The Beggar Woman tricks the man into taking the baby by making every excuse so as to force him to take the baby, if he wants sex; however she does this not particularly skillfully but the man is under the illusion he is acting of his own free will. Out of desperation, he says “‘Were the child tied to me, d’ye think ‘twould do?’” this is the answer the woman has been waiting for (I don’t believe this was spontaneous), she agrees, “’Mighty well, sir! Oh Lord! if tied to you!’” I think this line shows she is overjoyed because her plan is working. Then she quickly sets about tying the baby tightly to the man’s back, before he thinks twice and realizes what he has let himself in for, the woman is fleeing, with the departing words “’Sir, good bye; ben’t angry that we part, I trust the child to you with all my heart: But, ere you get another, ‘ten’t amiss too try a year or two how you’ll keep this.’” I believe that by her actions, the woman is making a point on how society was in the 17th Century. The upper class had it all from birth, could live carefree, fun lives, never have to worry about money, and rarely have to accept consequences. The Lower class, in stark contrast, was born to suffer for the upper class’s decadence and self indulgence. Many of the upper class, however, was unaware of the lower class’s toil, born into what is just a dream for the majority, shielded from the troubles of the real world; so I don’t think it would be fair to call many of the Upper Class as uncaring or cruel. So I think the beggar woman was just trying to make the man aware, and also get a better life for ‘Bobby’ than she could give him.
I believe the poet decided to write his poem in a light hearted tone with a regular rhyme and rhythm (not true in all poems) was so that it would be read and remembered, and hopefully the point taken on board. I believe that the class divide must have been something the poet felt strongly about, so he wrote a poem to get his message and opinion across to people. The rhyme and rhythm is also not a particularly easy stylistic choice to make, and King does well to stop it sounding silly and contrived. The poem is written as a narrative and so has no proper breaks (verses). The poem uses rhyming couplets, which would aid memory, as this poem may have been a bard’s tale, told in taverns, spreading his message. The overall tone of the poem is light hearted but with a serious point which would hopefully be taken onboard, the poems style is suitable for recital in a tavern.
In contrast, To His Coy Mistress, a poem by Andrew Marvell, in contrast to the Beggar Woman does not tell a story, it is a collection of ideas, attempting to coerce a woman into having sex. It is written by a man with very much a ‘Carpe Diem’ philosophy on life, living for the moment, lusting after women that take his fancy. This poem uses far more sophisticated diction, to express the ideas and images intended by the poet. Being more of a philosophical poem than the narrative ‘Beggar Woman’ there is no conversation. In ‘The Beggar Woman’ the whole point of the poem is conveyed in the last few lines where as in ‘To His Coy Mistress’ the ideas are the poem, and so are throughout. ‘To His Coy Mistress’ also uses rhyming couplets, with the final couplets of each verse making the main part of the man’s argument. ‘To His Coy Mistress’ is an argument and so is completely different to ‘The Beggar Woman’.
The man in ‘To His Coy Mistress’ takes a similar role to the gentleman in ‘The Beggar Woman’ in that he is pursuing the woman. The man in this poem again is driven by lust, not love. The object of the poem is a man trying to persuade the woman into having sex and losing her virginity. At first he uses flattery to try and woo the girl, saying that, while she is worthy of the Ganges, in India, that he could only hope for the river Humber in Yorkshire. He then goes on to use exaggeration (hyperbole) saying that had they (He and the woman) all the time in the world he would wait for his lust to turn to love, and love her forever ‘My vegetable love – heart. The final two lines are the main part of his argument, and they use flattery once more, ‘For lady, you deserve this state; Nor would I love at lower rate.’ He tries to instill fear into her referring to death for the whole of the second verse, the best example of this is in his final two lines of the chapter ‘The grave’s a fine and private place, But none, I think do there embrace.’ Then for the third verse he goes back to flattery, and then starts encouraging her ‘And while thy willing soul transpires, At every pore with instant fires’ that is basically saying ‘Come on, I know you want to as well, so lets do it’ also the word ‘Coy’ as used in the title means sort of a pretend playful shy. Then finally he goes on to choose his language even more carefully to try and tempt her with innuendo, use of the word ‘Amorous’ too and him saying ‘Let us roll all our strength, and all Our sweetness, up into one ball’. This poem is all carefully worded and structured to a common end, he wants to persuade/coax this woman into having sex. In doing this, I’d say he was ruthlessly cruel, manipulative, and most definitely acting on lust not love, as If the man really loved the woman he would respect her choice of celibacy. There is no mention of love in the poem, so I assume he is out for the exact same thing as the man in ‘Beggar Woman’, a short term relationship (though probably longer than the man in ‘Beggar Woman’), for his own gratification. I believe that the ‘Carpe Diem’ attitude is fine for two sorts of people, those who know they will live a long life, and those who have no desire to. I do like having fun, but as everyone should I exercise a fair bit of caution.
The role of the woman in this poem, though she is the object of it, is very little else. According to the man she is beauteous and this works against her, the man using it to his advantage. The role women out of each poem discounting social circumstance are both the same, in the eyes of men, objects of lust.
Although written hundreds of years ago, these poems raise questions relevant today. The wants of some men and women from relationships has changed little since them. The men in both poems, are after one thing, and ideally would get it without having to have a steady relationship, both women I assume, would rather not be in their respective positions. Many of the attitudes expressed in the poem are understandable such as the Beggar Woman’s views, as shown at the end of ‘The Beggar Woman’ may have been revolutionary and uproarious at the time, are now seen as the correct and fair way to do things. However this is the only view in the poem I find acceptable, the rest I find dated such as, as I have explained the class divide, and also the sexual inequalities, women being treated as a inferior species almost. Still many of the views etc. expressed in these poems are applicable today, the ‘Carpe Diem’ attitude is still adopted, rather foolishly I think, by many young people. The modern reader of the poem should learn from the way some things were how not to do things again, to learn from the mistakes of previous generations.
