Hello all,
I haven’t been able to post often lately due to the increased workload of year 13. For this week’s post, I’m posting my first English essay for poems of the decade with additions within brackets.
Guilt is the natural punishment inflicted upon individuals for their transgressions – a view supported by both Giuseppe and the Lammas Hireling. These poems diverge for in the Lammas Hireling, the speaker’s guilt stems from his destruction of the hireling – a symbol for nature itself – in his attempt to impose control over him. Giuseppe, however, is haunted by his role in the murder of the ‘last captive mermaid’ which Ford uses as a symbol for the persecution of the marginalised. Here, the Jewish in WW2. Both poems express guilt as a tormenting force expressed by the mind, subjection to which causes sufferers to seek absolution from others. Guilt is equally the inability to admit the truth of our transgressions. Both poets warn that an inability to admit to the reality will only sink the guilty further into a moral pit of anxiety and remorse.
The punishment of sin as the mental suffering of guilt as reflected by both poets in aphoristic statements that bely the immorality of the speaker’s actions. In Lammas Hireling, the speaker is ‘disturbed by images of his dead wife,’ perhaps a punishment or symptomatic of the haunting guilt in the death of his wife. The alliterative (d) is suggestive of the restlessness inflicted upon his ‘disturbed’ sleep. Upon the death of the hireling, the speaker appears wholly consumed by the death of his wife in the cyclical juxtaposition of ‘I don’t dream,’ and he becomes aware of the guilt [Link back to the cyclical structure of guilt that his initial denial of potential crime in his wife death and the punishing guilt therefore will only worsen – punishment as main argument.] that no longer sits on the subconscious but overwhelms him. In a similar manner, the singular simile, ‘she screamed like a woman in terrible fear,’ breaks the consistency of the rawness of the poem but expresses a tormenting image of humanity, in ‘like a woman.’ Ford questions, here, in the massacre of the mermaid, who is evidently capable of fear, the pain inflicted upon such individuals for the collective or ‘soldiers,’ of Giuseppe. The persons who make such choices must suffer the guilt of having disregarded another’s humanity. This is the cyclical cycle of guilt from which humanity suffers. Aphorisms, to both poets, disguise the cruelty of one’s actions in common phrases. The action of murder in Lammas Hireling is counterpointed: ‘To go into the hare gets you muckle sorrow. The wisdom runs, take muckle care.’ This ‘wisdom’ places the burden of ‘care’ unto the hireling that serves to suppress the speaker’s mental guilt. We find in reading the Lammas Hireling that the root of sin’s punishment is in the individual themselves and the torment inflicted upon them, and the subconscious cycle of seeking denial [Significance in relation to the main argument should be referenced. Duhig ends his poem on the note that denial can not end guilt, but only worsen it. This punishment can only grow with time] breeds only further suffering. Giuseppe, although part of a collective that must all suffer the lasting effects of an atrocity that indicts an entire community, must struggle with the burden of guilt alone. The aphorism, ‘starvation forgives men many things,’ is subtly exclusive of Giuseppe himself for ‘starvation,’ cannot absolve him. Giuseppe remains undeniably aware of his sin against the mermaid, and then ‘God.’ [Link to main argument]
Both poets find that guilt causes the guilty to seek absolution to soothe guilt’s burden. In Lammas Hireling, the resolution to guilt appears to be found in God or the ‘father,’ as a religious emissary. Duhig, here, alludes to the Catholic tradition of confession: ‘bless me father for I have sinned,’ that situates the reader in Catholicism to discern the truth in the poem. The speaker’s obsession with his own sinfulness becomes evident in ‘hourly’ confessions as the sibilant whispers of a guilty conscience. However, the religious imagery of Giuseppe suggests the influence of God is nullified for a ‘priest’ hold the hands of the mermaid, whilst her ‘throat was cut.’ Giuseppe exposes a similar flaw in seeking religious absolution as Duhig’s Lammas Hireling in the guilt of sin having sufficient hold in the hearts of men which cannot be alleviated even by God. The ‘yellow witness,’ of the moon asserts a feminine judgement [Expand on this feminine judgement. Significance of having killed his wife and Hireling, associated with mother nature. Here, guilt is a punishment from a female perspective.] over the farmer’s violence – an observing deity. Giuseppe finds absolution in relaying his story, but in this action, he passes the burden of guilt that will permanently transmute their relationship, losing the connection of ‘uncle’ and nephew. Although Giuseppe cannot look [his nephew] in the eye,’ his guilt is ultimately relieving for his guilt also demonstrates that Giuseppe has retained some humanity and integrity for which he ‘thanks God.’ The frame narrative draws also the reader into making a moral judgement if only for the purpose of understanding the chaotic reality. However, the ease of such judgements is undermined in recognition of the external forces that starve men of their own morality [Link back to historical collective responsibility. Can we condemn our predecessors without recognising that such atrocities occur as a collective? We cannot condemn only Giuseppe.]
In both poems, guilt becomes a distortion of the reality as a method of coping with the burden of sin. Such ambiguity is noted in Lammas Hireling, enmeshing the truth of his transgression with references to folklore and the supernatural. The ease expressed in disposing of the hireling, ‘dropped him from the bridge. There was no splash,’ contrasts with his engulfing guilt. Ironically, the caesura of ‘no splash,’ whilst perhaps a method of the speaking convincing himself of the hireling as an evil supernatural entity, also emphasises the sound of the ‘splash,’ only making it louder [Therefore? It casts doubt on the hireling as a supernatural being, but of human form. The speaker must shadow his account with ambiguities]. Giuseppe sees equal ambiguity as the speaker attempts to exclude himself from the actions of the community, but he is undeniably involved. The participants of the ‘doctor,’ ‘fishmonger,’ and ‘priest,’ are all defined by their roles, but Giuseppe evades categorising himself. Only at the end of the poem does the nephew formally indict him of his role as the ‘aquarium keeper,’ but the extent of his guilt remains ambiguous. Even in the magical realism of Giuseppe, we note the symbol of the mermaid sanitises the brutality of the acts committed in history. We must, in reading Giuseppe, acknowledge the atrocities committed by preceding generations to put an end to the cycle of violence and tormenting guilt [Cautionary intent for future generations to not discard the marginalised for the collective, coming at a similar cost of coming guilt]. The punishment for refusing such admission is evident in Duhig’s Lammas Hireling. The speaker spends his nights, ‘casting ball from half-crowns,’ caught in a perpetual present of repeating behaviour. This may be interpreted as a lack of remorse in only regretting the loss of fortune born by the hireling. Equally, by not confessing the truth, he may never be absolved by Catholic tradition. [Unreliable narrator? We cannot rely on this account, underscore the distortion of reality to evade punishment]
The poets of both poems explore the enduring effects of guilt in similar methods, despite differing in resolution. Whilst Ford expresses genuine regret and remorse in Giuseppe, the speaker of Lammas Hireling is also struck by paranoia and fear to which end, the reader must infer if they are truly repentant. Reading these poems, we must acknowledge the wrongdoing of previous generations. In Giuseppe, we recognise perhaps the impossible conditions of war that strip man of moral choice. To Lammas Hireling, we may try to discern truth from lie, but must also recognise that only the speaker can truly relieve himself of guilt or he will be perpetually tormented, not by any physical being but by his mind’s own affliction.
It’s always a good exercise to review past essays for improvement. The above essay was marked as 23/30 and required a more coherent structure for better reading. Learning how to analyse language in tandem with structural analysis was something I’d yet learnt how to do at this point.
WymCol English Blog 