Hartley’s novel Essay

Although appearing to halt a cynical view of delight in in the poem Larkin does in fact non doubt love, further the expectations that we have of it. In the words of Andrew Swarbrick, Larkin expresses not feelings of bitterness or pessimism but of pathos, of a tender benevolence for the widow who recalls dreams knowing they are best forgotten. Though sometimes grateful reminiscing erect reveal hopes that were unfulfilled, dreams neer lived push through, good times we can never experience again.Therefore what we perceive to be pessimism in Larkin is, in this instance, respectable rattlingism, an understanding of the illusions contained in the world, making him less deceived as a result. He once remarked, Poetry is an affair of sanity, of seeing things as they really are it was for him a way of being honest, not overestimating the value of things. Nonetheless, in the closing poem of The Whitsun Weddings, An Arundel Tomb, Larkin hints at his belief in love. Despite not ha ving a successful love life himself he still implies that he has trust in its inhabitence, the ultimate word of the anthology being the abstract noun, love.This key egress is a testament to its endurance and strength, What will rifle of us is love. legerdemain Saunders likens these lines containing the prove/love rhyme to Shakespeares attempt to define true up love in Sonnet 73, Larkins concluding line echo the rhyming couplet, If this be error, and upon me proved I never wrote, nor no human race ever loved. An Arundel Tomb concentrates on the historical aspect of the old. The persona in the poem, which is in fact Larkin, examines the concept of artifacts, how something set in stone can withstand the test of time regardless of whether it actually existed in the source place.Visiting a Sussex churchyard Larkin sees an example of love that both displaces and intrigues him, had it not been for the incongruity of two linked men displayed on the tomb he would have walked b y. It is a gesture small yet touching but the cynic in Larkin questions its validity presuming it to be a case of a sculptors sweet commissioned grace rather than a symbol of a long and devoted marriage. Together in finis the couples faces blurred but the husband is still holding her hand. over time their features have been weathered but their effigy remains as a reminder of their lives, a monument to their love. Archaic language is apply to complement the subject matter of the poem, capturing a bygone time so unlike todays unarmorial age. Further manipulation of sentence structure is evident with the effective juxtaposition of the adjectives sharp and tender, conveying entirely but perfectly Larkins confused and mixed reaction to the pith of the stone hands. There is debate over Larkins true feelings towards the real meaning of the faithfulness in effigy.Whether or not he again intended the pun with the use of the verb lie just as lovers were lying together in bed is unclear. As Brother Anthony (An Sonjae) points out in his paper Without Metaphysics there is a huge diversity in the interpretations of Larkins intended meaning in his work, it is up to the reader to locate their own response which is good for the reader, but a challenge as well. Does the poet trust that love survives not only in stone? Or as Andrew Swarbrick quite rightly points out does he almost believe it as the penultimate line suggests?Our almost-instinct almost true therefore cancels out the optimism of the following statement. Here we witness Larkin lowering his defenses, allowing himself to hope for the best, to want love to be that much mentioned brilliance but he cannot do so completely for fear of it being an illusion. Although hinting at what he truly believes it is as though he will not allow himself to trust it in case he is mistaken. Yet whether love survives or not it lives on in Arundel where only an spot remains. This is also true of Larkins poetry, and in fact to the w hole genre.Whereas fictional characters and places from refreshings are lost, forgotten, poetry allows thoughts to survive as art long after the death of the artist. Larkin wrote of this inspiring philosophical system in 1955, contained in a statement to D. J. Enright he explained, I spare poems to preserve things I have seen/thought/felt I forecast the impulse to preserve lies at the bottom of all art. Yet as mentioned previously the meaning of Larkins literature is not always clear, just like he could only assume the significance of the joined hands we can only guess at the thoughts of Philip Larkin which are contained and live on in his verse.The poem Dockery and Son relates the events and emotions that occur when Philip Larkin returns his old college, steps sustain into the other(prenominal) only to be disappointed with what he finds there. An outsider there, he no womb-to-tomb belongs and finds himself a stranger in his own past, as well as physically being unable to enter his past residence the door of where (he) used to live is also locked fableically. However, the most move thing for Larkin is the news that one of his peers now has at son at Oxford Dockery unlike Larkin with no son, no wife, no house or go through is a success story.The door to fatherhood is therefore also locked for Larkin. By starting with dialogue the poem is made more authentic as it adds an injection of reality to the verse. It also alerts Larkin to the fact that he is no longer part of that world, of public school boys and ranks, he, unlike Dockery, has no reason to revisit that part of his life. He feels ignored. As in The Whitsun Weddings Larkin philosophizes whilst on a train which is not only a vehicle in the customary sense of the noun but a vehicle for his thoughts and also a metaphor for direction, moving forward in life.The simplistic repetition in the triplet stanza How much How little conveys Larkins disappointment in himself as he contemplates his own a chievements in comparison with those of Dockery. Whereas Leo Colston benefited from his nostalgic visit to the past it has been a negative experience for Larkin who should never have returned. Both Larkin and Hartley save philosophies on the past in two contrasting but evenly effective genres, which themselves give insight into the pasts of the authors.The past is, as both pieces of literature show, inevitably significant to us all. How we are affected by it however, each negatively or positively, is to some extent in our own hands. tear down a god cannot change the past (Agathon 445 BC) yet we can move on, learn from our experiences and in the future be less deceived. L. P. Hartleys novel is a message to us all that we should not dwell on what has come before, but concentrate on living the present, Leo recognize that he should not be sitting alone before it was besides late.In reality the past does not fully exist in the words of Larkin it is a love song that can never buy t he farm the same, a locked door which we can never be reopened, only an attitude that lives on in our minds. We may try to capture moments and emotions in stone, or in verse yet the only place where they truly exist is in our memory. We have the ability to dictate the significance the past holds for us. And so whilst we cannot change our pasts, we have the ability to change our future Shakespeare declared that Whats past is prologue yet we can determine what is contained in the epilogue.