The title of ‘The Bull Moses’ is one that can be interpreted in many ways. I think that the Bull is called Moses because it is led to the ‘Promised Land’ it has dreamt about but never quite makes it like the prophet Moses. He only has a glimpse of paradise and freedom before having to return to ‘purgatory’. The title ‘Bags of Meat’ differs from the above title because it is impersonal and detached from the animals themselves. Instead of naming the creature as in ‘The Bull Moses’, it is just thought of as butcher’s meat.
The Bull Moses is depicted as a strong, powerful and dangerous animal – “The brow like masonry” – he has no emotions, like stone. “The deep-keeled neck”, shows his thick powerful neck. “A ring of brass through his nostrils” shows that he is dangerous and needs to be controlled. The animal is bored and wants to be free – “He would swing his muzzle at a fly”. He does this because he has nothing better to do with his time. The poet uses repetition to symbolise the animals fear – “Blackness beyond star”, “Blaze of darkness”. “In the locked black of his powers”. Anthropomorphism is not established in this poem, evidence to prove this is when the small child, telling the story, is bounding around trying to irritate and distract the bull. The bull does not move, just carries on eating his food and does not even give the impression of being sidetracked by the small child’s shouting.
In the beginning of the poem ‘Bags of Meat’ the bull is introduced to the reader, as “here’s a fine bag of meat”. It is only in the fourth stanza that the animal is called a bull, “now this young bull….”. Throughout the poem there is evidence that the bull is scared. “as the timid quivering steer”. “Enters with a bewildered jump”. The bull is described as having had a good life; the poem shows this by using the Metaphor’s ‘healthy’ and ‘plump’. The last paragraph differs from the preceding stanzas in that it introduces anthropomorphism as it implies that the bull knows what is going to happen and looks accusingly at the bidders. “…reproachful stare”. “A tear runs down his face when the butcher wins”.
‘The Bull Moses’ is effectively punctuated as when the bull is in the barn there is a lot of punctuation emphasising his confinement but when he is out of the barn there is less punctuation but each stanza always finishes with a full stop which stresses that he is never completely free. The unsteady rhythm shows the inevitability of the bull’s life. ‘Bags of Meat’ has a strong rhythm and a fast pace which illustrates the speed and atmosphere of the auction house and the bull’s optimistic hope that he will return to a good life. The poem is laid out on the page randomly because it reflects the fact that the bull is unsure of his future. When you look further into the poem’s layout, you find that the shakiness of the bull is represented by the disjointed way the poem was written.
Both poets lived and worked, at sometime during their life, on a farm. When Thomas Hardy wrote his poem, ‘Bags Of Meat’, views on animals were very different to those when Ted Hughes wrote his poem, ‘The Bull Moses’. As shown in the context of Hardy’s poem, cattle was only thought of as meat and because it was written before the industrial revolution, farming was widespread and England was a rural country. Hughes’ poem was written much later, when animal warfare was important to most civilians. As in ‘The Bull Moses’, the bull is treated humanely throughout the story. Industrialisation had started and there was not much money in farming anymore. In Hughes’ poem he almost envies how Britain was before the industrial revolution by describing how idyllic country life was.
The main difference in attitude to the two animals is that in ‘The Bull Moses’ there is an air of resignation with no hope of change in circumstance for the bull, whereas in ‘Bags of Meat’ there is an empathy with the animal and a certain amount of optimism for its destiny.
