At the beginning of the poem the writer focuses on individuals in the crowd; there are mothers holding up their babies to see and a girl tearing a strip of cloth from her skirt to wave with. While it seems uncivilised none of this is particularly awful behaviour until it is put in the context of what they’re about to see, at which point this becomes almost scary. This is the effect that Patmore is trying to evoke in his readers. Over the course of the poem the crowd is dehumanised. Just before the man is hanged they become a “rabble”, a chaotic mass of people with seemingly no intelligence. Afterwards the noise made by the crowd is described as a “din” an unintelligible “chaos of noises,” these, almost animalistic, comparisons portray exactly the aspect of human nature Patmore is objecting to.
Similarly, at the end of the poem, the writer focuses on individuals but this time they are all doing something that is, in his mind, morally wrong. He arranges them in order of increasing immorality, first, is a pickpocket who slinks off to find other people to steal from. Next is a young child who ties its doll to a stick this is especially bad as children are associated with innocence and potential and now they have been ‘tainted’ by the violence of the hanging. Even worse is the mother who then praises “the pretty trick” and, therefore, encouraging this ‘corruption’. Next are more children who hang a cat. These are worse because they take the violence to the next level and are killing a living thing for pleasure. But worse, in Patmore’s mind, are the friends who walk on “in lively chat” he believes that to be completely unaffected by the death around you is worse than imitating it. Last however are two people who had fought over spaces before go “forth to fight, with murderous faces”. Here, you know that one is going to kill the other which is by far the worst crime of them all. The penalty for death is hanging so the cycle will start again.
The second poem, London, discusses the city London, and its social structure, as William Blake saw it. It expresses his opinions through use of specific words and strong imagery.
The first, and most obvious difference is the difference in structure, Patmore’s A London Fete has no obvious structure, as such, however, the fact that there is only one large stanza helps with the narrative style of the poem, it is not a number of individual events, but rather a sequence of events, with one leading into another. This is vastly different to Blake’s poem as it has very clear structure that is very much like a hymn. The individual stanzas help to separate the events as they are each a self-contained event with a similar theme.
There is significant use of repetition in the poem mainly noticeable with the words “every” and “cry”. While these may seem simplistic and perhaps somewhat uneducated it is actually very effective. For instance, not only does it create a repetitive rhythm of “every” that is easy to remember, but also it drives the idea home and provides great emphasis on those few words. Likewise, the repetition of the word “cry” gives emphasis to the word and makes it seem like the whole city is crying or in pain. Equally, it shows how much pain they are in, due to the oppression of the wealthy. It is also a reminder of the lyrical nature of the poem.
Unlike the first poem, London has no explicit narrative; instead, there are many implicit stories that must be delved into before you can completely understand the poem. First, is the idea of “charter’d streets” and the “charter’d Thames”. London was a city that, in those days, represented restrictions. Whole streets were essentially bought by the wealthy and you could not travel them without paying a toll. However, oddly enough, the speaker in the poem is able to “wander” quite freely. Providing an interesting contrast between his freedom and the barriers in place inside the city. Similarly, the freedom of a river, in this case, the Thames, is contrasted somewhat by the restrictions placed on it. Following on from that is the idea of “The mind-forged manacles”, due to the restrictions placed on the city and, therefore, its people they cannot imagine themselves living in any other way or, indeed, anywhere else. Meaning that, through only their own minds, they have ‘chained’ themselves to their current way of life. However, while it may be that they are trapped in this situation because of their own minds it is due to the influence of the upper class or the Establishment. This is who Blake is directing the anger in the poem towards, because, above all, it is an angry poem. Similar to A London Fete, one of the subjects it is angry at is human nature, but a different aspect of human nature, rather than the anger being directed at our thirst for violence, it is at our selfishness and how those with more power oppress those without it.
Second, is the chimney-sweeper and the “black’ning Church”. In Blake’s time any orphans were given to the church to care for. The church would send the children off to work, usually as chimney-sweepers. It was not uncommon for chimney-sweepers to die in the chimneys but the church didn’t mind; there were always more orphans and there would be no guardians to voice their concerns. While Blake was a strong believer in Christianity he was extremely angry at the church for the way it was treating its children, which explains why the church is said to be “blackening”, in Blake’s mind the church is blackening morally. This society that has sworn to help those in need are sending them to their eventual death quite happily, and Blake is outraged out this. This is another example of how Blake is angered by how the church is abusing its power over the helpless orphans. However, it also introduces the other core subject for the ager in the poem: Blake’s disappointment in society’s failure to keep its promises. The church has failed to keep its promise and when something supposedly as morally sound as the church can’t withhold their ideals what does that say about the rest of humanity?
Thirdly, is the “hapless Soldier’s sigh” running “in blood down Palace walls”, the sigh symbolising the soldier’s death. This soldier is not only unlucky to have been killed but may also be unlucky to be a soldier in the first place. Many of the soldiers were tricked into joining the army; often by being made drunk and then asking them sign up or they would be commissioned through one of a number of other underhand tactics. These soldiers were then sent to fight abroad and they would die for their king who sat quite happily in his throne far away. Here, Blake has taken than and painted the palace with the blood of all the dead. This very powerful image accurately portrays Blake’s anger at the king and the government for sending countless young men to die at war. Again, this brings up his anger at humans and their inability to fulfil their duty and keep true to their promises.
Finally, and, perhaps, most importantly is the story of the “harlot’s curse”. This is another example of how, due to the oppression of the upper class those with less money are forced into positions they do not want to be in. In this case, the “youthful” girl is being forced into her profession. Similar to A London Fete children are being used to demonstrate the poet’s point. Though they are being used in a different way. Rather than showing using them to show how even the innocent have been tainted by the violence, this poem looks at children’s association with potential. In the harlot’s case, all of this potential is brought to waste because she has had no education because that privilege is reserved for the wealthy. The “curse” is far more interesting, however. There is the literal, somewhat more obvious, meaning of her cursing the child she is now burdened with. Another example of use of children; this “new-born Infant” will have next to no opportunities in life because its mother is very poor. But she is also a curse to her clients. Here lies the story; the middle class was plagued by syphilis due to the fact that very few people kept to their marriage vows. It was horribly embarrassing for a man to be treated for syphilis, but even more so for a man’s wife to have to be treated for it. Because of this, marriages ended up dying, hence the “blights with plagues the Marriage hearse” this could also be a reference to the transport of this death, a hearse transports dead bodies and it is the notion of transport that is interesting, marriage is the vehicle for this “plague”, due to marriage more and more people will be affected and die due to people’s inability to keep promises. There is, however, another meaning, most marriages among the more wealthy, in Blake’s time, were for convenience rather than actual love because marriages were an essential part of the social structure. But, as very few people kept their marriage vows, yet another example of broken promises, society’s core was corrupt and, in Blake’s mind, a society built on broken promises is sure to fail this ‘curse’ is represented fully by the harlot and their position in the social structure.
In conclusion, both poets have written their work because they feel that the very core of humanity has been corrupted in some form. Patmore feels that mankind's want for violence is degrading us to something below human, this is most notable in his various comparisons of the members of the crowd to “realm of the damned”, is not unlike Hardy's anger at the moral corruption in society due to our greed, and how, ultimately, this “curse” will be the undoing of society as the “plague” spreads. However, the form in which they present this feeling is different. Patmore looks a single event and uses it to demonstrate these characteristics in people and also to show that despite public executions have ceased we are still the same people we were then, we are no more moral or human than the crowd. Where as Hardy describes the situation as he sees it and draws attention to the issues themselves as opposed to the people, who are the cause. Additionally he brings attention to the fact that we have nobody but ourselves to blame for it due to the “mind forged manacles” we've created, arguably, because we cannot conceive a different world. However, both poets agree that it is that at some level or another the very core of our society, the people, are corrupt and that if nothing is done we will continue to drag ourselves into problem after self-inflicted problem.
