I was drawn into Keat's description of the serpent-lady. I expected something grotesque, but along with the writing style, the serpent-lady was painted in such a way that I could only describe it as beautiful.
"Eyed like a peacock, and all crimson barr’d; | 50 |
And full of silver moons, that, as she breathed, |
|
Dissolv’d, or brighter shone, or interwreathed |
|
Their lustres with the gloomier tapestries— |
|
So rainbow-sided, touch’d with miseries," |
The similes simply flow from one to another using words that exhibit color, "eyes like a peacock...full of silver moons...dissolv'd, or brighter shone..." This all drew me in and enticed me even though she was but a demon.
"Her throat was serpent, but the words she spake |
|
Came, as through bubbling honey, for Love’s sake, | 65 |
And thus; while Hermes on his pinions lay, |
|
Like a stoop’d falcon ere he takes his prey." |
Even after he reveals her anatomy, her words that "came, as through bubbling honey" creates a film over her true identity, making her seem even more lovely than she is intended to be. Perhaps this is done in an effort to draw his own audience in to realize that even the perceived notion of something that is unpleasant could be beautiful.
I agree. From Keats' description, she seems more sad and beautiful than monstrous. The poet is trying to tell his audience that she is good in spite of she is.
ReplyDeleteI like your thought at the end, ”that even the perceived notion of something that is unpleasant could be beautiful”. We talked a lot in class about the reader not knowing if Lamia is evil or good or both. I think this concept of something unpleasant also being beautiful is crucial to understanding Lamia herself. Just because something is beautiful does not mean it is good, and vice versa. I think the two cannot be necessarily thought of separately. This is the same for evil and good. There can be beauty in evil just as easily as good. The reader must be able to understand there is room for both to understand Lamia.
ReplyDelete