In the Ruin, the focus is on either the decay or the splendour rather than on the contrast between them(TM) (Renoir) Do you agree with this analysis of the poem? In your answer you should compare The Ruin
In the Ruin, 'the focus is on either the decay or the splendour rather than on the contrast between them' (Renoir) Do you agree with this analysis of the poem? In your answer you should compare The Ruin to at least One other Old English Text.
In comparison to The Wanderer and The Seafarer, I believe that Renoir's observation is fitting in that, firstly, the process of thought between what the speaker in The Ruin observes as the decay of a city and what he recalls as its past glory does not seem to, structurally, represent a developing or progressive thought process. Thus, I believe that the poem does not provide a structural template in which the poet can contrast the decay of the ruin and its splendour.
Although we do have a structural conjunction in the form of 'oþþæt' between the descriptions of decay and the descriptions of splendour from line 21- 28, the transition between the descriptions is arbitrary. In The Wanderer and arguably in The Seafarer we can observe that an emotional or at least meditative response is evoked after the speaker reflects on the decay of cities or the transience of earthly life in general. But in The Ruin, the speaker 'draws no explicit moral from his description' (Mitchell and Robinson, 2007.265).
However, I cannot agree that the descriptions of decay and splendour do not sometimes affectively work together. Renoir has described the poem as a 'vacuum' for the reason that it does not indicate a prescribed moral from the meditations on former splendour and earthly decay. The poem does not seem to link these two together in the similar formula of inductive reasoning that is noted in The Wanderer where the observations on decay lead to remembrance of the subject's former greatness which subsequently leads to a conclusion that all matters on earth will decay. The Ruin is structurally divergent in this case, but the language is similar to that used in the elegies of The Wanderer and The Seafarer and thus they in a basic manner convey the same ideas.
Anne L.Klinck, in her introduction to the book The Old English Elegies, observes that "the overall pattern [of The Ruin] consists of an alternating movement between past and present" and terms it simply as 'description'.
She also observes of The Wanderer that 'the connection between ruins and the end of the world is quite clear'; here she gives the examples of lines 73-77 of the poem:
Ongietan sceal gleaw hæle hu gæstlic bið,
þonne ealre þisse worulde wela weste stondeð,
swa nu missenlice geond þisne middangeard
winde biwaune weallas stondaþ,
hrime bihrorene, hryðge þa ederas.
(The wise man must understand how terrifying [it will be] when all this world's wealth stands waste, As now in various places throughout this middlearth, wind blown walls stand, rime covered, the buildings are snow swept). Here, we see that the signs of decaying in earth now are causes of what will be: the end of the world. In the Ruin , we do not get an implicit phrase which tells us that the descriptions of the ruin are meant to lead to an overall conclusion. However, we can try to ascertain a conclusion, or moral, by noting certain 'clues' within the poem.
In The Ruin the word 'walo' is used meaning 'slaughtered men/the slain', implying that the men may have died in battle but the word 'woldagas' meaning 'days of pestilence' (line 25), indicates that the inhabitants of the city have died because of disease. It could be possible that this be read as a variant on the theme of life's transience, highlighting the defeat of men by an insuperable opponent. Indeed, the word 'wyrd' meaning 'fate' is used a few times in the poem and although 'wyrd' is often recognised as pagan derivative it suggests a futility of life ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
In The Ruin the word 'walo' is used meaning 'slaughtered men/the slain', implying that the men may have died in battle but the word 'woldagas' meaning 'days of pestilence' (line 25), indicates that the inhabitants of the city have died because of disease. It could be possible that this be read as a variant on the theme of life's transience, highlighting the defeat of men by an insuperable opponent. Indeed, the word 'wyrd' meaning 'fate' is used a few times in the poem and although 'wyrd' is often recognised as pagan derivative it suggests a futility of life on earth. Thus, we see that it can be argued that, although it is not said literally in the poem, we are left with the distinct impression of an affective response on the speaker's part.
R.F. Leslie believes that lines 8-9: 'oþ hund cnea werþeoda gewitan' where the poet describes the deceased builders of the city waiting 'until a hundred years of people have departed' indicates the belief that the world's end was definitely approaching, Leslie says that 'oþ hund cnea' 'can imply little else to the medieval mind, with its expectation of the passing away of this world within a finite period of time' (Leslie, 1961, 28). This signifies a very obvious awareness of the impermanence of what was a very material world, the speaker here derives a recapitulated notion of which Kemp Malone and Albert C. Baugh in The Literary History of England sum up neatly as 'all earthly things perish'. For Malone and Baugh, The Ruin's only incongruity is that it simply 'departs form the usual Old English pattern in that the reader must himself supply the obvious moral'(1959, 88).
In A New Critical History of Old English Literature, Greenfield skilfully describes The Ruin's internal structure:
'The Runes specific quality, however, inheres in its use of alternation between the present devastation and past beauty, between the dead builders and the rulers and the once breathing and strutting warriors; and its climax, which narrows in focus from the "broad" kingdom to the city's pride, its circular baths.' (Greenfield,1996, 282).
It is also noted that there is syntactic variation within the poem as the poet uses 'compressed and separate images [to] describe the decaying present, whereas a more sweeping syntactic movement conveys the reconstructed glories of the past' suggesting that maybe the syntactic differences heighten the contrast between the decay and splendour and perhaps suggest a more emotive response structurally.
One could argue that the crucial difference between The Ruin and The Wanderer and The Seafarer is the thing that excuses its apparent lack of progression between two contrasting observations. The absence of a formal speaker within the poem can pardon the, at worst isolated, descriptions of decay and splendour. To support this idea further, we may consider that The Wanderer's conclusion has been derived out of the process of thought that is only a corollary of his loss and remembrance of it. Without that remembrance, he cannot observe the transience of life and therefore cannot conclude that the only guaranteed permanence one can experience is in Heaven. It points to a formulaic expression of how the concluding homily in The Wanderer fits in with the rest of the poem.
In The Seafarer, things are a bit more complex but if we employ the idea that the speaker in The Seafarer is a 'peregrinus' (Whitelock,1950, 262) and note within him an ascetic motivation to endure the hardship of sea-life and most importantly hold earthly pleasures in contempt (thus perhaps rendering the poem into an allegory), we can perhaps see how the speaker is observing the transience of earthly life and using those observations to validate his reasons for seeking the eternalness of Heaven.
The description of splendour in lines 31-37 of The Ruin , situates around the man, the speaker here conveys a vivid image of extravagant men with jewels and wine, wealth and prosperity are also mentioned. There is no question that this description is very materialistic and is a symbolic echo of the glory of men and a heroic past.
Hryre wong gecrong
gebrocen to beorgum, þær iu beorn monig
glædmod ond goldbeorht gleoma gefrætwed,
wlonc ond wingal wighyrstum scan;
seah on sinc, on sylfor, on searogimmas,
on ead, on æht, on eorcanstan,
on þas beorhtan burg bradan rices.
(The ruin has fallen to the ground broken into mounds of stone, where formerly many a warrior, joyous and ornamented with gold-bright splendour, proud and flushed with wine shone in war-trappings; looked at treasure, at silver, at precious stones, at wealth, at prosperity, at jewellery, at this bright castle of a broad kingdom).
In The Wanderer, we do not have such a descriptive account but the speaker dreams of his former life, he is not so materialistic as much as sentimental, and his narrative conveys a certain pride associated with his heroic past. Before the speaker cries out 'Hwær cwom mearg? Hwær cwom mago? Hwær cwom maþþumgyfa?
Hwær cwom symbla gesetu? Hwær sindon seledreamas?' he says that 'Se þonne þisne wealsteal wise geþohte'. The speaker grounds the heroic symbols of his former life to the foundations of the earth, the symbols of man have rooted from foundations which will become the only remnants of the former glory of men. Similarly, in line 31 of The Ruin, the former glory of men has become mounds of stone on the ground. Thus, we can see that a similar motif is used in the two elegies pointing to a reconciling theme of contrast between past splendour and present decay.
In The Wanderer, the lines 92-94 at least bear some relation to the dream the wanderer has about being in the hall on the knee of his Lord. The wanderer is specifically noting the impermanence of those very such things he consciously and subconsciously longs for. The Wanderer seems to describe the relinquishing of these material and impermanent things for something much elevated and ever-lasting, we note that the wanderer has completely submitted to these ideas in the final homily of the poem, the 'fæder on heofonum' is invoked and we see that the sorrow of the wanderer has subsided to a Christian value. It seems as though the whole elegy has been used as a vehicle to convey what can be seen as very monastic values.
Of course, in The Ruin, we do not see these monastic values, indeed some critics have failed to decipher a value from it at all. We also cannot recognise within the description of the ruin any echoes of the splendour of its heroic past, although we do not know what has been written within the fragmented lines 13-17. We do get some parallelism with the descriptions of the buildings, but I believe this is simply an aesthetic observation on the speaker's part which does not imply any underlying notion of a heroic past fading under a mist of Christianity with the exception that perhaps the former magnificence of the city has been ruined by Fate. If fate is construed as a pagan notion, the poem may hint at a didactic relevance, the works of giants have been destroyed by Fate, not by warfare, thus the poem might be conveying the folly of pagan values, and thus hinting the same moral as can be found in The Wanderer: that permanence can only be found in Christianity.
However I suppose this can be disputed, in that if the poem indeed expresses thoughts on the transience and impermanence and if this idea is of a Christian nature, then the poem becomes very elusive in its relation of earthly transience to pagan Fate.
One may argue that the conjunction 'oþþæt' in line 24 of The Ruin which the quickly brings to a halt the brief description of the former splendour of the city allows for a parallelism between the description of splendour and the description of the ravages of Fate. We can almost see that syntactically, the lines of splendour before 'oþþæt þæt onwende wyrd seo swiþe' and the lines after it mirror each other.
Beorht wæron burgræced, burnsele monige,
heah horngestreon, heresweg micel,
meodoheall monig mondreama full,
oþþæt þæt onwende wyrd seo swiþe.
Crungon walo wide, cwoman woldagas,
swylt eall fornom secgrofra wera;
wurdon hyra wigsteal westen staþolas,
brosnade burgsteall. Betend crungon
hergas to hrusan.
(bright were the city buildings, the bathing halls many, high the abundance of gables , great the martial sound, many a mead hall full of revelry, until Fate the mighty changed that. The slain perished far and wide, days of pestilence came, death took away all of the brave men; their sanctuaries became waste places, the city decayed.)
Furthermore, it is worth noting that 'wyrd' is here the reason why the city has fallen, summoning to the mind the fact that even the 'enta geweorc' cannot withstand Fate.
Although, The Ruin is structurally different from The Wanderer and The Seafarer it is possible to see similarities in motifs and general themes which indicates the reason why scholars often group these three poems together. However, what The Ruin does not contain that the others do is a formulaic expression to manoeuvre from one impression to another. Some might conclude that it simply relies on a juxtaposition of the two impressions and as Renoir concludes, we are left to decipher for ourselves the moral this juxtaposition incites.
Bibliography
Klinck, L. Anne, The Old English Elegies: A Critical Edition and Genre Study, McGill-Queen's Press - MQUP, 2001
Greenfield, Stanley B., Daniel Gillmore Calder, Michael Lapidge, A New Critical History of Old English Literature: with a survey of the Anglo-Latin background by Michael Lapidge,1996, NYU Press: New York
Whitelock, Dorothy, The Interpretation of The Seafarer. H. M. Chadwick Memorial Studies. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1950.
Leslie, R.F. Three Old English Elegies, 1961, Manchester University Press: Manchester
Renoir, Alain. "The Old English Ruin: Contrastive Structure and Affective Impact." In 'The Old English Elegies: New Essays in Criticism and Research. Ed. Martin Green, 1983, Fairleigh Dickinson University Press,
Malone, Kemp and Albert C. Baugh The Literary History of England: Vol 1: The Middle Ages (to 1500), Routledge, 1959
Mitchell, B and Robinson C. Fred, A Guide to Old English 7th Edition, 2007, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford.
Roubella Begum 854666
