nitrosplicer:anais-ninja-bitch:unknought:kaylapocalypse:adulthoodisokay:[x]The wild euphoria of “Yes

nitrosplicer:anais-ninja-bitch:unknought:kaylapocalypse:adulthoodisokay:[x]The wild euphoria of “Yes YES”Blake’s “The Tyger”, despite its conjuration of sublime terror, ultimately views nature through the lens of artifice. The tiger is a piece of craft, significant for what it tells us about its anthropomorphic creator. The tiger is not itself; it’s not a wild, uncreated thing.In contrast, the only crafted thing in Nael’s “The Tiger” is the cage, existing only as an impediment to freedom and destroyed as soon as it is introduced. Nature, rather than creation, is taken as fundamental, and with the destruction of the cage the boundary between the human observer and the natural world is eliminated. We cheer for the tiger’s destructive freedom in a moment of Dionysian ecstasy. Predatory, terrifying, alive, the tiger is out.this is such high quality literary criticismFar from being a poem which views the tiger as crafted, I argue that Blake’s “The Tyger” questions how the tiger could have been created at all: in addition, the context of Blake’s “The Tyger” has been neglected. In Blake’s “The Tyger,” the tiger is not a piece of craft, but defies creation, as demonstrated in lines 3-4: “What immortal hand or eye, / Could frame thy fearful symmetry”? The provocation of asking “What immortal hand or eye” implies that if such an immortal being existed, the tiger’s wild “burning bright” nature defies such craft. We also need to consider the term “fearful symmetry” as an invocation of the divine: William Blake was a Romantic-era poet, and subscribed to the idea of the sublime. The sublime is mystery itself, that which takes us outside of ourselves, that which escapes all comprehension. By saying the tiger has “fearful symmetry,” Blake is saying that the tiger itself is a part of that which escapes comprehension, that which defies creation. In addition, the previous critic ignores that William Blake’s “The Tyger” is a poem of six stanzas, and as such, we cannot judge the first stanza without the inclusion of the other six stanzas. The continuing five stanzas also question how the tiger could have been created: the fifth stanza ends on a question as well: “Did he who made the Lamb make thee?” This question is invoking the idea of a divine creator explicitly, but even then, the Tiger defies explanation, as the Tiger exists as a defiant image of the Sublime, acting as a metaphor for that which escapes comprehension. To compare William Blake’s “The Tyger” with Nael’s “The Tiger,” Nael also uses the tiger as an image of that which escapes comprehension. For Nael, the tiger escapes all physical entrapment, and the repetition of “yes” inspires an ecstatic wildness which inflects the entire poem. In conclusion, both Blake’s “The Tyger” and Nael’s “The Tiger” celebrate that which escapes comprehension and control, manifested in the image of a blazing bright tiger. TLDR: both poems have more in common than not! -- source link

More pics about