Questions for "Ode to a Nightingale"

Below you will find the questions I posed in class today for the group work on Keats' "Ode to a Nightingale." If you are assigned to post for this week, you can use the group discussion as a jumping off point for your post. If we get posts from each group, this week's blog post will amount to an eco-critical reading of the whole poem. (If no one in your group was assigned to post this week, I will give extra credit to anyone who posts.) You can also apply the "big picture" questions to Keats' "To Autumn" or Shelley's "Ode to the West Wind."

The big questions:

How does the poem suggest we understand the relationship between human beings and the natural world? What does external nature help us understand about the conditions of our existence, and more specifically, our mortality? How and why does nature provoke this realization?

You can approach this question by analyzing individual stanzas of "Ode to a Nightingale": 

1. What relationship does Keats posit between the bird and the poet in this section of the poem? (be specific: which words are important? Why?)

2. Does Keats feel connected to or divided from the bird? Why?

3. What does the poet want from the bird or see in the bird in this stanza? What does it make him long for, imagine, or realize? 

Why French?

I find it interesting that Keats's poem "La Belle Dame sans Merci" is an English poem, yet the title is in French. Instead of making the title be "The Beautiful Woman without Pity" he decides to use the title from Alain Chartier's poem, "La Belle Dame sans Merci."  It's an allusion to Chartier's work. His poem features elements of  medieval romance such as knights, fairies, fair ladies and so on. Instantly by reading the title, as a reader we are aware that this poem will include at least some of these medieval romantic characteristics. Not only is Keats calling up these chivalric notions, he is also making it apparent that the knight is going to die. This may suggest that the chivalric ways are dead or dying out.

Side note, but did anyone else think that it was funny that Keats's brother, George had a wife named Georgiana?

Therefore It Is

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.

Religion in Christabel

There are small hints throughout the poem leading the reader to believe Geraldine is an evil creature because she constantly deflects any prayer or thanks given to religious figures. For example "[Christabel] 'Praise we the Virgin all Divine,/Who hath rescued thee from thy distress!'/'Alas, alas!' said Geraldine,/ 'I cannot speak for weariness" (halfway through part 1). Geraldine holds conversation with Christabel throughout their encounter and her rescue, however anytime a religious figure is made known by Christabel, Geraldine makes an excuse as to why she will not join in praise or prayer. This may be because (as we discussed in class) the lamia is a Greek mythology creature, not a creature created by the Christian God. However, it could also be a message of warning. Geraldine may be the embodiment of the French Revolution- a passionate, and beautiful idea of bringing power to the people; however, a ruthless and utterly disguising the process is below the surface, far from that of Christian ideas of love. Geraldine masks the good intention and trustfulness of Christabel (who can be viewed as England)  with the passions she is capable of stirring within the powerful figures of Christabel's life, perhaps making the story a warning to the people to keep morals above passions.

The Innocent and The Temptress

Cristabel is initially described as a helpless, innocent, girl who needs a man's protection and guidance.  There is no such pretence in Lamia.  She is automatically described as the seductress that even Nymphs and Satyrs cannot resist.  Hermes swears his allegiance to her and is bound to her.  She and Geraldine are in a way sisters.  They both have an unnatural and supernatural command over men. I think Lamia's power is greater than Geraldine's because mythical creatures and Gods are held to a higher standard than a mere mortal. The fact that Lamia can bewitch them so easily is proof of her greater power.

Lamia archetype in Coleridge and Keats

In Keats' "Lamia" references to ancient Greek mythology/theology is used frequently such as with " She was a gordian shape of dazzling hue"(50) which compares Lamia to the gordian knot which is snakelike in various ways. On the one hand, the gordian knot is a trick and feeds the Lamia archetype as deceptive and seductive; also, the physical shape of the gordian is snakelike. A similar approach is used in Coleridge's "Christabel" which also describes Cristabel as the snake both physically and metaphorically. In Keats' "Lamia", Lamia is trying to avoid Lycius by transforming into the snake whcih seems to vindicate that Lamia is not a sinister character and that Lycius is at fault and is responsible for entering into a world of sin. It presents sort of a paradox, the capacity Lamia possesses over man and thus the Lamia archetype is materialized in the man's own lust and inability to forbear impulses. Overall, it appears that Keats is more sympathetic to the Lamia.

Difference in Lamia

-->

Keats Lamia is described as something beautiful that has turned into something dark, sinister and miserable, but still holds a bit of the former beauty. Like line 55 and 56 where is says she seemed “some penanced lady elf, some demon’s mistress”. This is different from Geraldine because Geraldine has two looks. She can look like a damsel or the serpent. There is no in between. She had shrunken serpent’s eyes when not the damsel, that were dull and full of malice and dread. Keats description of Lamia makes me feel sad about the tragic beauty the being has that makes them so good at tricking their targets. While Coleridge’s description of the serpent woman make me feel distrustful of her and wary. Something about her seems off and the hissing does not help. What stands out about the descriptions is the different feel you get from reading them. They impress upon me different warnings, Keats dangerous beauty while Coleridge trickery and  not always believing what you see and hear.

Known and Unknown Monsters

When we are introduced to Lamia she is described as a serpentine monster with some redeeming human features. Only after receiving aid from Hermes does Lamia become a beautiful woman. Geraldine seems to be normal throughout “Christabel,” aside from several hints: needing help over the threshold in line 131, the growling dog in line 148, and the mark on her chest in line 252. Yet even though Lamia is the more physically monstrous, Geraldine strikes me as more evil. Lamia is motivated by her desire to be with Lycius. Geraldine is never given any motivation but the reader is still led to believe she has some ill intention. The mystery surrounding Geraldine makes her appear sinister. In reality there is not much to indicate that Geraldine is evil but Coleridge sets the reader up to believe that she is. Keats describes a monster but gives her motivation that is somewhat innocent. Geraldine, to me, is more frightening than Lamia because she is entirely mysterious.

Lamia and Geraldine and Their Differences

In literature, snakes tend to symbolize evil, deceit and even temptation and when combined with a female, it becomes unnatural, making it apart of the Gothic ways. It provokes a pleasurable fear derived from the woman's beauty and the snakes terrifying nature. In "Christabel," Coleridge presents Geraldine as a supernatural woman possessing qualities likes a snake. Keats use's Coleridge's idea of the snake woman in "Lamia." However, both authors present these women differently. Coleridge depicts Geraldine as evil. There are many instances in the poem that establish that Geraldine is not good. When the women walk past the dog, it growls, showing a sign that something is not right. Later Geraldine damages the relationship Christabel and her father have. Coleridge applies the idea that Geraldine is pleasurably terrifying and is made to be only evil and full of deceit. Keats on the other hand represents Lamia as something a little different. Though in the description of Lamia appears to look and be evil, from within ,she wishes to escape from her snake like form. Keats paints an entirely different picture, making Liam a sympathetic creature who isn't completely evil like Geraldine.  

Suggested horror vs. the horror in the details.

I found the differences between the two transformation scenes quite interesting. In Christabel, Coleridge does not describe what is under Geraldine’s robe. Lines 252-254 say, “Behold! Her bosom, and half her side – A sight to dream of, not to tell! O shield her! shield sweet Christabel.” It is as if the horror underneath those robes is too much to bear for Christabel, so the reader is put into that same position of turning away from it. Coleridge leaves it to the reader to imagine what horrifying things are under that robe. 

In contrast, Keats description of Lamia is very detailed with multiple colors, stripes, spots and peacock eyes. For this reason, Lamia doesn’t come across as scary as Geraldine does. With Geraldine, there is a fear of the unknown, but with Lamia, especially with the description of lines 47-67, there is no fear because you are too busy trying to imagine what this creature with a snake’s head, but a woman’s mouth looks like. There is more revulsion than fear. 

That continues when you get to witness the transformation of Lamia in lines 146-170. You would think the transformation of a serpent-like creature into a woman would be a magical experience, but Keats is very specific about what goes on. It’s almost like a chemical reaction with the way she foams at the mouth and the release of phosphorus and sparks. Keats uses volcanic imagery so there is this feeling of burning away her old form to create the new one. Before this, Lamia seems a bit devious because of the way she bargains with Hermes to get herself turned into a woman, but I found myself more sympathetic towards her after this description of her painful transformation.

Lamia and Geraldine: Damsels in Distress

I thought it was interesting while reading the two poems to compare Lamia and Geraldine in terms of their relationships with hero-like figures.  Hermes and Christabel have interactions with Lamia/Geraldine that are similar in some ways.

Lamia is trapped as a serpent (which in Greek culture is pretty low on the animal totem pole), and Hermes removes the illusion.  Through the retelling of her story, Geraldine is 'trapped' as a damsel in distress, but by having Christabel hear her story, the reader realizes that this is an illusion to.  The story is not sound.  "Five warriors" took her, yes...but where are they?  What was a plausible purpose for their leaving, and more importantly, what is her purpose for staying?  There is something Geraldine is not willing to tell Christabel.  Geraldine's flawed story suggests the absence of an important detail, or at the very least, that Geradline is not what she seems (which is reinforced later on with the "bad omens" upon Geraldine's arrival).

There are some other slight differences here.  Hermes only helps Lamia after she helps him by giving him his water nymph.  Geraldine, on the other hand, does not really give Christabel anything of value, except maybe the opportunity to feel like a moral person by helping her.  Whereas Hermes helps Lamia as a reward for her actions, Christabel takes in Geraldine as an act of kindness.

Lamia is portrayed in more of a submissive role.  She immediately wants Lycius and ultimately does not get him; she's punished towards the end of the poem.  It is a male figure that gives her her human form (Hermes) and a male figure that ruins her (Apollonius).  She has a very reactionary existence.

Gerladine is more conniving.  She holds more cards than Christabel (or the reader) is aware of.  Both characters play the part of a damsel in distress, but while Lamia goes along with whatever happens to her, Geraldine seems to have an ulterior motive, something that the reader can only approximate since the poem itself was never completed.

Lamia and Geraldine

I found it odd how Geraldine was described as being a "perfect" woman and decided to look up the mythology of Lamia and found out that Lamia was a mistress of Zeus and made to either kill/consume her children by Hera. The mark of snake skin on her body a way of reminding Lamia of her sin of adultery. The fact that Geraldine is a Lamia figure and her interest in Christabel makes me wonder about whether or not Geraldine was getting friendly in order to eat her and satisfy her savage instincts. This idea is that Christabel and Geraldine are doppelgangers and why Geraldine is suppoused to represent everything that women are suppoused to strive to be her vicious behavior in her sensuality and how she seems to use that in the second act recasts her as something to be reviled and disgusted with.

Difference in Descriptions

Keats describes Lamia with contradictions. She is not just one color but variations of colors. She has characteristics of a zebra but also that of a leopard. The moons are dissolv’d or shine bright. In line 53 lustres contradicts the connotation given in the word gloomier. In lines 55 and 56 she is a lady elf, as wells as a demon’s mistress or a demon’s self. Keats description prepares for the idea that Lamia is not what she seems and although she appears in a certain state and manner it is a deception. The description makes the reader wary of this deception. Coleridge, however, describes Geraldine in correlating terms. She is a damsel bright in white silken robes. She is stately and glitters with gems in her hair. Geraldine is surprising because of her exceeding beauty. In lines 146-170 Lamia is somewhat exposed. She is described in negative words that bring about the typical image of a serpent. The mixed colors and animal images from before are replaced here with the picture of pain scarlet, yellow, and hot. 

Coleridge, De Quincey, and Opium Presentation Info

Cooke, Michael G. “De Quincey, Coleridge, and the Formal Uses of Intoxication.” Yale French Studies 50 (1974) : 26-40. Print.

De Quincey, Thomas. Coleridge and Opium-eating ; and Other Writings. Endinburgh: A. and C. Black, 1885. Print.

Hayter, Alethea. Opium and the Romantic Imagination. Berkeley: University of California, 1968. Print.

Blog post about Xanadu

Coleridge's Pains of Sleep

Fears and Regrets

In John Keats' poem "When I have fears...", he discusses two things that make him stick out in our hearts, and connect on a different level with him; he discusses fear and regret. We all have some fear or fears, and he isn't too afraid to admit that he is afraid: he is afraid of death, of dying at such a young age, and he is afraid of missing opportunities. The opportunities he has already missed make him regret that he never pursued them. How many people can say "I have no regret?", and truly, madly, mean it? There are next to none who can. I personally cannot say that. But what was Keats really trying to tell us, underneath all of this fear and anguish and regret from this poem? Maybe he was telling us exactly what could happen, if you just stop being afraid, and take the leap of faith. Or maybe he's trying to warn us NOT to take that leap, because it could lead to regret and remorse.

Keats, Confessional Literature, Lyric Poetry, Reputation Presentation

John Keats

• Born in London on the 31st of October, 1975
• Educated at John Clarke's school in Einfield, which had both a more liberal outlook and a more modern curriculum compared to schools like Eton and Harrow
• Was interested in History and the Classics as a student, which would greatly influence his poetry
• After studying to become a doctor and receiving his apothecary license, which meant he could practice as a surgeon or a physician, Keats decided he wanted to become a poet

Confessional Literature

• Keats approached the relations among experience, imagination, art, and illusion with penetrating thoughtfulness, with neither sentimentality nor cynicism but with a delight in the ways in which beauty, in its own subtle and often surprising ways, reveals the truth.
• His art’s very form seems to embody and interpret the conflicts of mortality and desire.
• The urgency of this poetry has always appeared greater to his readers for his intense love of beauty and his tragically short life.
• "When I Have Fears" is a very personal confession of an emotion that intruded itself into the fabric of Keats' existence from at least 1816 on, the fear of an early death. In the poem, the existence of this fear annihilates both the poet's fame, which Keats ardently longed for, and the love that is so important in his poetry and in his life.

Lyric Poetry

• Romantic lyric poetry consists of 1^st person accounts of the thoughts and feelings of a specific moment
• Feelings are extreme, but personal
• Dissatisfied with the pressure of most lyric forms toward quick, neat solution, Keat’s new ode form satisfied him because it was sufficiently confining to challenge his conscience as a craftsman.
• In a letter to his brother Keats explained his new ode form: "I have been endeavoring to discover a better Sonnet stanza than we have. The legitimate does not suit the language well, from the pouncing rhymes; the other appears too elegaic [songlike, tuneful], and the couplet at the end of it has seldom a pleasing effect. I do not pretend to have succeeded. It will explain itself.”

Periodical Review

• In an 1817 article, John Wilson Croker attacked John Keats in a review of his work for his association with Leigh Hunt and the so-called "Cockney School" of poetry.
• Keats, for example, was accused of "low diction" for rhyming "thorns/fawns" in "Sleep and Poetry" and other rhymes which suggested a working class speech.
• One of the things that Keats is now most celebrated for is his use of language, particularly the sensuality of it. Most important to the poem is its concentration on imagery and allusion in its evocation of nature. The liveliness of the words he uses only enhance the feelings behind his poem. In “To Autumn” he uses sensual language to describe a scene of a lively autumn, using words that are full of the senses, such as touch, sight, and sound. In the first stanza he uses words such as “load”, “fill”, “ripeness”, “swell”, “plump”, ”sweet”, “budding”, which all aid in Keats description of the beauty in nature at the perfect end of a summer and the beginning of autumn, right before everything begins to rot, and eventually, die. Surprisingly, contemporary reviews considered Keats’ word choice to reflect his low class speech.
• John Gibson Lockhart wrote in Blackwoods Magazine that Keats was a member of “The Cockney School of Poetry” (Lockhart 519), a dismissive term to describe Keats and some of his contemporary poets who did not attend Eton or Oxford or Cambridge and were not from upper class backgrounds. The comment was dismissive in both a political and a literary sense, aimed at working class young writers deemed unworthy of the title of “poet” for their non-formal rhyming.
  The term, Cockney School of Poetry, was both a dismissive take of their aesthetics and an attack on their upbringing. Reviewers thought that there was no room for these poets among the greats of the era, especially considering the political revolutionary tone to many of Keats’s contemporaries.
• Contemporary critics immediately understood, and condemned, his radical associations, the political, reformist agenda and the democratic ideology of the cultural and class background of the authors being introduced as a mechanism of reform.

• Percy Shelley was accused of being similarly offensive politically, but the reviewers excused him for his genius (and, of course, his high birth).

 Reputation

• While largely criticized, with Lockhart going as far as to call Keats’s poetry “imperturbable driveling idiocy” (Lockhart 519)  Keats’s ability and talent was widely acknowledged and admired by several influential contemporaries such as Shelley and Hunt. They praised him for his quick thinking and his style; both beautiful and lively in it’s sensualities. When Keats died, Shelley proclaimed that his death had occurred because of bad reviews in the Quarterly Review. Shelley wrote about Keats’ death, referring to him as “the loveliest and the last, The bloom, whose petals nipped before they blew
Died on the promise of the fruit.” Keats’s sensual language, fanciful ideas, and simple rhyme scheme were some of the biggest reasons for his poor reception, but they are now a few of the most important reasons why he is such a beloved and such a widely read poet of today. He lived his life afraid of death and the finality of it, assuming the end of his life would also mean the end of his works circulation. In the years after his death and up until now, his genius has been widely proclaimed.

"I have left no immortal work behind me - nothing to make my friends proud of my memory - but I have lov'd the principle of beauty in all things, and if I had had time I would have made myself remembered." 

--Keats in a letter to Fanny Brawne before his death

Lockhart, John Gibson. “The Cockney School of Poetry No. IV” Blackwood’s Magazine August 1818

Evil before good

In Keats Epistle to John H. Reynolds he attempts to cheer up his friend by mocking the views of society in how they treat people according to social classes. He refers to great philosophers, poets, and artists as “Making the best of ways towards Soho”(Epistle to John :line 12),meaning that even the greatest of people go through social alienation and are miserable at first in order to achieve great admiration. “Things cannot to the will be settled, but they tease us out of thought; Or is it that imagination brought beyond its proper bound, yet still confin’d lost in a sort of purgatory blind” (E to J 76-80) & “In happiness, to see beyond our bourn it forces us in summer skies to mourn” (E to J 83-84) both of this confirm Keats view of how first you must go through unhappiness in order to be happy. This can be compared to Elizabeth Hamilton’s, Translation of the letters of a Hindoo Rajah and her outside view into the Hindu religion. According to the Hindu religion people are born into their social classes and can never be reversed or altered but none of them hate or envy one another. They are conformed and content to their class because” They believe that the human soul must be purified by suffering, and that it is not till after having undergone this expiatory discipline through a series of different bodies, that it becomes worthy of admission to eternal happiness.”(Letters of Hinddo Rajah). By Keats choosing to end the poem to his friend with a quote from the twelfth night he left the decision to John Reynolds to think about how his illness is the worst part and soon happiness will come “ thou art made, if thou desir’st to be so”.  

Love and Death and This Living Hand

"This Living Hand" presents rather as a conundrum; it's listed as a fragment by the Broadview text, which also notes that there is no context for it. It could be so many different things its difficult to see how this fits into the confessional context that its headed under. The only way I'm able to shoehorn it in there is as perhaps being part of a love poem. The central theme of giving one's life to bring this once living hand back to life is easily identifiable and is a bit of a signpost there. It's a little too short to be a proper sonnet, and the form doesn't follow traditional sonnet formula; at the same time there is a bit of a sonnet-esque tone to the writing.

Opium the key to the subconsciousness

In the confessions of opium eater on of the interesting aspects of the story which it crosses is the boundary between reality and fantasy. The main character in the story explores what is created for him in his subconscious from his desires to the fears he has. One thing to note is that drugs of any sort that enters the body affect the brain and sometimes changes the whole functionality of the brain. With this in mind, the drugs seem to unlock a further truth inside himself in which he didn't realize without the drug. Therefore, his desire to seek the higher truth makes him want it more and eventually becomes the addiction. The opium in the story could be represented as a key to the subconscious mind the main character ignored. Often times the story goes in to the perceptive of what most drug uses in our time face, not the law, but themselves. 

Keats' Obsession

"When I Have Fears that I May Cease to Be" by Keats is a poem of missed opportunity.  Fame, love, and life are all beyond his reach and power to control.  He believes death will prevent all of his desires from coming true.  His fear of the lack of fame, "before my pen has glean'd my teeming brain" is a lifelong struggle for him.  This is something that is actually quite justified since he was not received well critically during his lifetime.  His fear of the lack of love is due to the female subject of the poem.  He saw a woman one day at an amusement park, never spoke to her, and yet idealized her for years afterward.  His lack of action and subsequent obsession with her helps his idea of love being another thing he did not accomplish...even though he became engaged to Fanny Brawne later.  Life is the final element he can not control.  He sees death approaching.  His family history pretty much guarantees his early death.  He knows he cannot fight it.  Love and fame are both gone with his life. "Till live and fame to nothingness do sink."

Kuble Khan is Hotel California

While I was reading "Kubla Khan" the song, "Hotel California," by The Eagles came to mind.  There is something reminiscent about the melancholy acceptance of the dangerous desire of Kubla Khan that feels similar to Hotel California.  Coleridge's vision of the garden is very similar to the etherial feeling of the hotel.  Both are places the writer desires in a very frantic way, but both know it is not healthy for them.  The realization of the personal destruction of the writer from these two places is both lifesaving and helpful to the reader, but the feeling of longing to return is always in the air.  When I hear Hotel California I always wonder why a person would leave such a lovely place, but then the actual meaning of the words kick in and I can understand both his desire to be there and his reluctance to leave.  The garden of Kubla Khan is a wonderfully, enticingly, mesmerizing place that draws you in and dares you to leave, just like the hotel.

Love as Subject to Time; Keats "When I Have Fears"

I think that one of the most interesting things about Keats' poem 'When I Have Fears...' is that fact that not only does it deal with large ideas of love, accomplishment, and time... It also seems to embrace the idea that there may not be anything wrong with not accomplishing all. The concern with time is supported throughout, especially with the repeated use of the word "when"- but it is his emphasis on love as subject to time that strikes me as interesting. Love is referred to in brief terms- his love is the "fair creature of the hour", and in fact- this stanza is more compressed than the others, suggesting that it (like love) is short-lived. It seems that by the end of the poem Keats has accepted the fact that in death, one is essentially alone ("I stand alone", in contrast to "the wide world"). This solitude places him in a position of reflection regarding his own emotions, and leads him to reach a point of acceptance. This crossing over, if it can be called that, seems to be represented in the imagery of the shore. As a place where two separate worlds collide (the sea and the land) the shore acts as a bridge between Keats initial desire for love and fame, to an acceptance of their unimportance upon time of death; an end to his endless fear of not having done enough or been enough.

Dreams and Reality: Separate but Equal?

I know this is a bit retrospective, but this didn't really occur to me until class. Dreams are something that, in our Post-Modern world, are again seen as an important literary subject of study. The difference, however, between the Romantic view on dreams and the Post-Modern view is the separation between dreams and reality. The Romantics try to establish a very clear difference between the two, keeping them as two different worlds which, while they coincide, are still separate. The Post-Modern period is often identified, by contrast, with the advent of Magical Realism, which weaves reality and dreams together to a point where they are often inseparable. The question then is which view makes the most sense or appeals the most to you? They both have credibility, as dreams clearly operate separately from reality, but equally, dreams and reality hold equal sway in many cases, and both are merely different shades of perspective. So which opinion on dreams do you all prefer?