Through his poetry, William Blake sets up dichotomies to reveal aspects of the human condition. By pairing his two poems, “The Lamb” and “The Tyger”, Blake examples the duality and complexity of comfort. When one feels as if their previous beliefs and knowledge has been confirmed, one feels comfort in the order of their mind. However, when an experience goes against their previous understanding, chaos ensues in the mind. William Blake’s life experiences exemplify the comfort in order and struggle against chaos. In the late 1790’s, Blake experienced success when teaching, drawing, and creating engravings; in turn, this created a sense of comfort. However, life stripped away this comfort when in 1803 Blake was accused of verbally dismissing his
…show more content…
When seeing the tyger, the narrator questions the creator’s intention and motive behind creating the animal: “What hammer? What chain? What furnace was thy brain? What the anvil?” Instead of the creator’s motive being comfort and need-based, the narrator believes the tyger was created in malice. The harsh, destructive imagery implies the creator formed the tyger violently. The creator, in the eyes of the narrator, could only “dare” to create such a beast. The tyger’s “fire” pushed the narrator to feel “fearful” and “deadly terror.” Unlike the lamb, the tyger exudes negative, dangerous attributes. The tyger promotes fear by its existence. The persona described the existence of the tyger to be beyond his comfortable world: “What distance deeps or skies.” The narrator notes the tyger lurks among “forests of the night,” instead of a bright, comfortable nature. Unlike the lamb, the tyger seems to not belong with the rest of nature (“The Tyger”). As Gilliam explains, “The shock experienced in the presence of the tyger causes the speaker to look further than the world he knows,” (Gilliam 6). Instead of only questioning who created the animal, the narrator also questions the creator’s motive. His questions imply a deep confusion and mystery about the tyger. The persona cannot identify with the tyger since he questions its entire existence. Gilliam …show more content…
In “The Tyger,” the narrator questions, “Did he who made the lamb make thee?” (“The Tyger”). Although unanswered, the question implies the narrator acknowledges the possibility of both opposing animals having a purpose in nature. The persona may not understand why the creator would create both the lamb and tyger, but he, nonetheless, questions how the two differing animals can exist in harmony. Thus, the narrator questions how both order and chaos exist in the world. Similarly, Blake also questions this theory: “Blake believed that they must co-exist, but how?” (Stevenson 214). Without the knowledge of the lamb, the persona could never relate his experience with the tyger to his previous understanding of creation. If the persona never experienced the confusing state of chaos, he could never understand the truly comforting state of order. Furthermore, without experiencing the tyger, the narrator would never confront his beliefs and question his knowledge. Although scary, his encounter with chaos allows for a healthy discourse about his beliefs. As Stevenson explains, “The unresolved conflicts of…‘The Lamb’ and ‘The Tyger’ remain insistent, simply because of the truth of their contrary images,” (Stevenson 214). Therefore, although the states of order and chaos oppose each other, they compliment each other in order to for the states to
When seeing the tyger, the narrator questions the creator’s intention and motive behind creating the animal: “What hammer? What chain? What furnace was thy brain? What the anvil?” Instead of the creator’s motive being comfort and need-based, the narrator believes the tyger was created in malice. The harsh, destructive imagery implies the creator formed the tyger violently. The creator, in the eyes of the narrator, could only “dare” to create such a beast. The tyger’s “fire” pushed the narrator to feel “fearful” and “deadly terror.” Unlike the lamb, the tyger exudes negative, dangerous attributes. The tyger promotes fear by its existence. The persona described the existence of the tyger to be beyond his comfortable world: “What distance deeps or skies.” The narrator notes the tyger lurks among “forests of the night,” instead of a bright, comfortable nature. Unlike the lamb, the tyger seems to not belong with the rest of nature (“The Tyger”). As Gilliam explains, “The shock experienced in the presence of the tyger causes the speaker to look further than the world he knows,” (Gilliam 6). Instead of only questioning who created the animal, the narrator also questions the creator’s motive. His questions imply a deep confusion and mystery about the tyger. The persona cannot identify with the tyger since he questions its entire existence. Gilliam …show more content…
In “The Tyger,” the narrator questions, “Did he who made the lamb make thee?” (“The Tyger”). Although unanswered, the question implies the narrator acknowledges the possibility of both opposing animals having a purpose in nature. The persona may not understand why the creator would create both the lamb and tyger, but he, nonetheless, questions how the two differing animals can exist in harmony. Thus, the narrator questions how both order and chaos exist in the world. Similarly, Blake also questions this theory: “Blake believed that they must co-exist, but how?” (Stevenson 214). Without the knowledge of the lamb, the persona could never relate his experience with the tyger to his previous understanding of creation. If the persona never experienced the confusing state of chaos, he could never understand the truly comforting state of order. Furthermore, without experiencing the tyger, the narrator would never confront his beliefs and question his knowledge. Although scary, his encounter with chaos allows for a healthy discourse about his beliefs. As Stevenson explains, “The unresolved conflicts of…‘The Lamb’ and ‘The Tyger’ remain insistent, simply because of the truth of their contrary images,” (Stevenson 214). Therefore, although the states of order and chaos oppose each other, they compliment each other in order to for the states to