Cosmo+Monkhouse+Any+Soul+to+Any+Body

Type in Victorian, again (contemporary of Hopkins, Whitman, etc.) Not a professional poet, but a British diplomat, very religious, who died in 1901. __ Structure __ __ Rhyme __ __Stanzas__ – 8 lines each with a particular structure ABABABCC This is known as an Ottava rima (from Italian) – brought from Italian poetry into English in the 16th century by Thomas Wyatt (who also brought in Petrarchan sonnet form) Only Stanzas 2 and 3 work in this way perfectly. (though 1 and 4 are close) Variation in the __First Stanza__ – the third line may be intended to be a “partial rhyme or forced rhyme” (think Compan – I). Would make it fit then. Otherwise, the poem follows the rules of the Ottava rima. Variation is __Stanza 4__ – first line, “were” possibly intended to be a forced rhyme with “care” etc. Otherwise it too is a variation on the Ottava rima. Variation in __Stanza 5__ – obviously different, and intended to be so. The couplet at the end is a continuation of the rhyme earlier, not new like in the other stanzas. __ Rhythm __ Take first stanza: and do scansion to figure it out: Lines are generally iambic or trochaic/ anapestic pentameter (5 meterical feet, unstressed/ stressed) But there are variations in this too. Extra syllable in alternate lines. . . so it’s not entirely iambic then. There are possibly some anapests (unstressed X 2, then stressed) in there at the end/ beginning. Or dactyls (the reverse of anapests) These may even be more prominent in other lines. -- figure out number of stresses in the line to decide. Enjambment also occurring here. . . __ Content __ Serious poem about death, but with light, even humourous moments The soul is addressing the body, Christian theological idea of the body and soul equally trapt by one another. Soul transcendent, body ages and decays (Soul lives on; Body of course will be resurrected, but there is still a material difference in the two). __ Stanza 1 __ --sets up the soul as the dominant force “my body” (ownership) not the other way around, or is it merely affectionate referall, implied closeness of the relationship (e.g. the way you would refer to your partner – my husband, my wife). -- it is a pairing again, perhaps even a juxtaposition (opposites paired together) -- final couplet is quite serious, but the middle lines are a lighter treatment of the subject (“what’ere the weather” “wet or dry” – trival/ flippant comment on the closeness of the relationship) Is there a conceit here, an extended metaphor, of the marriage vows?? (wet or dry, sickness and in health)? --“Clove” – effect of word? Is he using deliberately archaic language? --“the limit of your tether” – implicit metaphor (vehicle there, tenor not). . . body is chained somehow to mortality (idea that it is a cage for the soul, though, in this case, not an unpleasant one, apparently). __ Stanza 2 __ Parrelling/ contrasting what the soul thinks and what he’s been told he should think --First line and 3rd lines – “They” (theologians?) Christian theology of the dangers of the body (its demands, its less than divine (fallen) nature) – “wicked to be sad” (wicked is a loaded word) --Soul begs forgiveness of his body for repeating this sentiment, and says that he has not experienced this (not “all together bad” anyway) -- “a clod, a prison” – the body again cast as a cage for the soul -- lines 13 and 14. . . completing the thought/ perspective, but asserting uncertainty about whether he will feel so. -- final couplet – archaic language again, and also decision that he does grieve the loss (again, couplet seems more serious, less light hearted than the preceding lines (even though the deal with serious subject matter). __ Stanza 3 __ Tone overall is quite serious – not really any light-hearted lines here -- the content here, that the soul declares the body to be “more honest” and truthful than the soul contrasts deeply with the argument (that the soul did not accept) of Christian theology of the wickedness of the body – impulses, perhaps, but they also tell truth (e.g. blush – hard to fake – honest reaction to embarrassment).  -- soul reserves the power to “think” though/ body simply reacts __ Stanza 4 __ Tone shifts, from quite humourous in the first line, to very dark in the last  --Soul taking responsibility for the state of the body (again, emphasizing the relationship, and also the locus of power for action – Soul dominant) -- “not your fault, and partly mine” – time has a role too, but implication is that the soul (conciousness) can think, but perhaps made bad decisions that made the body age more quickly that it need to have done. -- “first design” – obviously, birth, youth, but, more deeply an allusion to creation story (Adam’s creation . . . God’s design). -- last line – “hungry legions of Decay” – personification created by the capitalization (always comment on such things!) -- unpacking the metaphor – Decay has legions (read armies/ soldiers/ workers) that do “his” bidding – e.g. the disintegration of the body post death. The body is “patient prey” – “friendless” in the “grave” (alone against a stronger personified force – again, denying the body action) __ Stanza 5 __ Serious tone again, throughout. --“My mother’s eyes overflow” – It is the soul who feels the connection to the mother/ but the body was the representation of it (and thus caused the mother’s tears) --“a slave more willing or a friend more true” (again, the power dynamics here are interesting – body a “slave” to the soul but also a “friend” – juxtaposition of these two concepts that don’t seem to overlap well) -- meaning of the last two lines: Religious theologians who decry the body as worthless, wicked, root of evil, etc. Also do not know what will happen after death (whether it truly is better in the afterlife, whether there is an afterlife once the soul leaves the body). -- considering Monkhouse’s religious convictions, this seems a very profound statement. the content of your page here.
 * Monkhouse – “Any Soul to Any Body” **