The poem London by William Blake is from his work called Songs
of Experience, published in 1794 in England and just in the period of the
French Revolution, when authors wrote with the romantic topics, looking for the
contemplation of nature and free spaces and all printed with a tone of dramatic
nature.
The first impression when reading the
poem’s title is that the author is going to speak about the city of London, to
tell us how London is and probably what he feels in the city. And at first
reading I think the poet writes about what he remembers of the city. It is
evident that Blake addresses his poem to no person, the poet’s addressee is
London. There is an allegory, a personification of the city, the city becomes a
person to be addressed.
The language the poet uses is simple
and the only problem I have found is the contraction of some words as in line
1: thro’ each. This is a very direct language, and there are so many
repetitions that the poet uses to emphasize his feelings, with something that
is repeated: lines 5, 6 and 7 ( in every), he wants to tell us that something
is common in different sites: in the cry of a man, in infants’ fear, in voices…
and the structure of the poem is very simple too, it is divided in four
paragraphs with four verses each one.
In each paragraph the poet describes a
different feeling. In the first paragraph the author talks about when he walked
around England, near the Thames and how he examined each human mark, of
weakness and woe. Blake as all romantic poets does not like civilization, he
liked nature and he liked spaces where there is nobody, and to argue this
feeling he speaks against human marks, and he only sees bad marks and he scorns
them because of these marks. In the second one he tells us where he finds the marks,
and they are in cry of pain of people, in the fear of children, in every voices
of everybody and specially in prohibitions, in the minds forged by bands, Blake
does not like how the civilization manipulates our mind and forces us to act in
a strict manner. If he is free in the landscape ( we can see that in other
poems of the same author, called To Summer, where he talks about the
pleasure of joining the life in contact with nature and far from civilization)
he can act in a free way, without rules, and he would not be mind- forged. He
says he can hear the manacles that presses people. When we analyse the
paragraph number three we see specific groups of persons and social entities.
The Chimney- sweeper is a person that cleans the chimneys of all the city, they
have also a metaphoric meaning that is to have the faculty of cleaning the
defects of society. As the author tells us in his poem The Chimney- Sweeper,
a child whose mother died in the birth, were sent by the father to learn this
job, it was not a job with reputation but it was a job. These boys were
condemned because the blackness they got when cleaning the chimney, is a
reference to coloured people that were condemned because his colour of skin was
regarded with obscurity. Then he mentions the Church, Soldiers and Palace,
social entities that forge us, that put on us the rules of society. When we
look at these entities we find they broke the rules every time. The author
talks about the appals, the blood that runs down and sighs of people that is also
condemned but that they want to follow the rules that condemn them. And
finally, in the last, the author goes directly to mention the problems that
annoy him and they are the cause why he wants to get away to the landscape’s
freedom; the midnight sounds importunate him, and also the laments of Infants
and how marriage blights people like a plague, he does not like this and he
wants to go to a place where this does not exist. It is important to mention
that Blake makes about Harlots curse, the prostitution, and the relation with
youthful, in this period it was very common that men went with promiscuous
women, in France for example, there was a cabaret, where men went to have
sexual relations with prostitutes, called Moulin Rouge. Blake does not like
this, he criticises this style of life. All the poem is a critic text of
civilization, of its rules and of people actions.
In conclusion, the poem is a good example of Romantic
thought of going to live with nature, far of civilised world. It is a pleasant
poem, but I think it is a little bit hard, because it talks about civilization
in a very bad way. I like it because, being of the same point of view or not
with the poet, it is a good critic, with argued points, with very good examples
of corruption and with things that can importunate someone in a moment.
|