|
1 2 [3] 4
Comment 13 of 33, added on November 23rd, 2005 at 12:41 PM.
I don't feel too terribly much like elaborating, but I couldn't help but smile while reading the last 2 lines aloud. I don't think Larkin thought he was saying anything new or exciting by saying we all fuck with each other, especially in family situations, it's been said countless times before. I think he was, instead, saying "man, we're goofy. But what 're ya' gonna do: shit happens."
The first two stanzas remain fairly light and almost nonchalant - i took the use of "fuck" more like some old guy who drops it casually than dark and monstrous. He definitely mocks the somewhat juvenile, angsty sentiments literally expressed by treating it in so stereotypical a manner, turning the common phrases and structures of the relationship described into little jokes about it. Of course, he has to ackknowledge that it has merit beyond adolescent whining, and the first two lines of the last stanza are certainly dark and serious. He very much acknowledges a validity and hopelessness in it all.
However - i guess this is where i differ from most of you it seems - i saw another mood shift in the last two lines, one going back beyond adolescent musings to childish simplicity. I really can't really see the last lines as sounding dark, they sound playful. Through the exceptional simplicity and starkness (a two line answer of simple words to answer the previous 10) of what he says, he invalidates it as the ultimate answer for everyone.
this is why I see the poem more as something fairly comical and very satirical of our whole situation. While we all want to complain and about how much the world sucks, we (as the many of the people posting here illustrate) can't except these simple little solutions, like just not having kids, because somehow, we love the shittiness of the world around us, it nourishes us like a parent nourishes a child. He doesn't suggest that we are propogating our own distruction and that the clock is ticking (as you'll notice the shorelines, even those made of shitty realtions, grow endlessly), he merely makes us look silly. He proposes no solutions, he simply asks us to evaluate the human experience and acknowledge it's flaws, and even to a degree love them.
bryan from United States
Comment 12 of 33, added on November 12th, 2005 at 2:58 PM.
The poem is sardonic and resigned. Every son and every dad will know the underlying sentiments to be true. Parents can't help but pass on themselves to their children, and children fully realise that only when they themselves mature. All children both resent and feel inadequate when compared to their parents, hence the "here's some extra" line. This poem only sank with me when I had children! Larkin never had children, but there you go.
Steve from United Kingdom
Comment 11 of 33, added on November 7th, 2005 at 10:18 AM.
Larkin hits the nail on the head in verses 1&2; growing up in the 50s & 60s I was certainly fucked up by my mother, who was way too possessive, and never ever let go until she died. I have been happily married for nearly 30 years and have 3 wonderfully independent-minded daughters who can say anything to their mother and me...my wife also suffered from repressed parenting and we have been determined to give our girls every opportunity to make their own decisions, giving advice when requested, and trying to guide rather than dictate.
I agree that the last verse shifts the mood from wry, if slightly caustic observation, to bitter recrimination, but on the whole the poem articulates brilliantly the secret angst of many people.
Tony from United Kingdom
Comment 10 of 33, added on November 1st, 2005 at 4:12 AM.
Larkin taps into a fundamental psychological process for the transmission thoughts and feelins and behaviours across the generations. In Transactional Analysis Larkin is describing the creation of life scripts - just a little more succinctly.
Rob van Tol from United Kingdom
Comment 9 of 33, added on October 10th, 2005 at 1:15 PM.
taken literally this poem is dark and disturbing but when you look at the relationship the last verse has with the other two its less about a family relationship and more about humanity and its flaws. The underlying idea is that we need to stop fucking with each other. Its more of a statement of peace then the inexorable pain caused within a family relationship.
lydia from Canada
Comment 8 of 33, added on September 30th, 2005 at 9:03 AM.
I enjoy this poem, but only as a wry look at the relationship between parents and children. I assume the last verse is supposed to give the poem more depth, but I find it jars. It gives the first two verses a darker meaning than I believe they can bear. Firstly, because it suggests a degree of actual harm. Secondly, because in adopting a darker interpretation, it ignores the joy children bring to parents. Thirdly, as others have touched on, once you become a parent yourself, the actions and attitudes of your own parents seem much more sensible.
I would be interested in knowing how much of a shock the use of the word "fuck" was in 1974, when the poem was written. While the use of the word in the same line as "mum and dad" still has an impact, it much have much less of an effect than it once did, surely?
G Jackson from United Kingdom
Comment 7 of 33, added on September 30th, 2005 at 8:36 AM.
Larkin definitely hits the mark. For what its worth, read a quote the other day, not sure who wrote it, but it might fit with the vibe.
"You will never truly mature as a person until you forgive your parents"
Sugggestion: New ritual that every child (regardless of religion) can opt participate in on their 16th birhtday. No pomp and ceremony, 5 minute conversation in which they express forgiveness for parental mistakes and stupidity.
Steve from Ireland
Comment 6 of 33, added on September 30th, 2005 at 8:12 AM.
The title "This Be The Verse" refers to Robert Louis Stevenson's "Requiem":
This be the verse you grave for me:
Here he lies where he longed to be;
Home is the sailor, home from sea,
And the hunter home from the hill.
D* from United Kingdom
Comment 5 of 33, added on September 19th, 2005 at 3:32 AM.
this poem was in a way very negative about our parents i think (my opinion) ;)
mark elwell from Malaysia
Comment 4 of 33, added on May 28th, 2005 at 5:57 AM.
As I am reaching mature age, have 2 mature age children, I love this poem, it is so apt, you really don`t mean too, but don`t realise how much influence you have over them. Thankfully I have two children who tell me what they feel, they have read this and love it also.
Chris from Australia
This poem has been commented on more than 10 times. Click below to see the other comments.
1 2 [3] 4
|
Copyright © 2003-2008 Gunnar Bengtsson, Poetry Connection. All Rights Reserved.
I don't feel too terribly much like elaborating, but I couldn't help but smile while reading the last 2 lines aloud. I don't think Larkin thought he was saying anything new or exciting by saying we all fuck with each other, especially in family situations, it's been said countless times before. I think he was, instead, saying "man, we're goofy. But what 're ya' gonna do: shit happens."
The first two stanzas remain fairly light and almost nonchalant - i took the use of "fuck" more like some old guy who drops it casually than dark and monstrous. He definitely mocks the somewhat juvenile, angsty sentiments literally expressed by treating it in so stereotypical a manner, turning the common phrases and structures of the relationship described into little jokes about it. Of course, he has to ackknowledge that it has merit beyond adolescent whining, and the first two lines of the last stanza are certainly dark and serious. He very much acknowledges a validity and hopelessness in it all.
However - i guess this is where i differ from most of you it seems - i saw another mood shift in the last two lines, one going back beyond adolescent musings to childish simplicity. I really can't really see the last lines as sounding dark, they sound playful. Through the exceptional simplicity and starkness (a two line answer of simple words to answer the previous 10) of what he says, he invalidates it as the ultimate answer for everyone.
this is why I see the poem more as something fairly comical and very satirical of our whole situation. While we all want to complain and about how much the world sucks, we (as the many of the people posting here illustrate) can't except these simple little solutions, like just not having kids, because somehow, we love the shittiness of the world around us, it nourishes us like a parent nourishes a child. He doesn't suggest that we are propogating our own distruction and that the clock is ticking (as you'll notice the shorelines, even those made of shitty realtions, grow endlessly), he merely makes us look silly. He proposes no solutions, he simply asks us to evaluate the human experience and acknowledge it's flaws, and even to a degree love them.
bryan from United States