EN3MCP 20012540 Autumn Assessed Essay 5. ‘I am going to play God’ says a persona in a Carol Ann Duffy poem. Write about the various kinds of authority claimed by any of the poetry you have studied for this module and/or its religious !intent. This essay intends to examine the various positions and types of authority claimed by Philip Larkin and Ted Hughes. However, in light of the statement made by Carol Ann Duffy’s persona, it will also seek to question how Larkin and Hughes make use of authority in order to pursue religious intent. What is particularly interesting about Duffy’s statement, is that it inherently suggests some sort of “play[ing]”, or impersonation through a higher authority, or as Duffy claims: “God”. This analysis of Duffy’s claim, is something in which this essay will explore further through the poetry of Larkin and Hughes. By forming a literary analysis of Hughes’ use of the animalistic persona in order to reflect and explore human experiences and emotions, the essay will question what sort of authority Hughes claims in his poetry and if so what religious or spiritual message is he trying to portray. In contrast, by an examination of some selected poems by Larkin, this essay will argue that Larkin seeks to claim an entirely different kind of authority compared to that of Hughes. It will therefore propose that Larkin’s authority intends to pursue the judgement of contemporary society and its landscape, but also acknowledges a kind of religious void and accepts the task of trying to identify how this can be filled by another presence. This study will undertake the close analysis of Ted Hughes’, ‘Hawk Roosting’ and ‘Conjuring in Heaven’ and Philip Larkin’s poems, ‘Here’ and ‘Wa- ter’. These particular poems by Hughes both seem to exert distinctly noticeable forms of authority, and also make use of some religious and spiritual intentions. Equally the selected Larkin poems also exercise an authoritative force but paradoxically display Larkin’s own musings with religious and spiritual experiences. Ted Hughes’ ‘Hawk Roosting’, from Lupercal, is one such poem which deals with the theme of authority. Lupercal, Ted Hughes’ second collection of poetry, followed up is acclaimed first col- lection, The Hawk in the Rain. Published by Hughes in 1960, the collection continued to examine !1 of !9 EN3MCP 20012540 Autumn Assessed Essay and develop some of the overarching themes that permeated The Hawk in the Rain.1 Like ‘Jaguar’ and ‘Thought-Fox’, published in The Hawk in the Rain, Hughes roots much of Lupercal in nature and commonly exposes the innocent savagery of animals and the animal kingdom. Much like Duffy’s persona’s clear intentions, in: “I am going to play God”, there seems to be that same level of intent in, ‘Hawk Roosting’. Written through the persona of a hawk, the poem opens in present tense, almost psychotically fantasising over sitting at: “the top of the wood”.2 The natural innocence of the hawk is contrasted with an unnatural humanity through its personification, and through our own interpretation it is easy to envisage a kind of totalising authoritarian regime. Despite the deliberate personification, the later uses of: “flight” and “allotment of death”, incline that Hughes may well be referring to past memories of 20th Century modern warfare. Indeed we may contrast this with a later poem of the same collection: ‘The Retired Colonel’, in which Hughes’ human persona laments with indignation over the passing of time since the colonel’s last heroic campaigns in defence of his country. In which, Hughes uses imagery such as: “cowerings of India” that “Stiffened in [the colonel’s] reddened neck”, that presents a sense of nostalgia and pride of the domination of England’s old empire.3 There is that same sense of pride in ‘Hawk Roosting’, as the tyrannical “Hawk” details that it has reached the: “top of the wood”, almost reminiscent of a hierar- chical power struggle.4 The poem’s final line affirms this control in: “I am going to keep things like this”, and the use of: “eyes closed”, portrays the hawk’s innate egotistical self-belief. The hawk also remains unaccountable, deluded and morally blind. Moreover, the literal “Roosting” of the hawk marks its own self-assertion. This contrast is perhaps most peculiar because the hawk implements human social characteristics upon the animal world, and further destroys the perceived innocence of 1 Neil Roberts, Ted Hughes: A Literary Life, (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 1996). 2 Ted Hughes, ‘Hawk Roosting’, Selected Poems, (London: Faber and Faber, 1982), p. 43. 3 Ted Hughes, ‘The Retired Colonel’, Selected Poems, (London: Faber and Faber, 1982), p. 51. 4 Ted Hughes, ’Hawk Roosting’. !2 of !9 EN3MCP 20012540 Autumn Assessed Essay animals. On the other hand, through the simple image of a hawk sat upon a tree, the hawk simply exists as an innocent creature performing typically natural roles. Proposing the notion that Hughes has perhaps exercised his will to present a human authori- ty through the natural world, this idea is particularly evident in the way Hughes begins to detail some of the hawk’s inherent flaws. The microcosmic image of the hawk’s existence appears to be limited between “my” or his “hooked head and hooked feet”, and this is reaffirmed in the previous line in the hawk’s own “[i]naction”. This totalising insularity is as Hughes’ hawk states: “no falsify- ing dream”, and this is in fact an omnipresent truth, as we find out through the deluded mandate in which the hawk almost divinely claims to be able to: “kill where I please because it is all mine.” Hughes further echoes the cynicism of the hawk’s regime in the normality of a statement such as: “in sleep rehearse perfect kills and eat”. This line sounds particularly resonant, and this may be due to the rhyming couplet of: “feet” and “eat”, that emulates a proverbial style. Furthermore, this un- naturalness seems humanly achieved as it is not the necessity of killing and eating in order for the hawk to survive, but the initial thrill of the: “kill” and then the: “eat.”.5 The hawk’s transformation is unsettling. Despite the idea that Hughes’ personification is of the natural behaviour of a hawk, the distinct human emotions and endeavours of the hawk seem ‘fable-like’. To add, the metaphorical interaction with the arrogance of man and the temptation of power, echoes the idea of presenting tragic flaws as in a Faustian endeavour. Peter Davison goes a step further by suggesting that: “[Hughes’] poems often contain… more than a touch—of melodra- ma, [like] the brutal tragedies of Seneca that Hughes adapted for the modern stage.”6 However, by using personas that exist in primitive and animalistic experiences, Hughes’ poetic authority “play[s] God” in that it he examines elements of the human condition. This is a view shared by Dennis 5 Ted Hughes, ‘Hawk Roosting’. 6 Peter Davison, ‘Predators and Prey’, The New York Times, Dec., 2002, [accessed 10/12/13 via: http://www.nytimes.- com/2002/12/01/books/predators-and-prey.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm ]. !3 of !9 EN3MCP 20012540 Autumn Assessed Essay Walder, who suggests that by: “dealing with the non-human world… [Hughes] allow[s] the human implications to trickle in secretly, of their own accord.”7 However, Walder’s understanding of these “implications […] trickl[ing] in secretly”, seems to ignore the notion that Hughes is intentionally claiming an authoritative stance. There is the sense that in acting out moral and social wrongdoings, Hughes is expressing his authority in order to cleanse humanity, or morally teach in order to prevent social evils from repeat- ing themselves. Hughes’ hawk in ‘Hawk Roosting’ deliberately displays the flaws of its’ character, and these range from the hawk's narcissistic tendencies, to it’s divine delusions. This idea is strong- ly evoked in the lines: “It took the whole of Creation […] Now I hold Creation in my foot”. Here, the hawk eerily professes it's own creation, and the close proximity of “Creation” and evolution in:: “produc[ing] my foot, my each feather”, inclines that Hughes may be directing us towards some religious conflict. The notion that the hawk “hold[s] Creation” both elicits a literal physical conno- tation, and refers to the creation narrative of the book of Genesis. However, both represent all-en- compassing human narratives. Hughes extends this, as the hawk declares that the: “sun is behind”, emphasising the hawk’s eclipse of the sun, or perhaps even a higher entity. The hawk also states that nothing has changed here as the: “eye has permitted no change”, and the hawks arrogant last claim: “I am going to keep things like this”, highlights that although there is the opportunity for change, the hawk’s ignorance and insularity provides no change.8 It seems that we may consider this as Hughes’ attempt to highlight the dangers of eclipsing religious or spiritual authority, and Simon Armitage’s claim that : “[f]or Ted Hughes poetry was a first language and a way of describing the world”, further highlights the idea that Hughes gestures towards allegory. 7 Dennis Walder, Ted Hughes, (Milton Keynes: Open University Press, 1987) p. 91. 8 Ted Hughes, ‘Hawk Roosting’. !4 of !9 EN3MCP 20012540 Autumn Assessed Essay In 1970, Hughes published Crow, a collection of poems that establishes the character of ‘Crow’ as a kind of everyman figure. The connection to creation myths occur repeatedly throughout the collection, with poems such as ‘Crow Blacker Than Ever’, recalling the first and second chap- ters of the book of Genesis.