When You Are Old

When You Are Old by Williams Butler Yeats

When you are old and grey and full of sleep,

And nodding by the fire, take down this book,

And slowly read, and dream of the soft look

Your eyes had once, and of their shadows deep;

How many loved your moments of glad grace,

And loved your beauty with love false or true,

But one man loved the pilgrim soul in you,

And loved the sorrows of your changing face; 

And bending down beside the glowing bars,

Murmur, a little sadly, how Love fled

And paced upon the mountains overhead

And hid his face amid a crowd of stars.

            When You Are Old by William Butler Yeats is a warning for a person about love. Yeats diction lulls the reader into a comfortable state in the beginning, while including hidden biting illusions throughout. Imagery used also draws comparisons to heaven and hell.

            The poem is thought to be based on French poet Pierre de Ronsard’s “Quand Vous Serez Bien Vieille” (When You Are Old) in Sonnets pour Hélène. The mystery person throughout the poem is most likely Maud Gonne–Yeat’s muse for many years. Interestingly, Gonne rejected his many marriage proposals and married another man in 1903.

            The first stanza creates a warm, comforting feel through word choices like “sleep,” “nodding,” “slowly,” and “dream.” The poem follows an Enclosed rhyme scheme (abba) throughout the twelve lines. The first line describes the woman’s (let’s say the person is female) “old” and “grey” features, but also mentions that she is “full of sleep.” Which, literally, of course means sleepy, but figuratively might mean full of life or years of sleep; meaning near death. “Nodding by the fire” also describes a sleepy state, but connotes dying and even (this might be a stretch) going to hell after death (seen in the “fire”). The Land of Nod in the Book of Genesis is where Cain fled to after murdering Abel, and may also have been where Adam and Eve were banished. The final line of the first stanza describes the woman dreaming of her past beauty, and particularly her eyes. Oddly, Yeats chooses the phrase “shadows deep” to describe her eyes. Which, unless cultural norms have changed so much since the late 1800s, isn’t normally an appealing description of someone. I interpreted it as shadows of vice hidden within her. Eyes are historically referenced to be a direct pathway to one’s soul. And if these shadows, which often hold a negative connotation, from her eyes go deep, it isn’t hard to imagine that Yeats may have been subtly passing judgment on this woman.

            The second stanza begins by mentioning the attention the woman got for her “beauty” and “glad grace.” While the phrase “glad grace” is one of the only examples of alliteration throughout the poem, I couldn’t find anything specific that Yeats may have wanted to express through that choice. He also points out that the people loved this woman with love “false or true”; most likely false because of the superficial reasons (“glad grace and beauty”) they loved her for. Yeats finally says that one man (most likely him) loved this woman for her true self, and still loved her as she aged–in contrast with the false love based on beauty. Yeats says he loves the “pilgrim soul” in the woman or, in layman’s terms, the adventurous soul.

            Now the poem begins to describe the woman’s actions upon reminiscing about the past. She bends down “beside the glowing bars” of the fireplace she is sitting next to, which may be compared to the bars or gates of heaven. Perhaps she is looking in on her lover (Yeats) in heaven. As she is against the bars, she murmurs how “Love” escaped her. This could be a personification of Love, a reference to the Greek god of love. It could also be referring to a specific love: the one that existed between Yeats and Gonne. The final two lines, while using beautiful imagery, is still a mystery to me. The “Love” that fled the woman is pacing upon mountains and is hiding among the stars. All this grand language involving larger than life things like mountains, stars, and skies makes it feel a bit supernatural. Yeats may be saying that the love they once had for each other is gone or that because he is dead (at that future time) the love is in heaven with him (amid the stars).

            Despite multiple interpretations, the poem makes it clear through a combination of appreciative diction and harsh illusions that this person (Yeats) truly loves this other person (Gonne), but predicts a bad ending if immorality leads her to ignore the true love in front of her.

What the Magistrate Learned.

1. Like I mentioned at the end of class on Friday, I think one of the most interesting lessons the Magistrate learned in the novel is about his own morality and humanity. Upon being captured as he returns to the town from his trip in the desert, he acts smug and feels confident in his ability to work his way to freedom through the legal system. "There is a spring in my walk as I am marched away to confinement between my two guards.... I am aware of the source of my elation: my alliance with the guardians of the Empire is over, I have set myself in opposition, the bond is broken." After months (maybe longer) of solitary confinement, the Magistrate realizes that his confinement is nothing noble about his struggle. Instead it is dehumanizing and deprives him of his morality: "in my suffering there is nothing ennobling.... What I am made to undergo is subjection to the most rudimentary needs of my body.... I wondered how much pain a plump comfortable old man would be able to endure in the name of his eccentric notions of how the Empire should conduct itself.... They [my torturers] were interested only in demonstrating to me what it meant to live in a body, as a body, a body which can entertain notions of justice only as long  as it is whole and well." Similar to Heart of Darkness, we see how ideas and feelings change when they are subject to "uncivilized" conditions.

2. The second lesson I would say the Magistrates learns is about the nature of empires and his place in them. Empires survive through continual progress and expansion. And to keep this gravy train going, they often also thrive on fear and the subject of other peoples. By being part of the empire, no matter if he agrees or doesn't agree with what is going on, he is supporting a system that ultimately does this.

South Africa

During the Xhosa Wars (also known as the Cape Frontier Wars) from the late 1700s to the late 1800s the newly established Dutch (Afrikaans) in Cape Town attempted to force the native African populations (most notably the Xhosa in these altercations) out of their land. We see a similar thing take place in Waiting for Barbarians where the Empire has both taken and plans to push the native "Barbarians" even farther away from their land.

Also, similar to how the Magistrate in the novel was imprisoned for having differing views from the Empire, both the Dutch and then the British imprisoned countless activists or politicians that didn't agree with what was going on.

http://www.sahistory.org.za/pages/governence-projects/frontier_wars/frontier_wars.htm

The War of Ideas

Jane Austen and the War of Ideas: Pride and Prejudice
By Marilyn Butler


What is the writer's thesis?
Despite the common assumption that Pride and Prejudice is a progressive novel (promoting class equality), Jane Austin intended it to convey a conservative theme (orthodox Christian morals).

What are one or two key points the writer makes in support of the thesis?
Butler works to discredit progressive interpreter Samuel Kliger’s theory that the novel contrasts art (of noble society) and nature (of Elizabeth and, deep down, of all people). Butler instead suggests the novels true battle is between the candor of Jane & Mr. Bingley and the satire of Elizabeth & Mr. Darcy.
Butler also cites one of Jane Austen’s letters as proof that even she thought the novel was too light for the progressive impression to hold much weight.


Were you persuaded? Do you agree with the writer's thesis? Why?
I agree with both the progressive and the conservative interpretation; who says a novel much be confined to one or the other? The time period certainly was one of changing class distinctions and equality, but at the same time there is no denying the obvious lessons both Elizabeth and Mr. Dary learned about (gasp) pride and prejudice.

In what way(s) does this information give you new or increased understanding of the novel or of Jane Austen as a writer?
I tend to read novels for pleasure first, before trying to draw a meaning out of it. Butler’s criticism, above all else, brought to my attentions the previously cited obvious moral lessons both Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy learned. I think I overlooked Elizabeth’s pride and prejudice in criticizing everyone around her because I, myself, tend to do that, and therefore, didn’t see anything strange about the main character’s inner thoughts.

The Play

Seeing William Shakespeare’s Twelfth Night in person really brought the story alive for me. Among the many aspects of the performance that I liked, I have chosen three in particular.

The emotions of the characters are one of the first things I noticed about watching Twelfth Night instead of reading it. Reading the play, one could kind of get a sense of the emotions a character might have only if his words made his demeanor completely clear. However, subtle, yet important, facial expressions and emotions can be lost–specifically the reactions from the characters listening to the speaker.

The second thing that stood out in the play was the props and scenery. While reading the play, one must imagine most props except for very obvious direction cues like “draw sword.” Some of the props used surprised me, and sometimes made scenes I had already read make more sense. One of my favorite inclusions was Orsino’s bathtub that he was brought out in. I am guessing it was the Director’s choice to use that, and it worked perfectly with the Duke’s haughty character and Viola’s meekness as she proceeds to scrub Orsino’s feet. The scenery, although limited, gave the story some context. It also made much of the interactions between the characters make sense, as they moved throughout the stage.

The last thing I enjoyed was the proximity of the audience to the stage in this particular production. I remember when I toured the Globe Theatre in London, the guide explained how close many members of the standing audience would be to the stage, and how the audience sort of became a part of the scenery. In the production at the Mesa Arts Center, the room was quite small and nobody was more than ten feet or so away. This made it easier to hear, see, and truly feel like you were part of what was happening on stage. We were so close in fact, that we could all too often see the spit spew from Sir Toby’s mouth.

This was the first Shakespearean play I have seen as a person who can understand it, and I am really glad I attended–I found it much more enjoyable than I originally thought I would.

What is real?

What is the true meaning of the word “real,” and what are the word’s connotations? My first road bump in my search came across in my initial decision on a word. I had chosen reality at first, but had it suggested that I include real in my search as well. To me, that would completely defeat the purpose of a one-word search. However, after long and arduous hours of contemplation (I am not kidding), I have decided on the word “real.” The word “real” encompasses a far greater range of definitions and ideas than reality, and I can still include reality and other real-derived words in my essay. I chose the word real because I’m interested in the intangible, the human experience, and philosophy. Who or what defines what real is to one person or another, and what effects does that have?

Off the top of my head, the word “real” to me simply means anything that exists. To understand that definition, we have to also understand what the word “exist” could me? Something that exists I would say means anything that consists of matter. On the other hand, who is to say that everything that people think isn’t real? Is the Internet real? Are ghosts real? Am I real? It’s quite hard to clearly define what ‘real” is, and that’s why I’m interested in learning more about it.

Of course, there are a plethora of alternative definitions of “real”; not artificial; utter; real number; and so on. Nonetheless, I think the main focus of my search will focus on the original definition I mentioned above. (269)

Wait! Did he just say what I think he said?

Lines 236-239

“Allas! a foul thing is it, by my feith,
To seye this word, and fouler is the dede,
Whan man so drinketh of the whyte and rede,
That of his throte he maketh his privee,
Thurgh thilke cursed superfluitee.”

By saying (in my own words) that man turns his mouth into a toilet by drinking so much white and red wine does the Pardoner mean that the actual wine is so “unholy” that it metaphorical turns your mouth into a toilet? Or does he mean that by drinking so much wine you are likely to throw up, turning your mouth into a receptacle for the “stuff” that would have most likely gone into the toilet?
I think my second conclusion is far more thoughtful. However, because he is preaching about religion he probably means that wine directly corrupts whatever it touches.

Also, I understand the first four lines perfectly, but I only have a rough understanding of the last line. I know that “superfluitee” means overindulgence, which fits with the Pardoner’s whole gluttony theme here. But I’m not sure what “Thurgh thilke cursed” is supposed to mean.