In both sections of Songs of Innocence and of Experience there are poems titled "Holy Thursday," which continue the disharmonious dialogue between the two sections. Each poem depicts the scene of Holy Thursday in London when thousands of orphan children parade to church. The first poem, appearing in Songs of Innocence, hereafter referred to as “Holy Thursday I,” takes an uplifting stance on the parade, remarking how the children resemble flowers and behave superbly in church. The second, which comes in Songs of Experience and shall be referred to as “Holy Thursday II,” approaches the subject with an eye for truth and justice, one that does not hesitate to see beyond the spectacle, but more sees the scene as it actually is, as a showcase of Great Britain’s poverty.
Regarding the forms of the poems, each seems to work seamlessly with its content. “Holy Thursday I” employs long lines of fourteen syllables, which enrapture the reader in its narrative. The lines seem to mirror the “multitude they seemd” or the “Thames’ waters flow” which the children are compared to in the first stanza (5, 4). Through these long lines, the reader has very little time to contemplate each successive image, but instead must meander through the poem like they are part of the throng it depicts, not being able to see the whole picture or its harsh reality. In contrast to this, “Holy Thursday II” utilizes lines that average seven syllables in length and create space for the reader to contemplate the poem and reflect. The poem also directly asks questions of the reader such as “Is that trembling cry a song?/ Can it be a song of joy,” which forces the reader to be a participant in the poem and not just a passive observer as in “Holy Thursday I” (5-6). These two opposing forms then ask very different things of the reader, the first simply requiring the reader to enjoy the scene and the second asking the reader to question it.
The depiction of the orphan children of London varies greatly between each poem as well. In “Holy Thursday I” the speaker describes the children as “innocent faces,” “flowers of London,” and “lambs” (1, 5, 7), which seems to obscure the children and describe them comparatively rather than give a clear picture of their reality. Yet in “Holy Thursday II” they are only talked of as “Babes” or “children poor” (3, 7). The differing terms denotes the heart of the contrast between the two poems; “Holy Thursday I” is focussed on the myth of the tradition whereas “Holy Thursday II” is concerned with its reality. There differing viewpoints seem to be entangled in the doctrine of the Christian faith at the time, which demonized the questioning nature of the latter poem and sought the blind obedience of the former. And so it seems Blake’s narrators form both sides of the Christian coin that prevailed during his time, either questioning or ensnared by the myth. And through his poems, Blake gives credence to both, the end of each giving valuable moral advice no matter which side your coin falls on.
The depiction of the orphan children of London varies greatly between each poem as well. In “Holy Thursday I” the speaker describes the children as “innocent faces,” “flowers of London,” and “lambs” (1, 5, 7), which seems to obscure the children and describe them comparatively rather than give a clear picture of their reality. Yet in “Holy Thursday II” they are only talked of as “Babes” or “children poor” (3, 7). The differing terms denotes the heart of the contrast between the two poems; “Holy Thursday I” is focussed on the myth of the tradition whereas “Holy Thursday II” is concerned with its reality. There differing viewpoints seem to be entangled in the doctrine of the Christian faith at the time, which demonized the questioning nature of the latter poem and sought the blind obedience of the former. And so it seems Blake’s narrators form both sides of the Christian coin that prevailed during his time, either questioning or ensnared by the myth. And through his poems, Blake gives credence to both, the end of each giving valuable moral advice no matter which side your coin falls on.
Collin, I agree with your characterization of the poem. The last stanza of Holy Thursday I particularly demonstrates Blake's belief that the Church has become corrupted. The speaker states of the children, "Now like a mighty wind they raise to heaven the voice of song" (9), while declaring the "wise guardians of the poor" (11) to be beneath them. In the church's eyes at this time, the virtue of the children was enough to cement their place in heaven. However, Blake specifies in Songs of Experience that the promise of a pleasant afterlife that the church provided to the poor was not sufficient. Blake believes that churchgoers should have been taking care of the poor children in life rather than respecting them for their goodness and leaving them to die in the streets. Blake may have believed that the church was placing too much emphasis on preparing its patrons for death, rather than focusing on their needs in life. As revealed in Songs of Experience, Blake is reluctant to blindly follow the perscriptions of the church. The final line of Holy Thursday I is "Then cherish pity, lest you drive an angel from your door" (11) - a line that elucidates the perspective of many church-goers. They believed they had to give to charity in order to create good will for themselves in the afterlife. However, giving to the poor and "pitying" them is merely treating a symptom of a larger disease - the inequality and squalor that the impoverished live in. The system that enables poverty to exist - that of "two worlds" divided along lines of money - is what the "wise guardians" must truly attempt to heal.
ReplyDeleteCollin, I really appreciate your interpretation of these two poems, especially your point that "Holy Thursday I" gives the reader the impression of wandering through a crowd, almost aimlessly. There is certainly a sense of overstimulation present here. I think one line in "Holy Thursday II," in particular, helps to show your argument. In line 10, Blake describes, "their fields are bleak and bare," which I feel very obviously parallels the bleak, bare, distant storytelling structure of the poem. What I find most interesting about these two poems is the difference between the wintry atmosphere depicted in each. In "Holy Thursday II," the atmosphere is bleak, bare, and cold (4). In contrast, "Holy Thursday I" portrays a sense of winter through cleanliness, whiteness, and purity (mostly in lines 1 and 3). Thanks for your post!!
ReplyDelete