William Butler Yeats (1865- 1939) was an Irish born lad who also studied in London. He wrote this poem in 1919. Believed to be written due to the aftermath of the first World War, other versions of the poem have references implicating the French, Irish, German and Russian Revolutions.
"The Second Coming" can be read here at this link. To me this poem insights fear, dread and mostly confusion. To begin with Yeats writes "The falcon cannot hear the falconer;" (Line 2). Implying that man does not hear God with the distractions of the world. There is also a direct implication with the return of the Messiah with " Surely the Second Coming is at hand" (Line 10) followed by a description of the loss of our morales and an image of a beast coming to the land. Yeats implication and description of this beast implies that it is what comes with the Second Coming. It is this description that confuses me. In the last 2 lines the poem reads, " And what rough beast, its hour come round at last," (Line 21). " Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?" ( Line 22). It leaves me with the impression that the poem is implying that the Second Coming of Christ will be a beast, demonic in nature, and not Christ that returns. Essentially it contradicts my religious beliefs and the Biblical word. Is the poet involved in the occult? Or, is he just implying that we dont know what returns. Is his description of the Second Coming actually a description of the Anti- Christ and the tribulation that follows?
Also confusing to me is the form of the poem itself. Is it free verse? Or is it iambic pentameter? Some of the rhymes appear to be a coincidence, but hardly rhythmical either, such as "...hold" (Line 3) and "...world" (Line 4), or "...man" ( Line 14) and " ...sun" (Line 15). Either way, if it is iambic pentameter the meter is broken and loose to me.
Nonetheless, it is a very prolific poem to me and I am excited to break it down even further in my essay.
The way that you broke down this poem was really well. I really enjoyed how you realated the poem instantly to your religion and went back and read it numerous times. That reminded me of how in our previous blog post about good readers and writers, it interpreted being a re-reader. I most agree with you on the whole demonic beast contradiction.
ReplyDeleteOverall, I think that you did a very well job on breaking it down. You have some really good questions and made some great points. Keep up the good work.
Kathryn L.
I to read this poem several times before I picked a different poem. I was confused with its words However, when you said that you are a Christian and are familiar with religion it made me realize that just like this poem there is a lot of symbolism in the scriptures. It was interesting to hear you understanding and take on this poem when it was very confusing to me. Thank you for your words and helping me understand it from a different point of view.
ReplyDeleteMichael, I too am a Christian and I thought the same thing you did when I saw the title. I thought, oh this might be interesting. I have to admit I didn't like it. I agree with your interpretation that maybe the poet was mocking the "Second Coming" with the talk of beast being born out of Bethlehem. It kind of disturbed me in a way I can't quite explain. I'm starting to wonder if I should've wrote about this poem, it was probably my second choice. Either way, I think you did a really nice job analyzing this poem.
ReplyDelete