Poem Analysis: a Parody
[Note: The verbose language was intentional. I deliberately tried to use very complicated language as part of the parody. Furthermore, there may be mistakes as to the accuracy of using a specific term, but this is a pseudo-academic text, not an academic one, so kindly overlook any errors. Also, I don’t intend to poke fun at the whole enterprise of analysis. Critics and academics can have insightful and very probable ideas about a text, and this essay is not intended to discredit that]
In this essay, it is the intention of the writer to examine a couplet of poetry, and therefrom to extract subtle meanings that would not be evident to many persons who happened to read the couplet independent of our interpretation. The author of the aforementioned couplet says:
With axe he smote the tree in twain
And let out screams and shouts of pain
From a purely semantic perspective, it is probable that this couplet is part of a wider narrative, and the surface level meaning is that a certain individual attempted to cut a tree with the means of an axe, yet, his strength proving insufficient, he caused himself pain thereby, but was able to split the tree. This is the denotative reading. Our endeavour is to interpret it in a much deeper way.
We first proceed with the formal and structural phenomena present. The couplet is composed of acatalectic iambic tetrameter, with not a hint to either an acephalous beginning, or any catalexis. We assert then, that the effect that this metrical strictness has is that it reflects the organisation of this protagonist. He is perhaps an apprentice woodsman, and hence, as a labourer, would needs follow a strict routine in at least his work dealings, for fear of being fired. Yet, conversely, it could be said, given the rather negative image we are given of him, that he is quite the opposite, and hence the metre juxtaposes this by following a strict pattern. Hence there is ambiguity in this matter and we are not, in this couplet, given any further details of this.
It follows, from our earlier point, that the couplet is syllabically consistent. Numerically, the lines are eight syllables each. 2^3 is equivalent to 8, but if we sum the total syllables, and also individual lexis, we arrive at 16, which, in the tautology of mathematics, is 2^4. Then, looking in terms of feet, 2^1 is the same as 2, which is accurate as each foot is iambic. Furthermore, taking this couplet in isolation, which we should be permitted to do given the couplet rhyme scheme, it is 2, which is again 2^1. The same can be said for the rhyme. Finally, the fragment ‘smote the tree in twain’ explicitly mentions a duality. Hence, syllabically, there is a plethora of dualities present, and the purpose of this can be said to reinforce the two main entities that are the subject of this couplet, namely the man and the tree.
If we are asked, what of the axe, does it not constitute a third entity and hence refute your thesis? We answer that we could argue that the axe serves as an extension to the man in this instance, hence we do not consider it as being a subject in the couplet. Furthermore, if we stipulate that our thesis was specifically for living beings, then the objection is avoided.
Also, observe the monosyllabic nature of each lexeme present in this couplet. We suggest that the reason for this stylistic decision is to phonologically and graphologically mirror each successive action, providing a chronological representation of each successive event.
Turning now to the lexical analysis, we can see that the first lexeme is ‘with.’ This preposition normally connotes the meaning of physical proximity, yet in this instance clearly means ‘through the means of.’ Yet we can link this to the former prepositional meaning, as naturally the tool utilised, in this case an axe, was in physical proximity to the protagonist, as it would, presumably, be present in his hand.
Next, we have the lexeme ‘axe’ and herefrom we could derive some symbolism. Axes may be either one-edged or two, and this context can either symbolise human greed as being constantly focused on the object of desire (one-edged axes) or the self-destructive nature of greed (two-edged axes). We are not informed as to the specifics of the axe, but we observe that the protagonist suffered from its usage, hence reinforcing the self-harming nature of greed, so it matters not as to which was intended. The reason we can specify human greed as being the tenor of this metaphor, if indeed we can be permitted to refer to this as a metaphor, is that the protagonist is cutting a tree, which can symbolise human desire for natural resources. This, when abstracted, can be seen as referring to human greed. Phonologically, the lexeme ‘axe’ has a rather abrupt sound. This, when combined with its status as a stressed syllable, gives a phonological description of the sound of the axe hitting the tree.
The pronoun ‘he’ can be seen as either a cataphoric or anaphoric reference, depending on the earlier and later lines, if indeed more lines exist [only two more lines of this poem were composed, and neither give any name to this man]. We shall take it as neither. Rather we shall take this individual and assume him to be a microcosm for humanity, which adds to our previous interpretation of the lexeme.
We have three ‘s’ related sounds: ‘smote,’ ‘screams’ and ‘shouts.’ This sibilant phonology can be said to provide an aural reflection of the swishing of the axe. This can be seen as juxtaposing the phonological harshness of ‘pain.’ This, in turn, with its abruptness, can be said to reflect the abruptness of the pain experienced.
In conclusion, none of this analysis was intended by the writer, so this whole essay, from an analytical point of view, is arguably meaningless. How do I know this, you ask. Well, I wrote that couplet…