Anne Bradstreet
So how was Bradstreet able to emerge from this state of things? It would be nice and inspirational to say that she did so by virtue of her strength of will and determination--but that would be naive. No doubt, she had will and determination--but she also had the good fortune to be born into comfortable economic and social circumstances. In short, she was born into a class for whom the "luxury" of education and writing was readily available. She had the advantage of having private tutors, as well as the support (including financial) of her family. Nevertheless, Bradstreet's accomplishment as a published poet was no mean feat.
A key step in reading and discussing her poems lies in reading them in the order in which the children die. Clearly in reading these poems (and others), Bradstreet suffered a good deal of loss, though that did not necessarily make her terribly distinct in her time. What's interesting, though, is to gage the change in tone as she moves from one poem to the next and continues to struggle with the mounting losses. What I would like you to do is focus especially on the poems "In Memory of My Dear Grandchild Elizabeth Bradstreet" and "On My Dear Grandchild Simon Bradstreet," a poem describing the death of a child some 4 years after the first. Does her attitude about death and God change, even if slightly, from one poem to the next? Pay close attention to the language she uses to describe death in the first poem, and compare that to the language she uses in the second.
Bradstreet is surprised and bewildered by the death of her granddaughter in the first poem. “Then ta’en away” indicates that she feels she has been robbed. Who could she attribute that act to, other than God? When she asks “why should I bewail thy fate,” it seems that she is trying to force herself into not questioning God for taking the child away. As a Puritan of good standing, she could hardly be blatant in that questioning; she seems to be trying to rationalize or make up for her lapse in the second verse, which reminds me of the Biblical verse “To Every Thing There Is a Season.” After giving the first verse over to mourning, she’s acknowledging the inevitability of death and decay and the fact that the decision belongs to God, even when it concerns "buds new blown."
ReplyDeleteThe second poem, it seems, should be accompanied by a deep, frustrated sigh – this was the third grandchild to die, and he was “i’ th’ bud” – not even allowed to live as long as the first two. Her feelings toward the child, with whom she had less time to develop a bond, are perhaps less personal than the first poem, but angrier. Bradstreet attributes to God a sort of impulsive violence in this poem: “Cropt by th’ Almighty hand” are angry words, which she attempts to balance by adding “yet He is good.” Again, she is trying to convey the Puritan spirit and avoid any accusations of blasphemy, but she seems to struggle with her true feelings throughout the poem, playing with thoughts which are counter to the Puritans’ religious beliefs. She appears to be saying “God causes these awful things to happen, yet we are supposed to believe him merciful and just?” yet trying to give the impression that’s not what she’s saying. It’s also interesting – defiant of God, in light of the belief that not all are destined for Heaven -- that she declares in the final two lines that the baby and his sisters are all saved: “Among the blest in endless joys remain.”
The first poem,"In Memory of my Dear Grandchild Elizabeth Bradstreet" was more affirmative than the second. Bradstreet had resigned herself to her grandaughter's death,and even believed Elizabeth, was in a better place; therefore, she could not be mournfull."Blest babe, why should I bewail thy fate, Or sigh thy days so soon were terminate, Sith though are in an everlasting state."
ReplyDeleteHowever,like many who may become overwhelmed by the random and tragic events that all too often occur in life, by the time her grandson died four years later; she was less optimistic. "No sooner came, but gone and falln asleep, Acquaintance short, yet parting caused us weep." She goes on to say, "With humble hearts and mouths put in the dust, Let's say hes merciful as well as just." Though some of the same spirtual rhetoric was used in both poem's, the tone was completely different. If Bradstreet's first poem was meant to encourage and convince the masses on how to cope with death, the latter was to convince one; herself.
She was writing about her granddaugher who has died as a baby. Bradstreet was a devout Puritan who believed in God's grace and His will, but she was also a woman who loved her family deeply. Both aspects of her character are present in the poem as she mourns the baby's death while striving to accept God's will.
ReplyDeleteIn the poem's conclusion, Bradstreet addresses her grief that this child had not lived a long life as is the natural order. She finds comfort in her faith that it is God's hand that "guides nature and fate." She struggles to accept her personal loss as being God's will.
The second poem, she is writing about her grandson, Simon Bradstreet as way to convince herself that this is “by the Almighty” and God’s will.
Even just glancing at the poems it's easy to see a big difference between the two. There's a lot of Capitalized letters in the second poem: Almighty, He. The importance of this is that in the first poem Bradstreet attributes her grandchild's death to the course nature, while in the second, she talks of God having a much larger hand in the child's fate. It seems to me like she's trying not to blame God.
ReplyDeleteThe first poem is a loving gentle farewell to “the pleasure of mine eye.” Mrs. Bradstreet refers to her granddaughter as “dear babe”, “sweet babe”, and “fair flower” and she seems resigned to God’s will that the child be “settled in an everlasting state.”
ReplyDeleteThe mood in the second poem is strikingly different. Mrs. Bradstreet appears disillusioned and her anger with God’s will is reflected in the words she has chosen – “rot”, “brings down”, “mown”, “eradicate”. Although she acknowledges that God “guides nature and fate”, she still seems to be having difficultly reconciling herself to the reason someone so young was chosen to die.
The emotional tone of the second poem feels more authentic than the idealist sentiment and romanticized language of the piece written after the death of Mrs. Bradstreet’s granddaughter.
Bradstreet seems fairly optimistic about her granddaughter’s ascension into heaven. Though she clearly is devastated, her language is light and hopeful. Bradstreet uses very gentle words like “lent” and “pleasure” and “fair flower.” She is reassuring herself that the death of the child was necessary. Why should she be upset if young Elizabeth is in a better place?
ReplyDeleteThe second poem is a little different. Instead of being lent on earth, Bradstreet writes that her grandson was “cropt” from life. The language takes a subtle shift in a slightly more coarse direction. It seems that now she doubts the will of the Lord. Bradstreet has already suffered the loss of one grandchild, so she probably doesn’t understand why another has to go. Her faith in God may be dwindling slightly. The tone she uses in the second poem is a bit more questioning: why was taking the life of a baby boy the will of God? With their “mouths put in the dust,” Bradstreet must feel like she shouldn’t complain about this and just accept the deaths. She half-heartedly suggests, “Let’s just say He’s merciful as well as just.”
The death of her granddaughter she explains to be a natural and common part of life. "Is by His hand alone that guides nature and fate." It was bound to happen and there was nothing that Bradstreet could do that would change the outcome. In the poem about her grandson dying she is a little more upset but tries not to be angry with God. "Cropt by th' Almighty's hand; yet is He good." I think she still understands that death is a natural part of life but does not understand why these small children need to die at such a young age. "No sooner came, but gone, and fall'n asleep."
ReplyDeleteBradstreet comes off as kind of bewildered and shocked about the death of her granddaughter in the first poem. I felt that there were some lines that indicated the way that she felt towards the traumatic event that she had to go through. I viewed a lot of her first poem as having the feeling of loosing something so unexpectedly. It's happened to all of us, because it's a part of everyday life. The feeling of loosing someone who is close to you can be very hard to handle, and it can happen at anytime. She also uses the word "ignorant" in the first half of the poem. She may not have known much about the feelings that death will bring and she may have felt dumbfounded and this could have been because her not knowing that death is indeed a part of our everyday lives. I also viewed some of Bradstreet's writing feelings towards the notion that she may not have had the chance to say goodbye to her granddaughter.
ReplyDelete