Comparative Essay Myth and Poem of Sisyphus

International Baccalaureate World Literature

Maggie Vega Y11

Comparative Essay Final

Essay Comparing the poem on Sisyphus by Fanthorpe and the myth of Sisyphus by Camus

Sisyphus was a character in ancient times. He was destined with a task by the gods, too pull a rock up a mountain and the rock would fall again and he had to do it all over again. In the poem of Sisyphus by Fanthorpe and myth by Camus, we can find differences in the way in which transmit the task of Sisyphus, the way in which they describe the rock being pulled up the hill, and through this description, the relationship with the rock and the hill. These descriptions also, in different ways transmit to our daily goals and expectations.

The main thing that both texts have in common is that they both describe the rock, the hill and the task that Sisyphus has to do all the time. Even though Fanthorpe also adds the energy that Sisyphus has to use in order to push the rock up “A trivial task for a team, an engine, / a pair of horses” (Fanthorpe, 9/10). As she compares things that have power, this means the task isn’t easy for Sisyphus; he has to work hard to lift the rock. And Camus portrays the description fully and in depth. “(…) One sees merely the whole effort of a body straining to rise the huge stone, to roll it, and push it up a slope a hundred times over;(…)”, (Camus, 27/28) through the use of asyndeton the reading becomes slower because you have to take a breath every time there is a comma, and this reflects with the effort that Sisyphus has to do to push the rock up. “(…) One sees the face screwed up (…)” (Camus, 29) the term “one sees” (Camus, 29) captivates the reader because he can imagine the poor old man trying desperately to push a rock up a hill, and the word “screwed” (Camus, 29) refers to something that is not moving from its place, meaning he has been doing this for a very long time, and has grown attached to it. Furthermore he adds the description of how his body changes, beyond the obvious details, how his hands get dirty “security of two-earth clotted hands” (Camus, 30), this also complements to what Fanthorpe mentions that the task wasn’t easy for him, that he has to push from every part of his body, and had to suffer every time the rock landed at the base of the hill. And by the use of run-on-punctuation Fanthorpe is describing the continuity of the process. “It falls, and I peruse it, /to heave it up again” (Fanthorpe, 29/30) and it also makes it hard for the reader to read it, because the full stops are at the middle of a verse.

This is a preview of the whole essay

These descriptions can also give us an idea of our everyday goals and expectations, Fanthorpe illustrates, through the description of the energy, that we need to have energy and passion in order to achieve what we want in life, it is never that easy to accomplish our dreams, “The interest lies / not in the difficulty of the doing, but in the difficulty for the doer.” (Fanthorpe 9/10) This transmits the idea that it is easy to say what we are going to do, but it is really difficult to actually accomplish it. And Camus shows a similar reflection about life, through the description of the task, that Sisyphus had to push every part of his body, so that he could achieve what he wanted, and when the rock went down again, he followed it and didn’t give up. So this tells us that everyday we face things that are difficult to us, and we continue doing them, even though it is not easy because we know that by doing them we are going to achieve our purpose one day, and we don’t have to give up, because if not all that suffering was done for no reason.

Complementing all I just said, the descriptions also make us feel the connection between Sisyphus, the rock and the hill. Fanthorpe transmits this by the use of personification of these objects, we feel as if they are two more characters in the poem, because they are the only company that he has during his task. “I know its every warts, its ribby ridges, its snags, / its lips”. (Fanthorpe, 14/15) The “lips” (Fanthorpe, 15) of the rock show the personification because obviously rocks do not have lips, and it makes it ironic because lips are used for talking and Sisyphus has no one to talk too. I could also find alliteration in “ribby ridges” (Fanthorpe, 14) that creates a clear image of imperfections in the reader. There is also a repetition of “its” to show that Sisyphus knows the stone as a whole, not only some parts because they had been together for a very log time.. Camus shows this connection through the way in which Sisyphus grasps the stone “(…) The cheek tight against the stone, the shoulder bracing the clay-covered mass, the food wedging it (…)” (Camus, 29/30) this shows there is a connection, that through the grasping he knows the stone as a whole. And the asyndeton in these descriptions show the continuity of his action, that he doesn’t do it just once; he does it over and over again. Unlike Camus, Fanthorpe also adds stress in the adjectives, in the description of the rock, the hill and Sisyphus. “Cheek, chin and shoulders, elbow, groin, shin, toe” (Fanthorpe, 16) where the reader can create a clear imagine in his head. The description of Sisyphus through the perspective of the rock “And the stone knows me (…)” (Fanthorpe, 15) where Sisyphus is described like a machine, with human qualities, because he does a monotonous action all the time “My surfaces, my angles, and my levers” (Fanthorpe, 19) the repetition of “my” also refers that the rock knows Sisyphus as a whole, because they are together all the time.

We can also deduce that, these differences between both texts can be achieved by the point of view they are written in, and by this the reader gets a different perspective of the same story. Fanthorpe writes in first person, so she focuses more in the feelings that are achieved by this task and not so much in how the task is performed. “I cannot afford / to spend energy on emotion” (Fanthorpe, 25/26). Unlike the myth by Camus that is written in third person so it focuses more in the fate of Sisyphus, and the analysis of his action, in the absurd of his task and not on the feelings that are shown. Because it’s not “Sisyphus:” talking, it’s the narrator, and so it describes everything deeply and fully. “One must imagine Sisyphus happy.” (Camus, 80)

Rounding up my ideas, Camus and Fanthorpe describe the rock being pulled up the hill in two different ways, Camus describes it fully and in depth whilst Fanthorpe portrays not the action but the energy needed to do it, and through this the power needed to pull the rock up the hill. They both connect to our real life experience, concentrating on the fact that we need to push our objectives up the hill in order to complete them, even thought it is not easy. And that sometimes it is easy to say what we are going to do, but difficult to do it. Fanthorpe also uses personification and stress of adjectives in order to portray the relationship between Sisyphus, the rock and the hill. Whilst Camus uses asyndeton to portray the continuity of the action, and the adjectives also show a connection. Furthermore the difference between the points of view creates different perspectives of the same myth, because Fanthorpe writes in first person, where you can get more feelings and emotions, and Camus in third person, so it focuses more on the analysis of his actions. They both give, different, sides of the same story.

Words: 1288

Bibliography: