Poetry and Poetics–Lit 204

Countee Cullen’s “Yet Do I Marvel” utilizes a unique sonnet structure to juxtapose God’s omnipotence and supposed good nature with the flawed state of the world. The first eight lines resemble a shakespearean sonnet, but the final six lines have an EEFFGG rhyme scheme, unlike either a shakespearean or petrarchan sonnet. Within this structure, I read the turn to occur between the 12th and 13th lines–similar to a shakespearean sonnet–where Cullen transitions from describing God’s neglect, “awful brain” and “awful hand” to questioning his own existence as a black poet in the poem’s final couplet (12). 

I found the first few lines of the poem especially intriguing, as they humanize god in a very interesting way. Cullen clearly views god as an all-powerful being worth worshiping, yet still feels the need to advocate for him as if he is misguided, ensuring the reader that he doesn’t doubt that god is “good, well-meaning” and “kind”, before laying out his thoughts and criticisms (1). It’s strange to imagine that God–as Cullen describes him to be–would fail to “stoop to quibble” about the problems with the world he himself created, and it’s clear that Cullen is wrestling with this idea himself throughout this poem (2). 

Another quality of this poem that I noted was that its intended audience is very versatile and broad. It simultaneously acts as a criticism of society and of those who were unreceptive to black poets and as a thought provoking piece about God and his influence.

Gerard Hopkins’ God’s Grandeur presents a Petrarchan sonnet that makes various assertions about god’s power and humanity. The first lines of both the poem’s octave and sestet contain alliteration that helps emphasize figurative language and imagery pertaining to god (of god himself in the octave and nature in the sestet) that paint him as powerful and all-knowing, unsurprisingly given the title. In between these sections, the poem disparages the actions of man and their unwillingness to “reck his rod”, suggesting that “all is seared with trade; bleared, smeared with toil; / And wears man’s smudge and shares man’s smell” (4-7). 

These elements to me form the central conceit of the poem–between the idea that god is all-powerful and should be obeyed, and the fact that with humanity he created something being presented as terrible and destroying the world. This contrast reminds me of our discussion on Ozymandias, in that god–in my interpretation–doesn’t have true control over humanity, he is only capable of creating them. This notion closely parallels the idea of Ozymandias’ legacy being out of his control and the themes that the poem presents. I also found that the way the poem deviates from Petrarchan sonnet’s typical rhyme scheme of iambic pentameter in various lines serves to support the idea of chaos and lack of control.

William Blake’s Introductory lyric to his collection “Songs of Innocence” presents a simple and sweet anecdote about divine guidance towards meaning. This poem consists of five quatrains, the first and fourth having an ABAB rhyme scheme and the remaining three an ABCB rhyme scheme. Blake embeds religious themes in this poem, most notably in the first and second stanzas, where the speaker describes being spoken too by a child in the clouds: “On a cloud I saw a child, / And he laughing said to me: / ‘Pipe a song about a Lamb:” (3-5). The religious nature of this encounter is bolstered by the mention of a lamb by the child, and emphasis is placed upon it by its capitalization. In the middle three stanzas of the poem, the speaker is instructed not only to “‘Pipe a song about a Lamb’” (5) but also to “Drop thy pipe thy happy pipe / Sing thy songs of happy chear” (9-10) and eventually told “‘Piper sit thee down and write / In a book that all may read–’” (13-14).

At first the child is trying to get the speaker to use their pipe, which makes sense as they are clearly a piper from context: “Piping down the valleys wild / Piping songs of pleasant glee” (1-2). However in the following lines the child encourages the speaker to abandon the pipe and instead to sing and write, which I found was a clever way of developing a theme. My interpretation was that the poem suggests that it is easy to misunderstand one’s gifts and in doing so miss out their potential. The piper/speaker wasn’t doing anything wrong by piping in the valleys, but by writing down their songs and singing them, they enabled more children to share in their gift. I think it’s also important to note that the child doesn’t force the speaker to do anything. The piper had no obligation to abide by the words of the child, but their openness and selflessness enabled them to recognize their chance to do more than they currently were. This notion of taking charge of one’s own role in the world is applicable far beyond a religious context which makes the message of the poem that much more valuable to those who don’t want to look to the heavens for guidance.

The first Shakespearean sonnet undoubtedly seems to have been written knowing its place in the collection, aptly serving as a tone-setter and thoughtful, poignant hook to readers via its direct diction and through my interpretation, the call to action it creates. I found that the way this poem is written especially implores the reader to examine Shakespeare’s ideas in relation to their own life. Although poems often have this sort of effect inherently, I thought the contrasting usage of the words ‘we’ in the first line and ones like ‘thou’, ‘thy’, and ‘thine’ in the second quatrain very deliberately and effectively created a sense that the subject is acting in a way which opposes some norm or the way in which ‘we’ are supposed to behave. The first quatrain is straightforward and unassuming, merely Shakespeare’s perspective on the flow of life and the way things are, but the second makes direct and pointed claims about an individual. 

The aforementioned sense of opposition is bolstered by the juxtaposing lines in the second quatrain, which are simultaneously critical and complimentary. Shakespeare insinuates that the person to which he is referring has merit and purity, saying that they have ‘bright eyes’ (5) and that they are too cruel to their ‘sweet self’ (8). However, he also seems to claim that they are self-absorbed and misguided, saying that they are ‘contracted to thine own bright eyes’ (5), and that they are ‘making a famine where abundance lies’ (7). These layered, contrasting lines to me seem to be intended to spark curiosity and introspection in the person to which ‘thou’ refers or the reader. Despite reading as very deliberate and direct, these lines contain plenty of ambiguity, ambiguity which in my analysis is addressed in the final quatrain.

Shakespeare meanders through the first two quatrains of this sonnet, poking and prodding as a means to provoke curiosity, but in the final quatrain he attains some specificity and provides more concrete ideas to the reader. The first two lines assign significance and purity to ‘thou’, saying that “thou that art now the world’s fresh ornament and only herald to the gaudy spring” (9-10). These lines are especially striking as they begin the third quatrain and proceed those in the second which as previously mentioned had a much different tone, but the third line in this quatrain stood out to me especially: “within thine own bud buriest thy content” (11). I took this to mean that we have inherent value and the ability to live meaningfully simply by being and recognizing our place in the world and the flow of life. In tandem with the second quatrain, Shakespeare–from my perspective–implies the danger of self-absorption and encourages one to recognize their purity and significance. This idea is corroborated by the concluding couplet, which opens with the line: “pity the world, or else this glutton be” (13), which to me outlined a very real inferiority we all have to the ways of the world, and encouraged us to live as Shakespeare suggests for fear of a consequence.