Hi, all! I’m so sorry I can’t join you today. I wanted to tell you how impressed I was with your blog posts (and to argue about whether we live in an enlightened age). I was also so excited to convince you to like Pope! I’m still going to try to do that a bit here, and I also want to get you to start thinking about some of the skills we’ll be using all semester—especially the close analysis of literature. Your handout on how to read literature (on this blog if you’ve lost yours) got you started on that, I hope, but I want in this post to point out some specific aspects of Pope’s poem that are particularly analyzable.
Though both are examples of Enlightenment philosophy, we might think of Pope as offering quite a different take from Kant’s. If Kant started with the motto “Sapere aude!” (“Dare to know!”), Pope wants us to consider instead something we might call epistemological humility (epistemology = the study of knowledge; humility = modesty about one’s own position or ability). In other words, Pope thinks we can’t know everything—certainly not everything about the universe and how it operates (“‘Tis but a part we see and not the whole” [60])—and he suggests that our understanding of the limits of our own knowledge should influence our philosophy.
Pope defended his decision to write his philosophy of man and the universe in verse instead of prose by arguing that verse can be both more forceful and more concise (see the very useful headnote to the poem in your reading for details). We know that Pope thought very carefully about his technical choices. Just look at this page from his manuscript to another part of “Essay on Man.”
This manuscript is housed at the Morgan Library, just up the street from Baruch. You can even go visit it!
So, to read Pope well, we have to think not just about what he says but about how he says it. I’ll walk you through a few examples from the opening of the poem before encouraging you to find some examples yourselves. Here are my annotations to the first few lines (you should be able to click and then zoom to see them a bit larger). I show you these not because they’re the only way to engage with the poem! But rather, to show you an example. I want you to see some of the tiny observations that grow into my larger thoughts about the poem.
Pope starts the poem by addressing someone directly, his friend St. John Bolingbroke. The literary term for this is apostrophe. He says “Awake, my St. John!” (1). We can read this a couple of ways: maybe St. John is literally asleep (has Pope been rattling on about philosophy for too long?) or maybe the “awakening” is more metaphorical (like Kant’s comparison of enlightenment to growing up or maturing). The fact that the poem is addressed to an individual seems significant either way: even though Pope is writing this poem himself, he suggests that the work of philosophical enquiry should be collaborative (“Let us…” [3, and repeated]). And maybe this task isn’t just for Pope and his friend (though we know—see the footnote—that they’d planned on writing companion pieces together); maybe it’s for us, too. So the form (Pope’s use of apostrophe) helps us see something we may have overlooked about the content (in this case, the idea that, for Pope, philosophy should be a shared project).
Now, let’s think about the extended metaphor of the first stanza of the poem (the first chunk before a space). What Pope calls the “scene of Man” (5) is likened to a natural landscape of some sort (though the exact nature of that landscape shifts: is it a “maze”? a “Wild”? a “Garden”? a “field”?). If you’re a city kid, you may not catch the full metaphor at first, but if we read carefully, we can see that Pope is comparing himself and Bolingbroke (and maybe us too?) to hunters, walking through a field or forest and beating at the bushes to encourage prey or game to fly out. (Hunting was a common past-time for well-off Englishmen at the time Pope is writing.) Go back and read the stanza with this in mind. So, philosophers are hunters, but the game aren’t pheasants or deer but more abstract targets like “Folly” and “Manners” (13, 14). What might the use of this metaphor tell us? What connotations does it have? Now, we’d have to think about it alongside the rest of the poem, but it seems fair to say that hunting is both a rather aggressive or violent activity but also (for those who enjoy it) a hobby, something amusing. We start to get a sense of Pope’s attitude toward philosophy by thinking about the particular metaphor he chooses.
Finally, take Pope’s use of heroic couplets. These are pairs of rhyming lines, written in iambic pentameter (that is, with ten syllables each, in the meter ba-DUM, ba-DUM, ba-DUM, ba-DUM, ba-DUM) and usually closed rather than open (in other words, formed so that each line ends with some kind of closing punctuation, like a comma or period). Once you know that this is the form Pope uses, it’s impossible not to see it. But why does it matter? Well, take a look at some of the couplets in this first stanza. One thing to note is that Pope frequently uses the couplet form to bring together opposites. For example:
Together let us beat this ample field,
Try what the open, what the covert [hidden] yield;
The latent [hidden] tracts, the giddy heights explore
Of all who blindly creep, or sightless soar; (9-12)
Even on a first read, we can see some oppositions: things that are in plain sight vs. things which have to be uncovered; creatures that crawl vs. creatures that fly. Once you start looking, you’ll see these oppositions all over Pope’s poem, especially (as in these examples) in paired clauses within a single line. And there’s even more structure built in. Look at the last two lines I’ve quoted here: the clauses line up in the couplet (that is, the things that “creep” are found in the “latent tracts,” the things that “soar” in the “giddy heights”). Again, we’d want to keep reading to decide what Pope’s doing here—is he bringing opposites together to reconcile them? Or is he holding them apart? And yet, we can already see that the form of the poem (in this case, these highly structured couplets) reinforces Pope’s content (his idea that the universe, like his poem, is “not without a plan” [6]).
I hope these observations have gotten you thinking. For today’s (Monday’s) class, first, I’m going to ask you to consult with a partner (or two) about the things you annotated as you read the poem for class. Compare the things you noticed: are there patterns you both observed? do you see stark differences in how you understood the poem? did your partner look up things that had also puzzled you? Do you see anything new now that you’ve read my post?
Second, please leave a comment to this post with your observations about both the form and content of a *single* heroic couplet (that is, two lines) of Pope’s “Essay on Man.” How do you see the form and content working together? or in tension? This comment needn’t be as long as a blog post (certainly not as long as this one!), but it should be long enough to explain your thoughts coherently. Make sure to be clear about which lines you’re discussing, either by quoting them fully or by citing the line numbers.
You can look forward to the next blog post assignment (on haiku) this evening. Sorry again to miss your company!
“Presumptuous man! the reason wouldst thou find,
Why formed so weak, so little, and so blind?”
There’s an old adage that my mom used to say to me all the time: “When you assume, you make a [rear end] out of you and me.” Pope’s lines work together to say this in recognizing that man is both a arrogant creature and an (often) wrong creature. Even though man assumes they know the answer to many things, they are often ignorant to the facts of the situation and end up looking “weak” and “blind.” There’s also a lack of self-consciousness present in man’s blindness, which adds to the tone of “presumptuous man!”
“In God’s, one single can its end produce; Yet serves to second too some other use.”
Basically when it comes to life in general when we tend to work hard for one goal, whether we reach it or not, we fall in a position where we would never even have the slightest thought of being in. So everything happens for a reason, in God’s way. Pope breaks up the idea after “end produce” and starts another line to show that emphasis. That when one door closes, another one opens. To show that if something doesn’t benefit the current situation, it can benefit another one in the long run. It also does a good job in explaining the line prior in speaking about purpose.
Form and content work together in order for the poem to fully convey. Form basically means the structure that it will follow and content is what you’re actually writing about.
“Observe how system into system runs,
What other planets circle other suns,” (lines 25-26)
The form in these two lines is a comparison between two types of systems. One being with the mechanical system the solar system. It shows how one needs the other two actually function, a system will need another piece, which in this case was referred as a system to actually function. Compared to a solar system how planets rotate around the sun. Not only that but both of these examples can be viewed as things produced from god. The content here will obviously be the examples itself.
“What future bliss, he gives not thee to know,
But gives that Hope to be thy blessing now.”
Pope expresses his thoughts using poetry to emphasize each line’s importance. His use of heroic couplets separates each pair of rhyming lines. In the cause of lines 93-94, this shows the importance of hope. These lines explain how man’s happiness depends on his ignorance of future events. Ignorance that the future will be filled with joy makes man hopeful in the present. Hope is repeated throughout this section to emphasize man’s dependance on hope for his happiness.
“Respecting Man, whatever wrong we call,
May, must be right, as relative to all.”
Alexander Pope is referring to our inherent feeling of knowledge. The form of this sentence is setting up a man’s opinion to the rest of the world. Its content is what strikes me. Alexander Pope mentions a respecting man’s opinion. Than in the next line he takes a complete opposite approach as if the man became boastful in his knowledge. That it is now my way or the high way. These lines are in conflict of each other, but if we look at the two lines in conjunction, we realize that Pope’s message is that only through humility, can many achieve enlightenment. The idea of epistemological humility comes into play where we cannot know everything, but the things that we do know have the ability to enlighten us.
In my opinion the whole poem is like a chain of 10 sections and each one of them, in my opinion, are separate ideas and moral rules.
“Say first, of God above, or Man below,
What can we reason, but from what we know?”
The author uses a rhetorical question here to force readers to think about his idea that how humans can find their essence without help. The Pope believes that there are not enough things in our world for regular person to discover and understand the meaning of one’s life. Moreover, in my opinion, author believes that people can not understand any of the “higher” truth from what they see and have in regular life. There is just not enough hints for people in our world to understand the deeper meaning of humans’ essence.
“Each beast, each insect, happy in its own: Is heaven unkind to Man, and Man alone?”
Alexander Pope wrote this heroic couplet with human perspective in mind. In this perspective, we, humans are assuming that other creatures don’t encounter any day to day problems since it’s impossible to observe that they’re in societies as demanding as ours. The form in which Pope executes the presentation of this line, however, is profound. He shows human logic with human selfishness present, even without explicitly stating that humans are selfish. He uses repetition (“Man, and Man alone”) to show how important humans are to themselves. With this repetition, he proves that humans are always going to pity themselves and allow themselves to feel victim to injustice in a self centered manner. The form and content helped each other get the point across, because he spoke like a human pleading for God’s wellbeing through its form, and also explicitly stated the content of “Heaven” being “unkind to Man.”
“For me kind Nature wakes her genial Power,
Suckles each herb, and spreads out ev’ry flower;” (133-134)
Besides the words that start the beginning of the two lines, Pope also capitalizes “Nature” and “Power” referring it to the presence of God mentioned throughout his poem. This use of personification emphasizes the importance of God and God’s power. The terms “herb” and “flower” refer to the humans that are here because of God. God is described as a kind force by Pope that nurtures and looks after his creations (humans), but will always be at another level that humans can never reach, which is emphasized by Pope’s use of personification.
“Laugh where we must, be candid where we can;
But vindicate the ways of G-d to man.”
This specific line resonated with me because it has a beautiful, and lyrical sound to it. I enjoy reading poetry in iambic pentameter, and I believe Pope wrote this piece using this particular style in order to give the poem more depth, beauty, and meaning. It almost sounds like a prayer or song when you read it in this rhythmic ‘tune’. I also chose this phrase because it exuded a positive outlook on the world. From what I understood, the meaning of this phrase illustrates Man’s life. We laugh during the good times, we cry and complain during the bad times, and we are “candid” in the middle. Yet, I believe what Pope was trying to communicate throughout this piece was that since mankind does not have the capacity to understand G-d’s purposes, we must stay hopeful, and not complain because we will never know why G-d does the things he does (instill evil in this world, for instance). The overall piece was often justifying the ways of G-d’s to mankind and sort of telling man to have trust in G-d since everything he does is right and has a hidden meaning behind it.
“So Man, who here seems principal alone,
Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown,”
Pope suggests that even if we seem alone, our actions are always influenced by things around us. This idea goes back to Kant’s way of thinking when he says that we are immature and that it is so easy to follow and take guidance when it is given to us, as opposed to thinking based off of personal experiences. The form Pope states this, is in a rhetorical manner. He says that we are alone in the first line, but right after he suggests that are actions are influenced by an unknown.
“Presumptuous Man! the reason wouldst thou find, Why formed so weak, so little, and so blind?”
In discussing and inquiring about a presumptuous man, Pope explains that the man is weak, and then further supports the definition of a presumptuous man by calling this man blind. By doing this, Pope maintains a smooth poetic flow of his work, all while providing the reader with a full explanation of what he thinks of a man who is presumptuous. With the content and form working in combination of one another, Pope is able to continue making similar comparisons in the lines that follow all while helping the reader understand what he is referring to. Had Pope not explained that a presumptuous man was ‘so weak, so little, and so blind” the reader would not be able to fully grasp and understand Pope’s thought process which would render the rest of the stanza confusing.
“When the dull Ox, why now he breaks the clod, Is now a victim, and now Egypt’s God” (63-64)
The form of the couplet paints a picture in our mind of an ox killed by man, who then becomes worshipped by man. The content is that man can see an ox as food or just some tool used for resources yet, man can also view the same animal as sacred and God’s gift to man.
“Then say not Man’s imperfect, Heaven in fault;
Say rather, Man’s as perfect as he ought:”
Calling man “imperfect” implies a transcendental mistake: if man is imperfect in an absolute sense, then the whole of creation is broken. If man is truly not “as perfect as he ought,” then one could reasonably assume that Heaven itself created a faulty design, or even worse, that God is a torturer of men. Pope’s poem illustrates how an incomplete perspective of reality could never comprehend absolute truth, and it is therefore foolish for people to make value judgements about the human experience and creation. I think it is very interesting to see the parallels between Pope’s writing and Eastern religious thought. The rejection of anthropocentrism, and Pope’s emphasis on non-judgemental observation are both at odds with the state of Christian theology during the author’s time. Was he exposed to Eastern religious texts? Where did he get these ideas from?
One heroic couplet I found particularly interesting was in the second stanza, lines 62-63. This line reads, “When the dull Ox, why now he breaks the clod,/Is now a victim, and now Egypt’s God:.” The first thing that caught my attention was the powerful use of imagery – that of a “dull ox” (an ordinary animal) reaching the stature of a God. From the ending words in these lines, “clod” – meaning lump of earth/clay, to “God” – we see the transition from earth to the heavens. Of course as Pope shows, this transformation doesn’t happen overnight. To reach godliness, the dull ox toiled in the field day in and day out.
These two lines could be a metaphor for the state of man’s purpose in the world. Similar to the ox, many people may find themselves a “victim” of the society or circumstances they are born into. While some people would accept that fate and give up, others would acknowledge their circumstances and do something about it. Toiling in the field (or any profession which society thinks as inferior) is just one small part of the grander scheme of things. No one knows how things will turn out. So the best an individual can do is actively work towards changing their circumstances.
“Observe how system into systems runs,
What other planets circle other suns,”
Alexander Pope is referring to men as having the ability to see the nature of the world. The form of this piece depicts an eagerness that we should imply when it comes to learning about the world or our surroundings. The content of this piece encourages us to become educated on things in the world and being able to form a connection between them. Pope mentions to observe the systems, then he goes on to talk about planets circling the sun. By doing this he’s showing us that there’s an infinite number of things to learn about. I think Pope’s message is that we live in this world and we have the ability to know what’s happening around us and also outside of our world.
“Is the great chain, that draws all to agree,
and drawn supports, upheld by God or thee?”
Pope questions the derivation of truth in this couplet. Does mankind discover truth through their own methods, or does God hold the truth? Chains are a hard material used to connect or link things. “The great chain” that Pope refers to is the ultimate truth of the universe, whatever that may be. To Pope, this chain of truth is what brings people together,”that draws all to agree, and drawn supports.” Pope thinks that there is a truth out there, that is real and connects people, but he questions its origins.
“But ALL subsists by elemental strife; [169]
And Passions are the elements of Life.” [170]
Pope writes the word “all” in all capital letters, suggesting that he is referring to all men. It seems like he is saying that everyone exists because of natural forces of conflict, but passion is the cause of conflict for man. To me, having passions and interests is what makes a person want to continue living, and have a purpose for living. If one is really passionate about what they want, they would fight for it. In other words, I think in order to succeed or advance in life through one’s passions, one must face obstacles to get what they want to achieve.
“Or in the full creation leave a void,
Where, one step broken, the great scale’s destroyed:
From Nature’s chain whatever link you strike,
Tenth or ten thousandth, breaks the chain alike.” (243-246)
In this couplet, Pope suggests that Nature’s chain is a delicate balance and if we break one link, we threatened to destroy Nature. Pope holds the delicate balance of Nature to a high regard, in an almost melodramatic manner. I find this particular couplet interesting because of throughout his entire essay, Pope emphasizes and personifies selfishness and the danger of having too much pride and how that is also a threat. However, the main difference between the other “warnings” and this particular couplet I have selected is that this section is where he really delves into how detrimental it would be to Nature if man creates a void or breaks a link in Nature’s chain. In other words, it is almost as if Pope is saying that man can be selfish and possess excessive pride, but if man were to disrupt the natural order, it would break down the universe.
Men would be Angles, Angles would be Gods,
Aspiring to be Gods, if Angles fell,
Aspiring to be Angles, Men rebel (126-128)
I was so surprised by those lines that Pope could have at the time back to his age. I see it as a battle cry that human should break the chain on our feet. In some certain occasion, Men could become Angles or even Gods. There will be no huge gap between. Pope encourage human to chase because it is not impossible to achieve. With rebellion, Men are potential Angles or Gods. I believe Pope is telling us how big we are and how much we can make.