In the scheme of things, Wild Oats is a poem quite different to the other poems that I have studied by Philip Larkin. This is one of the few poem where he talks directly about relationships with women.
As usual, Larkin begins with a very descriptive beginning: 'About twenty years ago / Two girls came in where I worked - " It really doesn't get more descriptive or more narrative than that. The entire poem is particularly descriptive through out, riddled with extra thoughts and metaphors, unlike Larkin's other poems which are usually well structured and follow a strict pattern of: description, thoughts and then ultimately revelation/epiphany.
In many ways, Wild Oats is an incredibly cheesy love story, where the persona end up dating second best, not actually getting the one that he wants. in the second stanza, the persona reveals the reason why he ended up with 'her friend in specs' rather than his 'bosomy English rose'. He only ever met with her, and took her out on a date twice, both of which, he was left with the impression that she was trying not to laugh at him. This appears to have been the catalyst that sent him into developing the resignation that we see at the end. All in all, one can only conclude that he decided to date the woman in glasses because it was as good as he was ever going to get. Maybe he thought that if he couldn't begin a relationship with the woman he really genuinely loved then, by dating her friend, then he could at least spend time with her; a possible shot in the dark, another attempt to get closer to what he wanted.
On thought that comes to me is the saying 'Better to have loved and lost, than to have never loved at all', and the impression I am getting from this poem in particular, is that Larkin/the persona's ideas about romance, are about as far from this as you can get. He would rather learn from it and, never date a woman again rather than have to go through the embarrassment, and disappointment of being laughed at and not quite getting it right. In the last stanza, the persona's resignation to the entire affair becomes apparent. Talking about how the whole event of this affair and the things it taught him were 'useful to get ... learnt', and 'that I was too selfish, withdrawn'.
I think the biggest revelation that the persona has at the end of this poem is not actually about realising that he will never get the woman he wants, although this is something that definitely crosses his mind. The real revelation is that he is 'easily bored to love'. In fact he is not overly wanting of human love or relationships, but rather he is happier with his love of music, thinking and writing. They are the things that he really loves, not women at all. I think that this is not a poem about relationships and romance, I think it is far more likely that this is a poem about the persona realising his true loves in life.
Friday, 28 February 2014
Monday, 24 February 2014
SELF'S THE MAN (Poem) By Philip Larkin
Just like Dockery and Son, as well as a number of Larkin's other poems, Self's the man is another poem about life choices and family.
This poem is very similar to Larkin's other poems in the fact that throughout the course of the poem, the persona's emotions and feelings change and eventually he has an epiphany at the end of the poem. He starts off with what seems almost like admiration for Arnold, the way he has made something of his life and how he has coped with marriage so well, however this soon changes, subtly in the third stanza where the persona almost sound sorry for Arnold, as if he got the short straw, the bad end of the stick. The final change in emotion at the end of the poem is really obvious, when he physically says: 'but wait, not do fast:'
The poem begins very suddenly, almost as if in answer to a question or a statement that had been said of him just before the poem started. You can just imagine someone turning round to the persona and telling him that he is really selfish and why couldn't he be more like Arnold (the other person in the poem), and then him turning round and almost shouting: 'Oh, no one can deny / That Arnold is less selfish than I', in response to the people.
The only thing that really changes in the first five stanzas is the tone of the persona's voice, as the more he describes Arnold's life, the more he feels sorry for him and the more he begins to think that he got a better deal than Arnold. However once we reach stanza six, things change quite dramatically and things really do begin to get interesting. The persona changes his mind about Arnold's decision to get married and begins to try and convince us that there is no real difference between the two men, and that Arnold is not 'less selfish than I', but in fact he is just as selfish, if not more so.
The argument that the persona bases this theory on, is that Arnold wanted to get married, he wasn't forced into it, he didn't sacrifice anything to get married. He wanted a wife and children and therefore marriage is the most selfish thing Arnold could have done because it is what HE WANTED TO DO. Arnold 'still did it for his own sake.'
The persona comes to the conclusion that there is no reason for him being called selfish, or more selfish than Arnold, because just as he avoided marriage for himself and his own reason, so did Arnold get married and start a family. 'So he and I are the same'.
Ultimately, I think that what Larkin is trying to say here, is that no matter how hard we try to be selfless, when it comes to life choices 99% of the time, we will be selfish and make a choice in terms of how we want our live to turn out. Even if you want to live it for someone else's benefit, its still what you want to do with it... it still selfish, and we can't help it.
This poem is very similar to Larkin's other poems in the fact that throughout the course of the poem, the persona's emotions and feelings change and eventually he has an epiphany at the end of the poem. He starts off with what seems almost like admiration for Arnold, the way he has made something of his life and how he has coped with marriage so well, however this soon changes, subtly in the third stanza where the persona almost sound sorry for Arnold, as if he got the short straw, the bad end of the stick. The final change in emotion at the end of the poem is really obvious, when he physically says: 'but wait, not do fast:'
The poem begins very suddenly, almost as if in answer to a question or a statement that had been said of him just before the poem started. You can just imagine someone turning round to the persona and telling him that he is really selfish and why couldn't he be more like Arnold (the other person in the poem), and then him turning round and almost shouting: 'Oh, no one can deny / That Arnold is less selfish than I', in response to the people.
The only thing that really changes in the first five stanzas is the tone of the persona's voice, as the more he describes Arnold's life, the more he feels sorry for him and the more he begins to think that he got a better deal than Arnold. However once we reach stanza six, things change quite dramatically and things really do begin to get interesting. The persona changes his mind about Arnold's decision to get married and begins to try and convince us that there is no real difference between the two men, and that Arnold is not 'less selfish than I', but in fact he is just as selfish, if not more so.
The argument that the persona bases this theory on, is that Arnold wanted to get married, he wasn't forced into it, he didn't sacrifice anything to get married. He wanted a wife and children and therefore marriage is the most selfish thing Arnold could have done because it is what HE WANTED TO DO. Arnold 'still did it for his own sake.'
The persona comes to the conclusion that there is no reason for him being called selfish, or more selfish than Arnold, because just as he avoided marriage for himself and his own reason, so did Arnold get married and start a family. 'So he and I are the same'.
Ultimately, I think that what Larkin is trying to say here, is that no matter how hard we try to be selfless, when it comes to life choices 99% of the time, we will be selfish and make a choice in terms of how we want our live to turn out. Even if you want to live it for someone else's benefit, its still what you want to do with it... it still selfish, and we can't help it.
Wednesday, 12 February 2014
TALKING IN BED (Poem) By Philip Larkin
Talking in bed isn't the love poem that you would initially expect it to be, it is a poem that; although it is about love and relationships, it is about the love and relationships between older people who have been married a long time. They are not newly weds, and they are not young people. This is a poem, more about enduring love rather than falling into it.
Right from the beginning, Larkin hints that this is not a poem about the younger generation. The attitude of the persona does not suggests the same enthusiasm and energy that you would expect in a young couple in a romantic relationship. In the second line of the first stanza, Larkin describes how the notion of the two people 'lying together there goes back so far'. This is the first concrete evidence for the 'older couple'.
In the second stanza, he talks about how inside the room there is nothing but silence, but the lack of communication isn't written as to make it appear awkward, which would suggest that these people do still love each other very much, but they have reached the stage where they see very little need to speak to each other, they all ready know each other too well. another idea is that this suggests that Talking in bed is a poem about falling out of love, ending something that was once passionate and alive. I don't think that this is the reason the couple are not talking. I think if this were the case, Larkin would have made this silence sound harsh and awkward. Also we have seen in many of Larkin's other poems, that silence is precious to him and he thinks highly of it.
It is interesting that before we are even half way through the poem, Larkin leads us out of the room with the couple and into the outside world, with the 'winds incomplete unrest' and the 'dark towns' that 'heap up on the horizon'. This contrast between sweet silence and 'incomplete unrest' shows us just how peaceful and beautiful the relationship is between the couple who are lying together, side by side in bed. Also when the persona describes how nothing outside cares for the people inside, this shows us that they are definitely happy together, because in their silent bedroom, they have something that the outside work lacks; care for one another.
Linking back to the idea of this being a poem about falling out of love, there is a small amount of evidence in the fourth stanza to support this. the persona describes 'It becomes still more difficult to find / words at once true and kind'. This could hint at a deteriorating relationship, but it could also merely be a case of them not being able to find anything to say that hasn't already been said. But it is the last two lines together that really makes the biggest and hardest suggestions about relationships.
'Words at once true and kind / or not untrue and not unkind'. At the beginning of a relationship it is really easy to find things to say that are both 100% true and 100% kind. You are just getting to know each other, and may not know the full story. Likelihood is that you'll know the majority of the other person's life story, but even husband and wife keep things from each other. I feel what Larkin is trying to say here, is that the older we get, the more we find our about are spouse and the harder it gets to find things that are both 100% true and kind. Its just never going to happen.
Right from the beginning, Larkin hints that this is not a poem about the younger generation. The attitude of the persona does not suggests the same enthusiasm and energy that you would expect in a young couple in a romantic relationship. In the second line of the first stanza, Larkin describes how the notion of the two people 'lying together there goes back so far'. This is the first concrete evidence for the 'older couple'.
In the second stanza, he talks about how inside the room there is nothing but silence, but the lack of communication isn't written as to make it appear awkward, which would suggest that these people do still love each other very much, but they have reached the stage where they see very little need to speak to each other, they all ready know each other too well. another idea is that this suggests that Talking in bed is a poem about falling out of love, ending something that was once passionate and alive. I don't think that this is the reason the couple are not talking. I think if this were the case, Larkin would have made this silence sound harsh and awkward. Also we have seen in many of Larkin's other poems, that silence is precious to him and he thinks highly of it.
It is interesting that before we are even half way through the poem, Larkin leads us out of the room with the couple and into the outside world, with the 'winds incomplete unrest' and the 'dark towns' that 'heap up on the horizon'. This contrast between sweet silence and 'incomplete unrest' shows us just how peaceful and beautiful the relationship is between the couple who are lying together, side by side in bed. Also when the persona describes how nothing outside cares for the people inside, this shows us that they are definitely happy together, because in their silent bedroom, they have something that the outside work lacks; care for one another.
Linking back to the idea of this being a poem about falling out of love, there is a small amount of evidence in the fourth stanza to support this. the persona describes 'It becomes still more difficult to find / words at once true and kind'. This could hint at a deteriorating relationship, but it could also merely be a case of them not being able to find anything to say that hasn't already been said. But it is the last two lines together that really makes the biggest and hardest suggestions about relationships.
'Words at once true and kind / or not untrue and not unkind'. At the beginning of a relationship it is really easy to find things to say that are both 100% true and 100% kind. You are just getting to know each other, and may not know the full story. Likelihood is that you'll know the majority of the other person's life story, but even husband and wife keep things from each other. I feel what Larkin is trying to say here, is that the older we get, the more we find our about are spouse and the harder it gets to find things that are both 100% true and kind. Its just never going to happen.
Thursday, 6 February 2014
AMBULANCES (Poem) By Philip Larkin
At first glance, Ambulances seems to be a poem very different to Larkin's other works, however once you get into the actual words of the poem and the meanings behind these words, it becomes quite clear that this poem follows the same themes and thoughts as most of Larkin's other poems. I also found this poem a little odd at first as the only people who really tend to talk about ambulances are young children. But of course, by now, we know that Larkin is one for talking about the taboo subjects and bringing up the tender topics of conversation.
Right from the opening phrase, 'closed like confessionals' we are being fed a different view of Ambulances and what their purpose is in our society. I think that this phrase really opens the poem well by stressing the importance of ambulances. The first parallel I made between ambulances and confessionals is that they both carry someone who is believed to be able to save you, in an ambulance, you find a paramedic who will try and offer physical salvation. They will try their hardest to save you from whatever ailment or injury you are suffering with, they will not stop until they are sure you are safe. Equally, in a confessional, you will find a priest, whom catholics believe can forgive you of your sins and offer you spiritual salvation. Both of these 'boxes' are places where life is tried to be saved and death, whether it be spiritual or physical, is push away and stopped before it claims the person seeking help.
I also really like the metaphor of the thread that Larkin uses to describe how the ambulance works. I think that this can be taken in two different ways. The first being that Larkin is referring to the idea of someone's life 'hanging by a thread'. The thought of being on the very edge of death and needing an ambulance to stop death from claiming you. This idea is also continued later on in the poem when he talks about the ties of life beginning to loosen, this idea fascinates me and I'll come onto that shortly. The second way that this 'thread' metaphor can be taken is much more positive and makes for an overall, more pleasant read of this dim poem. I think that the idea of the ambulance as it 'thread / loud noons of cities', is saying that slowly but surely, ambulances weave and 'thread' their way through the cities, stitching it back together and making things better for the people that live there. Sewing up to wounds in the towns and cities and fixing society. Personally, I like to think of the second one myself, however this is Larkin and this is one of his ambiguous thoughts that he leave to us to decide what we'll make of it.
Finally for the first stanza, the last line of the stanza is very real and I think what Larkin/Larkin's persona is trying to tell us is that as 'all streets in time are visited' by and ambulance, so do death come to us all, no matter how hard we try to avoid it.
After this first stanza, we move into the middle section of the poem which focuses of looking at the lives of the ordinary people in the city who are having to witness the ambulance and its works, and how they are reacting to this. The description of the 'children strewn on the steps or road' suggests that they have been affected by this as much as the patient. Once the ambulance drives away, they are thrown back into their everyday lives, trying not to remember the tram they have just witnessed. Even if it is somebody you do not know, seeing someone so ill they have to call for an ambulance is bound to leave an impression. The trauma of the incident is 'strewn' across the surrounding streets and the people with it.
Larkin talks about 'women coming from the shops' and this just reminds be of the natural instinct that humans have, we are drawn to drama. If something unusual or exciting happens, we want to be there and be a part of it. Naturally we want to see things for ourselves and not settle for a secondhand account of what happened. But then this liveliness of the people and the energy they show in wanting to see whats going on is juxtaposed with a 'wild white face'. White or pale faces are usually associated with people who are ill and/or have died. Is this the 'wild white face' of the person being treated, or is it the face/s of the people watching, being saddened and shocked by what they are seeing.
Someone I know suggested that 'the red stretcher-blankets' could represent the red carpet laid out for someone special. Almost like the ambulance is welcoming in each and every patient as a unique and special individual who needs tailored treatment, and in someways i feel that this welcomes us into the back of the ambulance with the patient. The last three stanzas of the poem are really quite ambiguous. They could be interpreted as a description of either the patient or the onlookers, however personally, I feel that at this point the narrative and the persona have travelled into the back of the ambulance with the paramedics and the patient and has moved onto the thoughts and the effect of what is happening to the patient themselves.
'A sense of the solving emptiness'. To solve something, is to find an answer to it. I think that here Larkin is revealing to us what death is. Its a solution, and answer to all of lives problems. For here onwards, death becomes a very clear and obvious thought in the persona's mind. Especially when Larkin writes; 'the unique random blend / Of families and fashions, there / At last begin to loosen'. This links into the point I made earlier about life hanging by a thread. When you get right to the point when your life hangs in the balance and you are inches from death, all that ties you to this life becomes of little values to you and those ties 'at last begin to loosen' you come to the point of realising that you have reached that 'sense of solving emptiness'. Family, friends, pets, memories, hobbies; none of that matters anymore because you have finally reached the ultimate answer to all of life's problems and sufferings: Death.
So as I said at the beginning, Ambulances seems a very different poem to what we are used to for Larkin, but once you get past the choice of topic, you can see that this is indeed a very deeply thoughtful and philosophical poem, just like all of his others.
Monday, 3 February 2014
DOCKERY AND SON (poem) by Philip Larkin
Dockery and Son, is one of Phillip Larkin's poems which focuses on the idea of having children and it also shares many of the themes that appear in Self's the Man. In this poem, Larkin's persona discusses whether or not children are a good thing or not and whether they are beneficial to a man's image.
Initially, the first stanza, Larkin leads you to believe that the poem is just about reminiscing about his (or his persona's) time at Oxford University and the friends he made while he was there. And throughout the first stanza, this is mainly what he his doing. He has returned to Oxford and is talking to the Dean, who mentions that the son of one of his old university friends is now studying at the university and this gets him thinking about the choices he made or didn't make throughout his life leading unto this point. There is little more to say about this stanza.
Stanza two is where things really start to get interesting. He catches his train, 'ignored' and then begins to think about what the dean had said about Dockery's son being at the university and he also begins to have thoughts about his own choice to not have children. "Did he get his son // at nineteen, twenty?" suggests to us that he is shocked that his friend had a child so young and it also gives us the idea that maybe the persona did know his friend as well as he thought he did. The notion that Dockery had his son so young tells us quite clearly that this is what he wanted from the start. You would have to be certain that you definitely wanted children to make the conscious choice to have kids so early on in life. At this point in the poem, it is clear that Larkin is beginning to emphasis the importance of life choice and how important it is to take them seriously.
I really like the way that he describes life choices 'like sand-clouds, thick and close'. It really does do justice to the way that these choices seem to be around us. Before you get to them, you can see really clearly what the choice is and when you're going to make it, and sometimes you can even see if there's going to be a better way around it, like you can see a sand cloud from miles and miles away in the distance. However once you are inside a sand cloud, it is difficult to get any clarity of how to get out, how big the situation is or what that answer will be. It can be confusing and difficult to know what to do, also sand-clouds always seem off in the distance until you are inside one. Equally, life choice are always a lot closer than you think that are. This links into the epiphany that Larkin has towards the end of the poem. He seems to come to the realization that if you're not careful, life will just pass by you and 'whether or not we use it, it goes'. What Larkin is say here, is that even if we don't consciously make a life choice at all, time and life isn't going to wait around for us to catch up. Life keeps on going whether we like it or not, coming ultimately to 'the end of age' which we know is a euphemism for death.
I believe that very little of this poem is about Dockery and his son, but more about the epiphany that this man and his son unknowingly ignite within Larkin's poetic persona.
Initially, the first stanza, Larkin leads you to believe that the poem is just about reminiscing about his (or his persona's) time at Oxford University and the friends he made while he was there. And throughout the first stanza, this is mainly what he his doing. He has returned to Oxford and is talking to the Dean, who mentions that the son of one of his old university friends is now studying at the university and this gets him thinking about the choices he made or didn't make throughout his life leading unto this point. There is little more to say about this stanza.
Stanza two is where things really start to get interesting. He catches his train, 'ignored' and then begins to think about what the dean had said about Dockery's son being at the university and he also begins to have thoughts about his own choice to not have children. "Did he get his son // at nineteen, twenty?" suggests to us that he is shocked that his friend had a child so young and it also gives us the idea that maybe the persona did know his friend as well as he thought he did. The notion that Dockery had his son so young tells us quite clearly that this is what he wanted from the start. You would have to be certain that you definitely wanted children to make the conscious choice to have kids so early on in life. At this point in the poem, it is clear that Larkin is beginning to emphasis the importance of life choice and how important it is to take them seriously.
I really like the way that he describes life choices 'like sand-clouds, thick and close'. It really does do justice to the way that these choices seem to be around us. Before you get to them, you can see really clearly what the choice is and when you're going to make it, and sometimes you can even see if there's going to be a better way around it, like you can see a sand cloud from miles and miles away in the distance. However once you are inside a sand cloud, it is difficult to get any clarity of how to get out, how big the situation is or what that answer will be. It can be confusing and difficult to know what to do, also sand-clouds always seem off in the distance until you are inside one. Equally, life choice are always a lot closer than you think that are. This links into the epiphany that Larkin has towards the end of the poem. He seems to come to the realization that if you're not careful, life will just pass by you and 'whether or not we use it, it goes'. What Larkin is say here, is that even if we don't consciously make a life choice at all, time and life isn't going to wait around for us to catch up. Life keeps on going whether we like it or not, coming ultimately to 'the end of age' which we know is a euphemism for death.
I believe that very little of this poem is about Dockery and his son, but more about the epiphany that this man and his son unknowingly ignite within Larkin's poetic persona.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)