English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

My daughter needs to do an analysis on this poem for school. She cant understand it, and neither can I...Help someone?

2006-11-20 05:58:26 · 4 answers · asked by Karen 3 in Arts & Humanities Books & Authors

4 answers

To understand this poem you must know something about the Bible, as it is full of Biblical allusions. In Hebrews 2:14 we read that Christ shared our humanity. In Matthew 10:29 we read that not one sparrow will fall to the ground without God willing it. In Revelation 21:4 we read of God at the end of time wiping every tear from our eyes. We all have human feelings for those whom we care for. No parent can be indifferent to the joys and sorrows of his/her child. The God Who made us is conscious of the sorrows which we experience and those of the rest of creation (the sparrow of Matthew 10:29 is echoed in the image of the wren, the smallest bird in Britain). Not only does he empathise with us, but He became flesh and dwelt among us (John 1:14 and stanza 7); suffered and died for us (Isaiah 53: 3 describes Him as a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief) and therefore can sympathise entirely with all the suffering we may experience because He has been there before. But this is not a poem of gloom and doom, as it contains the message of hope that God will destroy our gloom and give us His joy.

2006-11-20 06:53:02 · answer #1 · answered by Doethineb 7 · 0 0

Well I guess these days it is hard to understand the concept of compassion. In a world where people walk by someone lying on the street.

Rant over.


This poem is from Blake's 'Songs of Innocence'. There are some 'Songs of Experience' too, that express more bitter and cynical, 'realistic' expressions. The songs of innocence are in a way pure, childlike, unspoilt, full of faith and hope.

On a simplistic level, to understand the poem you need to know that when Blake says 'He' he means God. That might help.

2006-11-20 06:11:33 · answer #2 · answered by Nico 1 · 1 0

In utility words he's a link, a pointer to Christ. he isn't significant for his own self, yet basically simply by fact he factors to Christ. in a similar way the Church factors to Christ. She isn't significant for the different reason than she is the servant of Christ in the international. curiously, sisters and brothers, religious men and ladies, are themselves. they're lay people and are examples of ways we can all be in the dominion of God. we are asked to be Christ to others, to evangelize. we don't hesitate or refuse simply by fact we are sinful. while a clergyman is being sinful he isn't performing as he ought to, only as though i'm sinful i'm not as I ought to be. That he factors to Christ is his function. As Catholics, we've by no skill bought into the whole depravity of humanity and have confidence that we are in a position to help one yet another to realize union with God. we've by no skill been an individualistic faith per ourselves basically and suspiciously keeping off all others. We do study to determine while a clergyman is performing suitable in his function and while he's extending, nevertheless. it may be incorrect to think of a clergyman in a roundabout way divine, he isn't, he's a guy concecrated to the provider of God. Jesus informed the Apostles to coach all that he has taught them. Our Bishops in the present day have that accountability. they're assisted by utilising deacons and monks. those are the orders of Holy Orders, deacon, priest, and bishop. That a guy is a cardinal or a pope isn't an "order". The view that any guy is only too corrupt to steer us and handbook us is rejected by utilising Catholics. We help one yet another--we at the instant are not lone wolves. we are people, living in community, all incorrect; we do our maximum suitable and delight in our leaders the two clergy and lay. The instructions of my Bishop are to be taken heavily; in the event that they sound incorrect, i'm predicted to attempt to appreciate why that's and in spite of if my consience is properly formed. i don't do what my ethical experience says is erroneous no rely who tells me; disagreeing with my Bishop does point out that something is erroneous nevertheless. The meaning of the ritual of the Mass, our liturgical prayer, is mischaracterized while that's suggested that that's a re-enactment, a repeat crucifixion and dying of Jesus. Priesthood is a function of all Christians, all of us instruct Christ to a minimum of one yet another. That those of the Holy Orders gain this in a particular way would not recommend that they are divine or that they are making a ritual enactment of killing the human Christ. not in charge.

2016-10-22 10:32:09 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

I find it hard to believe anyone could read this poem and not understand it. William Blake is very straightforward. I suggest you and your daughter read it aloud several times. The meaning will reveal itself to you.

ON ANOTHER'S SORROW

Can I see another's woe,
And not be in sorrow too?
Can I see another's grief,
And not seek for kind relief?

Can I see a falling tear,
And not feel my sorrow's share?
Can a father see his child
Weep, nor be with sorrow filled?

Can a mother sit and hear
An infant groan, an infant fear?
No, no! never can it be!
Never, never can it be!

And can He who smiles on all
Hear the wren with sorrows small,
Hear the small bird's grief and care,
Hear the woes that infants bear -

And not sit beside the nest,
Pouring pity in their breast,
And not sit the cradle near,
Weeping tear on infant's tear?

And not sit both night and day,
Wiping all our tears away?
O no! never can it be!
Never, never can it be!

He doth give His joy to all:
He becomes an infant small,
He becomes a man of woe,
He doth feel the sorrow too.

Think not thou canst sigh a sigh,
And thy Maker is not by:
Think not thou canst weep a tear,
And thy Maker is not near.

O He gives to us His joy,
That our grief He may destroy:
Till our grief is fled and gone
He doth sit by us and moan.
Can I see another's woe,
And not be in sorrow too?
Can I see another's grief,
And not seek for kind relief?

Can I see a falling tear,
And not feel my sorrow's share?
Can a father see his child
Weep, nor be with sorrow filled?

Can a mother sit and hear
An infant groan, an infant fear?
No, no! never can it be!
Never, never can it be!

And can He who smiles on all
Hear the wren with sorrows small,
Hear the small bird's grief and care,
Hear the woes that infants bear -

And not sit beside the nest,
Pouring pity in their breast,
And not sit the cradle near,
Weeping tear on infant's tear?

And not sit both night and day,
Wiping all our tears away?
O no! never can it be!
Never, never can it be!

He doth give His joy to all:
He becomes an infant small,
He becomes a man of woe,
He doth feel the sorrow too.

Think not thou canst sigh a sigh,
And thy Maker is not by:
Think not thou canst weep a tear,
And thy Maker is not near.

O He gives to us His joy,
That our grief He may destroy:
Till our grief is fled and gone
He doth sit by us and moan.

Hint: The point is that it is human to feel what another feels in times of sorrow. That quality of human nature is called, "empathy." It also assures the reader that whatever may be in his or her heart, even the slightest sigh, is known to God and God is near at such times. He will sit by one's side and mourn. Perhaps the ability of man to empathise with a fellow man in sorrow, as God does, suggests that when God made man in his image, that included the ability to know what another feels, and to share his or her feelings.

2006-11-20 06:16:06 · answer #4 · answered by Suzianne 7 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers