The beginning scenes of the poem are littered with mythological creatures, various insects, and even the "BOTANIC MUSE" (31), setting up the world Darwin is about to take the reader into. The mythological creatures establish that we are about to enter a fantasy land, where reason has no say (despite the fact the entire poem is based on scientific classification). This essentially forces the reader to reconsider the way we view the objects we are about to see. It also brings a conscious to Linneus's work, acting as personification upon the study of taxonomy. At least, that is how it seemed to me, if you have anything else to say about the idea that Linneus's work being personified and what kind of implications this could have, I would enjoy hearing it [see questions below].
I find the insects very interesting as I believe they set up the kind of view point the reader should occupy. Maybe it was just me, but when I read about the plants, I imagined them to be either about my size or much bigger as if I were in fact the "painted Moth... Glow-worm... Spider... [or even the] horned snail" (25-29). Darwin keeps with this view point consistently throughout the poem, especially when the speaker talks about the Ilex:
"Four of the giant broods with ILEX stand,
Each grasps a thousand arrows in his hand;
A thousand steely points on every scale
Form the bright terrors of his briftly mail. -" (143-148)
Ilexes seems to be mighty warriors, large enough to guard an entire forest. This resizing also changes the aspect of personification, as we are forced to think of the plants at a more human-like height. They are not simply a small object looked down upon by human eyes, but a force that could meet you at eye level. They almost become like real human beings, as Darwin uses human titles to depict the various plants depending on the number of males to females, maturity levels, and how the plants enter into relationships with each other (not with human beings). There isn't an active search for sympathy here, but rather a kind of personification which seeks for us to witness plants as equal beings.
The female plants are particularly interesting as depending on the male to female ratio, they can take on a number of roles. I won't lie, I actually got this idea from Wikipedia, but mostly it called my attention to be called to the language used. A particularly interesting moment is with the Alcea and Eloisa plants, who the foot notes say are considered to be monster vegetables:
"With vain desire the pensive ALCEA burns,
And, like sad ELOISA, loves and mourns." (69-70)
The foot notes describe how some Alcea plants grow too many petals, eventually making it impossible for the plant to reproduce. For me, this called the image of a woman who waits too long because she keeps thinking she can find be or is unsure of what to do in terms of finding a husband. This is why the plant is described as "pensive" and having a "vain desire".
While I find this aspect of the poem interesting, I am not quite sure how I should read it. At some level there seems to be empowering reads of the female plants becoming intimate with the male plants, such as the Iris, who had "three unjealous husbands wed" (72) her. Other times it seems the female plants seem like temptresses with the three female parts of the Silene being called "three dread Sirens" (138), and the males that become intimate with the Gloriosa are noted as "The flatter'd victims of her wily age" (124).
QUESTION TIME!!!:
- What do you think about the idea of the taxonomy system made by Lenneus being personified within the poem? Or am I thinking of another device?
- What about the meeting of science and imagination? What implication do you think this has?
- How would you describe the relationship between the female and male plants? Who seems to hold more of the power within the relationship?
The question of who holds power, the male of female parts of the plants is an important one: in some cases, the female plants (or, more correctly, the maids who figure forth the pistils or female generative organs) appear as timid or love-lorn maids, while at other times the are seductresses and wily old women. Bewell suggested one way to read this condition in the poem: Darwin is rejecting monogamy and setting out a spectrum of different possible sexual arrangements. Personification thus works quite differently in this poem than in others that we have read: in personifying the plants, Darwin doesn’t create an empathetic connection between people and plants; rather, he suggests a correlation between plant behavior and human behavior. This connection might be read as thwarting social and sexual conventions of Britain at the time, which comports with Darwin’s radical beliefs in other aspects. Darwin was once reprimanded by his local clergyman for painting the phrase “E conchis omnia" or “all from shells” on his carriage, a phrase that advertised his belief in evolution. His poem is thus probably less interested in empowering women and more interested in challenging the status quo in many areas of his society.
ReplyDeleteYour example of the lines from p. 7 is very interesting: the name “Eloisa” is in all caps because it refers to a poem by Alexander Pope titled “Eloisa to Abelard.” This poem is spoken by Eloisa after she has been confined in a convent for having an illicit relationship with a man (Abelard) that her family didn’t approve of. Abelard had been castrated by her family and therefore Eloisa could never fulfill her desires or reproduce with him. This literary reference reinforces the point in the footnote (that a multiplication of petals makes the flower into a eunuch that cannot produce seeds), but it also raises questions about the commentary Darwin is making on human relations and power: the hollyhock is a “vegetable monster,” suggesting that Eloisa’s situation is also monstrous (and that her family made her so). Darwin often uses literary and mythological references to extend his points into a critique of abusive social conventions and practices. The poem also includes support for the abolition of the slave trade and a discussion of prison reform, among other important reform causes of the 1790s.