with God in the moment, but rather reminiscing on that time. It has been finally revealed to the reader that the speaker has been grappling with God’s existence. However, the speaker’s standing with God is unclear. Three possible situations arise. It is possible that he has overcome “Despair” and is once again with God. It is also possible that he has accepted “Despair” and moved away from God. And finally, it is possible that he has settled with indecision and thinks its okay to believe in God and also question God’s existence at the same time. The most legitimate of these is that the speaker has once again accepted God. “Done darkness” strongly indicates that the speaker’s restless period in battling “Despair” is over. In addition, the speaker’s parenthetical remark “(my God!)” indicates that he is stupefied that he was actually wrestling with God at some time in his life. Nevertheless, the sonnet’s title, “Carrion Comfort,” is an argument for the other two scenarios. The speaker, in the end, is comforted, but only in despondency.
In Carrion Comfort Gerard Manley Hopkins, attempts to respond to a problem that has troubled scholars for ages – whether or not God does exist. Truthfully, however, there is no answer to this problem. It cannot be proved either way, only speculated upon. Hopkins’ challenging poem perfectly illustrates the never-ending cycle of hope and despair. This cycle will always continue, but Carrion Comfort can be a testimony for those who have suffered its wrath and those who are in need of guidance.
To view the poem this is based on go here.
An Inner Travail
Is there a God? Maybe there is, maybe there is not. Humans may be alone in their journeys through life. They will receive little guidance from a supernatural force or being. Life is full of despair and sorrow. If one completely accepts this notion, though he loses faith, then life’s great parody – that one’s pain will not be relieved but only worsened by more desperation – will be revealed to him. It is with this attitude the speaker battles with in Gerard Manley Hopkins’s sonnet Carrion Comfort, communicates a troubled, uneasy, pessimistic bearing on life throughout most of the poem until the poem’s end where the speaker undergoes a revelation and seems to come to a resolution.
Gerard Manley Hopkins’s wisely chose the form of a sonnet because of the form’s primary focus on love or philosophy. Many poems show how humans think, but the sonnet possesses a potency for emotion. Perhaps, the critical addition of a conclusion attracts only those who want to discuss intellectual topics in a profound manner. In addition, it is an exceptional method for one to make sense of their feelings. Traditionally sonnets are written using Shakespeare’s rhyme scheme – abab, cdcd, efef, gg. The poet Wordsworth took liberties in writing, however, using the scheme – abbaaccb, dedeff. Hopkins’s scheme is similar to Wordsworth’s, but differs in the second half – abbaabba, cdcdcd. The octet presents the speaker’s situation – he is struggling with the allure of despair – to accept despair and submit. The reader understands the speaker’s frustration. The sextet gradually sums up the speaker’s frustration, but fails to completely conclude. Hopkins’s does this on purpose to leave an uneasy and struggling feeling at the end. In addition, Hopkins’s took another liberty in not using iambic pentameter. The meter in every line in both the octet and sextet is erratic. This enhances the speaker’s emotion because the jolty meter alludes to the speaker’s uneasiness and perturbed mindset. He is not up to the task of following what Richard Wilbur calls the sonnet’s “strict geometries” in his sonnet In Trackless Woods. The lack of a consistent meter creates a thick, clustered feel. As one reads through the poem, the speaker becomes more claustrophobic and thus so agitated that he puts himself in an even more despairing frenzy.
The poem begins with the speaker’s struggle to accept despair. It is a confessional for the speaker. “Not, I’ll not, carrion comfort, Despair, not feast on thee” (1). He brings up grotesque images while saying “carrion comfort,” which literally means “decaying comfort.” “Carrion comfort,” however, is an oxymoron because there is nothing soothing about carrion. A gruesome image also enters the reader’s mind after “not feast on thee” (1), which alludes to the speaker consuming “Despair” as his only source of life – the speaker, a parasite, “Despair,” a host-opiate. This personification, the capitalized “Despair,” treats “Despair” as if this idea is a living object capable of harm. The speaker’s is ambivalent with “Despair.” “…Or, most weary, cry I can no more. I can…” (3). He contradicts himself several times after line one, admitting that he would give in, but rebutting that he will never give up. “Can something, hope, wish day come, not choose not to be” (4). This double negative ultimately saying, “Choose to be,” or that he will choose his own destiny and not be controlled by “Despair.” In addition, by saying “Can something, hope, wish day come…” the speaker changes the tone. He is being optimistic and is looking towards the future as a place of better fortune.
The middle of the poem is an amalgam of different questions pointing at different events in the speaker’s past life. He almost distances himself from the reader – becoming vaguer with each question. The concrete, morbid sincerity of the first four lines is gone. “But ah, but O though terrible, why wouldst thou rude on me” (5). The speaker hints at the, possible injuries “Despair” has given him. “With darksome devouring eyes my bruised bones” (7). The tone changes again, becoming even more macabre because of the evil demeanor of the personified “Despair” – the “devouring eyes” clearly dark, bloodshot, and full of malice. “O in turns of tempest, me heaped there; me frantic to avoid thee and flee?” (8). The speaker becomes cowardly and meek – a figure cowering during a storm, trembling, wanting to run away. He starts to get caught up in these past memories, questioning the usefulness of common things such as work. “Nay in all that toil, that coil, since (seems) I kissed the rod, / Hand, rather, my heart lo! lapped strength, stole joy” (10 – 11). All the “toil” – praising God – which he has labored through in life has taken away his energy and his fun. This keeps the original pessimistic tone – perhaps raising it a notch, since work is such an imperative element of human society, it is absurd to criticize it. The questions continue until the second to last line on which the speaker becomes extremely desperate. “Cheer whom though? The hero whose heaven-handling flung me, foot trod / Me? or me that fought him? O which one? is it each one” (12 – 13). He is perplexed with the practice of praising God. He does not want to “cheer” him because God, the “hero,” has done nothing good for him, only put him into sorrow. The speaker continues to add that maybe he should be the one praised for he was brave enough to challenge the will of God. By saying “is it each one” the speaker returns to his past attitude of ambivalence – he asks if he can, at the same time, praise God and praise himself.
The last line, technically the conclusion, does not sum up the sonnet’s subject matter. Instead, it is a revelation for the speaker and reader. “That night, that year / Of now done darkness I wretch lay wrestling with (my God!) my God” (14). The speaker indicates that the last thirteen lines of the poem were describing his status in the past. He is not toiling with God in the moment, but rather reminiscing on that time. It has been finally revealed to the reader that the speaker has been grappling with God’s existence. However, the speaker’s standing with God is unclear. Three possible situations arise. It is possible that he has overcome “Despair” and is once again with God. It is also possible that he has accepted “Despair” and moved away from God. And finally, it is possible that he has settled with indecision and thinks its okay to believe in God and also question God’s existence at the same time. The most legitimate of these is that the speaker has once again accepted God. “Done darkness” strongly indicates that the speaker’s restless period in battling “Despair” is over. In addition, the speaker’s parenthetical remark “(my God!)” indicates that he is stupefied that he was actually wrestling with God at some time in his life. Nevertheless, the sonnet’s title, “Carrion Comfort,” is an argument for the other two scenarios. The speaker, in the end, is comforted, but only in despondency.
In Carrion Comfort Gerard Manley Hopkins, attempts to respond to a problem that has troubled scholars for ages – whether or not God does exist. Truthfully, however, there is no answer to this problem. It cannot be proved either way, only speculated upon. Hopkins’ challenging poem perfectly illustrates the never-ending cycle of hope and despair. This cycle will always continue, but Carrion Comfort can be a testimony for those who have suffered its wrath and those who are in need of guidance.
