Who is the Stronger in the Play of August Strindberg

The Swedish writer August Strindberg (1849-1912) is generally recognized as the first expressionist playwright.  August Strindberg was born on 22 January 1849 at Riddar-Holms-hammen 14 He ancestors came from Angermanland Province in northern Sweden.  The first twenty years of Strindberg's life was a period of great economic and industrial growth for Stockholm.  During high school, he led a classroom rebellion against school religion.  He refused to attend school prayers.  After graduation from high school, he joined two universities and he became a member of the privileged class.

He married three times.  His first wife was the Swedish actress Sirivon Essen (married in 1887, divorced in 1880s), his second wife was the Austrian author Fridauli (married in 1893; divorced in 1896), his third wife was the Swedish actress, Harriet Boss (married in 1901, divorced in 1904).  He wrote plays and letters but he couldn't write verse.  He started to write a comedy set in Rome earlier in the nineteenth century, and a tragedy about Christ.  (Lindberg, 2000: P.50)

Strindberg himself, writing to his wife, Siri, who was to play Mrs X in the opening performance, instructed her to play Mrs X as the "Stronger, that is to say, the softer".  For, he continued, "the rigid person breaks while the supple person bends, and rises again."

Strindberg is a Swedish playwright, novelist and short-story writer, who embodied in his works psychology, naturalism, and other element of new literary forms.  Strindberg was married three times - several of his plays draw on the problems of his marriages and reflected his constant interest in self-analysis.   Sensitive and controversial writer; who suffered from hostile reviews.  Strindberg represented the 18th century ideal of artist as a free personality, unrestricted by convention.  (Carlson, 1993: P. 40)

"My souls (characters) are conglomerations

of the past and present stages of

civilization, bits from books and

newspaper scraps of humity, rags

and tatters of fine clothing, patched

together as is the human soul

and I have added alittle

evolutionary history by making the

weaker steal and repeat the

words of the Stronger, and by

making the characters borrow

the ideas "suggestions" from one another."(1)

(Authors forward to Miss Julie in Six Plays of Strindberg, 1995: P.20)

He is a painter, essayist, and photographer.  He explored a wide range of dramatic methods and purposes from naturalistic tragedy, monodrama, and history surrealist dramatic techniques.  He is considered the "father of Modern Swedish Literature" (Adam, 2002: P. 15).  His view on psychological power struggles may be seen in works such as "The Stronger" (1889).  It is his notable contribution.

 

Who is the Stronger, Mrs X or Miss Y?

 

Eric (1958: P. 918), mentions things about the characters and said that there are two women, ran into each other in a restaurant on Christmas Eve.  One is married and has been at shopping for presents for her family, the other is unmarried and is sitting alone in the restaurant reading magazine and drinking.  Those two women are not even important enough to have names; Strindberg calls them simply: Mrs X and Miss Y.

"The comer of aladies' café.  Two little iron

tables, a red velvet sofa, several chairs.

Enter Mrs X, dressed in winter clothes,

carrying a Japanese basket on her arm.

Miss Y sits with a half-empty beer

bottle before her, reading an illustrated

paper, which she changes later for another."(2)

Here, the entire play consists on nothing more than a single conversation between these two women.  There is no action, no real plot development, nothing particularly out of the ordinary.  In fact, one of the women, Miss Y, doesn't even speak in the entire performance.

"Mrs X Do you know it really hurts

me to see you like this, alone in a café's,

and on Christmas Eve, too.  It makes me

feel as I did one time when I saw abridal

party in a Paris restaurant, and the

bride sat reading a comic paper, while

the groom played billiards with the witnesses."(3)

Pishkan (2000: P.915), mentions that Miss Y seems the stronger: "Well, they are not altogether the same thing, looks up scornfully.  Now you shall see what I bought for my piggy wigs up a doll.  Miss Y laughs aloud, shrinks with laughter.  I won't sit at the same table with you."  (Ibid: P. 915).  These are such considerable evidence that show the capable person who can stay worthless in the face of an uncontrolled spate of words is both strong and wise.  A babbler, especially a female babbler, is supposed inevitably to wind herself into a cocoon on her own words and become entrapped. We need only reflect that Mrs X, however unwittingly, has remade herself in limitation of rival to become convinced that Miss Y, the rival, somehow evictions, even though she had lost both her fiancé and the man who formed the apex of the love triangle.  Miss Y's position as the true victor - the stronger - seems even more convincing.  Mrs X embroidered tulips, which she hates, but it is Miss Y's favourite flowers.  Mrs X tries to imitate Miss Y's father name.  Mrs X tries to wear Miss Y's colours, reads her favourite authors, eats her favourite foods, and drinks her favourite drinks as it is shown in the following lines:

"That is the reason I had to embroider tulips

which I hate on his slippers, because you

are fond of tulips; we go to Lake Malarn in

the summer, because you don't like salt

water; that's why my boy is named Eskil-

because it is your father's name; that is why

I wear your colours, read your authors, eat your

favourite dishes, drink your drink, chocolate..."(4)

There are many women who resemble Mrs X and her sudden flash of insight, and this shows how powerful Miss Y's influence has been on her and her life, wants to acknowledge the superior strength of her adversary.  Indeed, for a few moments Mrs X seems to be making such acknowledgement.  She begins to compare Miss Y with different things.  She compares her to a worm eating an apple (Mrs X) from the inside and leaving nothing; but Mrs X means that she lives inside her all the time so the soul is that of Miss Y; but the body is that of Mrs X because she imitates her as part of her plan.

Besides, she compares her to a snake because Miss Y cheats by seducing her husband and she had watched her with black eyes.  This means that Mrs X can not get ride of the influence of Miss Y; therefore, Mrs X regards herself as a bird caught by that snake.  Also, she (Miss Y) compares her to a giant crab lying under water catching the bound feet of Mrs X by its powerful claws.  The following lines show the weaknesses of Mrs X, they are:

"Your soul crept into mine, like a worm

into an apple, ate and ate, bored and

bored, until nothing was left but the

wind and a little block dust within I

wanted to get from Xou, but I could

not I left that when I littled my wings

they only dragged me down; I lay in

the water with bound feet and the

stronger I strove to keep up the deeper I

worked myself down, down, until I sank

to the botton, when you lay like a giant

crab to clutch me in your claws -and

there I am lying now."(5)

Strindberg creates an episode of incredible, poetic power - a snapshot of life so intense, so powerful that it rivals Beckett at his best.  The Stronger is rich in allegory and lends itself to many layers of interpretation; it is a play that takes little more the ten minutes to read / perform, but that can easily spend hours thinking about afterwards.  It is, moreover, a powerful play, one that makes a deep impression, and leaves one with the illusion that has travelled for and seen much, even though the entire thing is actually incredible short.  (John, 1985: P. 10)

What is it that makes the play so powerful?  To begin with, it is an immaculate piece of stagecraft.  It is a tribute to Strindberg's genius that despite the father that Miss Y says nothing right though the play, the interaction between her and Mrs X is inevitable sense of the term dialogue.  Strindberg uses a combination of stage directions and reactions from Mrs X to ensure that Miss Y is more than a passive listener and that her responses influence and guide the thread of the scene.

Kia (2001, P.22), states that the purpose of Mrs X in using different thins in the play is her desire to degrade Miss Y.  But there is a more serious reason that, it is that the man is originally an animal.  Therefore, Mrs X uses different images of animals to explain the behaviours of Miss Y: "I hate you, hate you, hate you!"  she cries after a passionate speech, her recognition of the true meaning of past circumstance Mrs X's character is changed and grown before an eyes.  Her angry outburst is followed by scornful vituperation: "you only sit there ... as quiet as a stroke by a rat hole ... and read the papers ... to see if someone has not been given notice at the theatre."

This gives place to pity: "you are unhappy, unhappy like one who has been wounded."  And pity gives place to triumph.  You are angry because you are wounded, I can't be angry with you; no matter how much I want to be because you come out the weaker one.  (Ibid: P. 30)

In fact, "The Stronger" is one of those fascinate pieces of writing that lend themselves to multiple and conflicting interpretations.  As the play progresses, we discover that Miss Y and Mrs X are rivals for more than theatre roles - Miss Y is having / has had an affair with Mrs X's husband.  Except that the play never really corroborates this - we only know that by the end of the scene Mrs X believes that this is true.  (The Element of Drama, P. 22)

Frequently, Mrs X learned to drink chocolate from you.  But, Miss Y is now sipping (drinking) beer, forget her awful life and run away from her better reality.  This refers to Mrs X changes towards the best; while Miss Y lost.  Mrs X to Miss Y that she is stronger than her due to Miss Y learned Mrs X how to love her husband and these are the means by which Miss X was watching Miss Y all the time and was taking useful thing of her.  Mrs X thanks Miss Y for her good lessons.  The following lines show Mrs X's strength:

"Everything is worthless and sterile in your

hands; you can never keep a man's

love with your tulips and your passions.

But I can keep it.  You can't learn how

to live, as I have learned.  You have no

little Eskil.  You are always silent?

I thought that was strength, but perhaps

It is because you have nothing to say!

Thank you, Amelia, for all your good

lessons.  Thanks for teaching my husband

how to love.  Now I am going home to

love him."(6)

The debate in the play is about gender roles.  The divergence of interpretations brings us to the first of the allegories implicit in the play.  Strindberg captures wrongfully the fundamental duality of the role women play in society.  In Mrs X, we have the woman as caring mother and devoted wife, a person who has lost all individuality and been completely reshaped by the demands of her husband a woman who glories in the stability and warmth of the family life she had achieved on the other hand, we have Miss Y, who is the independent woman, who lives her life her own way and is able, because of her independence to shape others to her personality, but who ultimately ends up alone in a restaurant on Christmas Eve.  (Julia, 1975: P.22)

Edwin (1979, P.5), illustrates that there is a deeper allegory in the play in choosing to silence the character of Miss Y and showing us how Mrs X is able to carry on a conversation with someone who never actually speaks to her at all, Strindberg has created an image of man's interaction with God.  In the play, Miss Y is not really an individual, but more a sort of human mirror that Mrs X uses to understand and interpret her own life, surfacing her discontent and insecurity and reconciling herself to them by means of dialogue that is entirely one sided Miss Y doesn't need to say anything, and what she thinks or knows has no part in the development of the story.

 

The Theme of the Play "The Stronger"

Pishkan (2000, P. 612), states that expressionism is generally applied to 20th century view point that proclaims the primacy of emotion in all the arts.  Expressionism signifies all modern art, it is actually a recurring tender linked to romanticism.  It is traced back to developments in France during the 1880s in reaction against impressionism.  Expressionism, in literature, as, art was an attempt to widen the frontier of aesthetic consciousness by exploring aspects of mind unaccounted for by realism or naturalism.

The term "expressionism" was first used to describe the world painters who departed from the value and techniques of the impressionists; but soon extended to describe a variety of experimental techniques in all the arts.  Expressionist writers often distorted objects and actions from the outer world in order to represent them as they appeared in the inner mind.  The Swedish writer August Strindberg is generally recognized as the first expressionist playwright.  This theme seeks to give artistic shape to inner, often revolutionary tendencies; his belief was that the economic and social conditions of the age were constant driving women into an increasingly selfish and immoral position.  He was violent hatred of women in general.  The play "Stronger" is about many aspects of two ladies, Mrs X who is an actress, married and Miss Y an actress, unmarried.  We have seen Mrs X's anxiety about her husband, and Miss Y shows ignorance and careless which means that this form of dialogue without answering is one of the characteristics of the expressionism theatre.  Mrs X has an inner problem and Miss Y does bad deeds by attracting me; which is another characteristic of the expressionistic theatre to take revenge from society.  (Ibid: PP.222-224)

In fact, the theme is about women that economic and social conditions of the age were constant driving women into an increasingly selfish and immoral position.  Therefore, we can say Mrs X disgusts from Miss Y and the deeds of Miss Y can be the cause of poor conditions of their social life.  Strindberg Mrs X in the opening performance, instructed her to play Mrs X as the stronger; that is to say, the softer.  He stays the rigid person.

Conclusions

On the surface, there's nothing particularly complicated about Strindberg's play "The Stronger". Two women - two actresses - run into each other in a restaurant on Christmas Eve. One is married and has been out shopping for presents for her family, the other is unmarried and is sitting alone in the restaurant reading magazines and drinking. We are told almost nothing about these women - they are not even important enough to have names; Strindberg calls them simply Mrs. X and Miss Y. And the entire play consists of nothing more than a single conversation between these two women. There is no action, no real plot development, nothing particularly out of the ordinary. In fact, one of the women, Miss Y, doesn't even speak in the entire performance.

The play is filled with irony.  One reason  Mrs X is not thought to be the stronger is that she goes back to her husband after she concludes that and affair has existed ironically thinking that an affair will not disable her marriage, and she says: "That only gave me a stronger hold on my husband."

notes 

⁽¹⁾             Ekman, Has Gorm, (2000).  Strindberg and the Five Scenes: Studies in Strindberg's Chamber Plays London and New Brunswick, New Jersey.  P. 54.

⁽²⁾             Falker, Fanny, (1921).  August Strindberg.  P.17.

⁽³⁾             Innes, Christopher, (2000).  A Source Book on Naturalist Theatre.  London New York.  P.11. 

⁽⁴⁾             Meyer, Michael, (1985).  Strindberg: A Biography.  Oxford.  P.77.

⁽⁵⁾             Paulson, Arvid, (1970).  World Historical Plays.  By August Strindberg.  New York.  P.60.

(6)   William, Paymond, (1952).  Drama from Ibsen to Bretch.  London. P.20.

References

Adam (2002).  Dictionary of Literary Biography.  Vol. 259.  Twentieth-Century

                     Swedish Writers before World Was II.

Carlson, M. (1993).  Theories of the Theatre: A Historical and Critical survey from

                   the Greeks to the Present.  London: Cornel University Press.

-------------- (1993).  All August Strindberg's Life.

Lane, S. (1998).  The Sons of a Servant.

Lindberg. (2000).  The Swedish Theatre.

Modernism:  Against the New Conformists.  London and New York.

Benttey, E. (1958).  The Brates.  United States of America.

Perrine, L. (2001).  Drama:  The Elements of Drama.  Ltd.

Peter, V. (2000).  Stylistic.  Oxford:  Oxford University Press.

Piskhan, K. (2000).  A Readers' Guide to English Literature.  Oxford.

Strindberg, A. (1985).  The Stronger.  New York.  Ltd.

Word, J. (1980).  The Social and Religious Plays of Strindberg. London

The Stronger by Strindberg

Abstract

On the surface, there is nothing particularly complicated about Strindberg's mono dramatic situational plot one – Act play structure, “The Stronger ". Two women- Tow actresses – run into each other in a restaurant on Christmas Eve. One is married and has been out shopping for presents for her family, the other is unmarried and is sitting alone in the restaurant reading magazines and drinking. We are told almost nothing about these two women- they are not even important enough to have names;    Strindberg calls them simply Mrs. X. and Miss. Y. And, the entire play consists of nothing more than a single conversation between these two women. There is no action, no real plot development, nothing particularly out of the ordinary. In fact , one of the woman – Miss. Y. does not even speak in the entire play ,i.e. Miss Y. maintaining her share in the development of the action by pantomime , facial expressions , and an occasional laugh ,

Introduction

 The Stronger is universally considered the quintessential short play and a superb monodrama of great psychological profundity. The play represents a triangular situation in which two actresses—one married, Mrs. X, and one unmarried, Miss Y—meet accidentally at a café while Christmas shopping and begin considering their past rivalry in love for Mrs. X’s husband. The play is unique in that the subject of the discussion, the husband, never appears, and for the fact that only one of the women, Mrs. X, speaks, while the other, Miss Y, merely reacts. To say “merely” is, however, to minimize unjustly the silent role, for it presents challenges every bit as great as those offered to the silent Mrs. X. In The Stronger Strindberg demonstrates what a keen insight and capacity for observation he possessed in regard to human nature and its machinations. There is, of course, the fairly open question of which of the two women is the stronger, the married actress who takes all in stride, bends with the winds, and survives in the dog-eat-dog world, or the taciturn Miss Y who, as Mrs. X says, has failed to bend and broken like a dry reed. But is her observation correct or is it wishful thinking? ; For near the end she observes that

Miss Y, rather than going after her prey aggressively, merely sits like a cat at the rat hole and outwaits it. Mrs. X may in fact be announcing her own eventual loss of her husband to Miss Y—except that she is currently so secure in her marriage and family that she is unaware of her unconscious premonition. Like all great works, The Stronger has built-in ambiguities.

One –Act Play

 The form of the One – Act Play could be distinguished from the full –length play by the restriction of its basic dramatic elements: characters, plot structure, language and dialogue. It tends to reveal character through a brisk sequence of events whereas the normal play tends to show character developing as a result of actions and under the impact of incidents in every detail. Accordingly, the plot and the language of one –act plays are reduced to an absolute minimum. The dramatic conflict is minimized to the extent that it is presented in one, or sometimes tow, situation throughout the play. The motivation of the characters is often uncomplicated since the one-act play lacks the extension of time, place and action through which the normal character in the full length- play is developed. Because of the restriction of the previous dramatic techniques, the language of the one-act play becomes highly suggestive. There is no room for any irrelevant statement. Every sentence basically and directly contributes to the main action. In short, the relation of the one- act play to the normal or the longer drama has often been linked to that of the short story to the novel. One of the important dramatists, who is contributed to the new wave of the one –act play, is August Strindberg. In his one simple situation, The Stronger, Strindberg creates an episode of incredible, poetic power – a snapshot of life so intense, so powerful, that it rivals Beckett at his best. The Stronger is full and rich in allegory and lends itself to many layers of interpretation; it is a play that takes little more than ten minutes to read / perform, but that one can easily spend hours thinking about afterwards. It is moreover, a powerful play, one that makes a deep impression, and leaves one with the illusion that one has traveled far and.  Seen much, even though the entire thing is actually incredibly short

Two Tramps in Mud Time summary

Two Tramps in Mud Time

Robert Frost [1874-1963]

Introduction

Robert Frost was born in San Francisco, the son of a schoolmaster. When Robert was 10 years old his father died and the family moved to Massachusetts in New England. At 14 he is said to have sold his first poem! In 1892 he left school and worked in a mill, then taught at a school, became a reporter and editor of a weekly. Then he joined Harvard and studied the classics for two years. Again he became a reporter, a shoe maker, and a teacher of English and Psychology. In 1912 he went to England and published A Boy's Will and North of Boston which made him famous. After his return to the U.S.A. he continued to write poetry.

Robert Frost is perhaps the best loved of American poets. He was awarded the Pulitzer prize for poetry four times in 1924, 1931, 1937 and 1943. His famous works include Mountain Interval (1916), New Hampshire (1923), Collected Poems (1930), A Witness Tree (1942), and In the Clearing (1962).

Signposts

1. The summary of the incident.
2. Self justification of poet's motives.
3-5. Amplify the instability of New England's seasonal climate.
6. The poet's optimism or well being.
7. A shift from the point of view from the interrupted author to the upraising lumberjacks.
8. The situation of the man who splits wood for love and the needy vagabonds who eye him in their extremity.
9. Fuses the coordination of love and need.

Poem in Detail

Stanza 1One day in April, between winter and spring, the author was chopping wood in his yard when two strangers emerged out of the wood like sub-human creatures. One of them distracted the poet, greeting him in a cheerful voice. He suggested that the poet should split the wood with greater force. The poet knew why the tramp had stayed behind allowing his companion to go ahead. He also knew that the tramp wanted to do the poet's work for payment.

Stanza 2
The poet was splitting large blocks of wood of a beech tree—the blocks were big and shapely like the chopping block. Each time the poet struck the wood forcefully, wood fell in neat splinterless shapely pieces like rock split into small pieces. The poet believed that the life of self-control had given him greater strength. He realised that the extra energy that a life of self-control gave a person, should be used for doing some work for others' benefit. However, on that day he wished to pamper himself by using that extra energy on splitting wood.

Stanza 3This stanza shows how the weather changes quickly during the time of transition from winter to spring. It was the month of April—the sun was warm but there was chill in the air. April is the month of unpredictable weather. When the sun is shining and the wind is not blowing, it looks as if you are in May—in the spring season. On the other hand, if you speak of the weather as if it is spring in May as referred to above, then you arc in for a surprise. A cloud suddenly covers the sky and wind flows from a cold mountain. Then it seems that you are not in May, but two months backward in winter in the middle of March.

Stanza 4A bluebird gently lands facing the wind only to keep its feathers unruffled. The controlled shrill notes of the bluebird's song shows that it is aware that it is not yet spring time. It sings in such a way so as not to excite blossoms to bloom in its spring glory. The winter was only pretending to be dormant, while it was still snowing. The bluebird is not gloomy but he is blue in colour only. The bird would not advise blossoms to bloom because he knows that anytime winter may return and the blossoms will be destroyed by frost.

Stanza 5
Water is very scarce when we need it the most in the hot summer months. Then we have to hunt for it by digging the ground with the magic stick; but now water is found everywhere. At present there are rivulets in the ruts of the road made by the wheel of carts and every hoof-print of a horse is filled with water. While one may be glad about the apparent abundance1 of water one should remember that under the surface of the mud, frost is hidden, just waiting to emerge after the sunset. Then the frost will reappear on the surface of the water as a fine layer of crystal. In this stanza note the contrast between reality and appearance. There is plenty of water yet it is hidden. There is plenty of work for the busy poet yet the tramps who wish to work do not get a chance to work.

Stanza 6
The poet had always loved the work he was engaged in. His enthusiasm increased when the two tramps came and wanted to take away his work from him. This made him realise how much he enjoyed chopping the wood. One might think that the poet had never felt the weight of an axe as he lifted it above his head or the firm grip of his outspread feet on the ground. While splitting wood the muscles in the poet's body throbbed and he sweated profusely in the heat of the springtime.

Stanza 7
Now the poet remembers about the tramps who had emerged out of the woods. The poet wonders where the two hulking tramps had slept the previous night. The poet thinks that the tramps had spent the winter in a lumber camp but were now unemployed. That is why they had slept in some unknown place. The tramps assumed that it was their right to chop wood. Here the irresponsible life of the tramps is compared to the self-controlled life of the poet. The poet is amused at the thought that the tramps judged him by their own standards and thought him to be a fool from the way he handled the axe.

Stanza 8
Neither the poet nor the tramps said anything. The tramps decided to stay over and to look at him. They wanted the poet to understand that he had no right to do that work for pleasure. They needed that work to earn their living. By taking up their work for pleasure the poet was depriving them of their livelihood. Therefore, they had a better right to the job of splitting the wood. The poet understood that he worked for the love of splitting wood but the tramps wanted to work out of necessity. The poet agrees that where there is a choice between work for pleasure and work to earn a living the latter takes precedence.

Stanza 9
The poet wonders that some may accept the division of work for love and work for need. The poet is of the view that pleasure and need must be combined in work. It is only then that a man can reach the highest degree of achievement. In other words like the two eyes give one sight in man so also the two aspects as indicated above gives unique achievement. A man has to unite his need for work as well as his love for work. He needs to undertake his task with joy for the benefit of human beings. It is only then that the task pleases God and is done for the betterment of humanity in future.

Notes

Stanza 1Tramp: a person without a settled home or regular work.

Mud time: the time of transition from winter to spring when snow melts and there is slush and mud everywhere.

put me off my aim: diverted my attention

hailing cheerily: greeting heartily.

dropped behind: stayed behind.

go on a way: continue his journey.

He wanted............ for pay: The tramps 'wanted to split the wood for a payment.

Stanza 2
beech: wood of a beech tree.

around: from all sides.

chopping block: a block of wood on which meat or vegetable is cut into small pieces.

squarely: honestly.

fell splinterless: large pieces of wood fell without being broken into fragments.

cloven rock: neatly split rock.

blows: efforts, strength.

spares: reserves.

strike: spend.

giving a loose to my soul: allowing my soul to express itself freely.

on the unimportant wood: in the insignificant task of splitting the log.

The blows......... unimportant: The life of self-control that the speaker has been leading, has given him additional strength. The speaker thinks that he should have made better use of his time by spending it in doing some deed of common good. That particular day, he deliberately decided to spend his time in pursuit of something that was not so serious as that of doing good to mankind. The words "giving a loose to my soul" and "unimportant wood" are significant in this context.

Stanza 3
The third, fourth and fifth stanzas refer to the vagaries of New England's seasonal climate. The main story is suspended and the poet illustrates the April's delicate equilibrium between warmth and cold—spring and winter. April signifies mud time—the time of transition from winter to spring when snow melts and there is slush and mud everywhere.

The balance of weather in April is so delicate that, if you dare to speak of it, it is disturbed. The third stanza shows how the weather changes quickly on the slightest pretext.

The sun was........... chill: The sun was warm because it was the beginning of spring. The wind was still chilly because the winter was just over.

the wind is still: the cold wind is not blowing.



You know how .... middle of May: April is a month of unpredictable weather. When the sun is shining and the wind is not blowing, it looks as if you are in May in the spring weather.

But if you .... to speak: If you speak of the weather as if it is spring in May as referred to in the lines above; then you are in for a surprise. A cloud suddenly covers the sky and wind blows from a cold mountain, then it seems that you are not in May but two months backward in winter in the middle of March.

the sunlit arch: the vaulted sky, bright and warm in the sunshine.

Stanza 4
alight: to come down from above.

fronts: stands in front of the wind.

unruffle a plume: not to disturb its feather.

so pitched: in a very moderated tune.

as yet: as of now. to bloom: to blossom.

A single flower............ bloom: not a

single flower bud has opened into a flower as yet.

snowing a flake: snowing in very small masses (flake) of snow.

half knew: almost knew.

playing possum: pretending to be dead; winter is not yet over, it might come back any moment.

he isn't blue: he is not gloomy or depressed; but he is just blue in colour.

advise: suggest.

a thing: anything.

he wouldn't........... blossom: he knows that at any time winter may return and then the blossoms will be destroyed by frost.

Stanza 5
witching-wand: a magic stick used to find out where the source of water is. If there is water underground, the magic stick is supposed to shake violently in the hands of the bearer standing on the surface of the earth.

wheelrut: furrow made by wheels. brook: a small stream.

print: depression made by the hoof of an animal.

hoof: the horny part of the feet of animals, like horses.

In every............. a pond: In summer there is scarcity of water; but now, as the winter is just receding, there is water in plenty on the ground; so much so, the furrow made by wheels look like a stream and the depression made by a hoof, looks like a pond.

lurking frost: the frost that is hidden, waiting suddenly to appear in the open. The lurking frost is like a wild beast hiding.

steal forth: move in secretly without being noticed.

Stanza 6
By coming......... to ask: what the tramps intended to ask is stated later in the poem.

The weight of a vernal heat: These lines describe the experiences involved in splitting the wood.

axe-head: The head of the axe with a heavy metal blade.

poised: held suspended in the air.

aloft: up in the air; upwards.

The grip......... feet: when you are splitting wood, you raise the axe and spread your feet. The feet have a firm grip on the ground.

The life......... smooth: Because of the energy used while splitting wood, the body muscles become tight and loose in usual intervals. When they are loose, they look soft and smooth.

rocking: move gently from side to side.

moist: slightly wet with perspiration.

vernal heat: slight heat of the spring season.

Stanza 7
The seventh stanza shifts the point of view from the interrupted poet to the lumber jack.

hulking: big and clumsy.

tramps: persons without regular work or settled home.

From sleeping....... last night: The tramps came after their sleep last night; but where they were sleeping only God knows.

lumber-camps: a camp where workers for felling of timber are put up.

But not long....... camps: but they were not sleeping for a long time, since they were put up in the lumber camps.

all chopping: all kinds of splitting of wood.

theirs of right: theirs by right. woods: a small forest.

lumberjack: one who is employed in the felling or sawing of timber.

They judged................. tool: Mark the subtle sense of ironical humour in these lines. It is not possible for "men of the woods and lumberjacks' to recognise and judge a civilized man rightly, they can judge a man only by means of their own tool-here: the axe.

Except as a ................ knowing a fool: Ironical humour continues in these two lines. The only way in which the two tramps could judge a person was in the way he could handle an axe.

Stanza 8
they had but to stay: they had only to prolong.

their stay: their act of standing there.

logic: way of reasoning.

As I had no................. for gain: Splitting the wood is for the poet no more than a hobby; but for the tramps it is their source of livelihood.

My right: The poet's right of having the hobby and splitting wood.

might be love: might be out of love for the hobby.

need: The tramps need the work of splitting wood for their livelihood.

in twain: together.

Stanza 9
vocation: trade or profession.

avocation: hobby in which one indulges for pleasure.

their separation: separation of work done for pleasure and work done for a living.

But yield................. to their separaion: The poet does not believe in the separation of vacation and avocation.

work in play: work is done for the sake of leisure.

love and need are one: When work undertaken to earn a livelihood is also the work undertaken as a hobby for enjoyment.

stakes: a race for prize money.

for mortal stakes: a race for prize money for winning the prizes of life like honour, wealth, power, etc.

For Heaven....... sakes: for God's sake and for the sake of future.

But yield who............ for Heaven and the future's sake: The concluding stanza of this poem is supposed to express what may be described as its central thought. "The underlying theme is a defense of the individual against the "gang security".

The poet knows we have no right to exercise a personal indulgence arrogantly when others are in dire need. When we unite our love and need in work, that is, play for mortal stakes then, the motive is pure and the act is justified. His relationship with his fellowman is one of sympathetic understanding.

On "Two Tramps in Mudtime" summary

The question of respect for one's own needs despite an apparent selfishness is raised in "Two Tramps in Mud Time." Because the speaker has had no previous relationship with the tramps—they are "two strangers"—the question can remain the abstract one of what one owes to one's fellow man, what one must give of one's self to the claims of another if the claims conflict, even if there is no obligation to that person, no claim by right of anything except common humanity, human kindness, or guilt in the face of another person's need. One issue in this poem, then, is simply that of selfless giving up as opposed to keeping something for oneself. It is a question relevant to the artist's need to hoard himself as opposed to his human obligation to give himself; it illustrates the kind of conflict in Frost that was generated by his mother's hero tales of self-sacrifice and his opposite need to work for himself in asserting his creative originality (EY 377, 578-79). Like the question in "Love and a Question," this poem too asks how far one is supposed to go in self-sacrifice, how one is to draw the line between personal rights, property, or needs and some other's right to make a claim on his sympathy, to make him feel guilty, or to make him give up something that he need not have given up.
In this case the conflict is further complicated because it seems to be between something that is of little consequence to the speaker, yet vital to the tramps. The claims are not of equal weight: they are work as opposed to play, need as opposed to love. The last stanza, which declares the necessity for uniting vocation and avocation, love and need, work and playas the ideal way of doing a deed, does not resolve the dilemma of who should be chopping the wood. There seems to exist a separation between love and need, work and play.
Yet there is need and need: there is financial need and there is emotional need. There is also right and right—the right of a man to expect sympathy for his need to earn a living and the right of a man to chop wood—especially if it is on his own property—if he wants to do so. In fact the recognition on the part of the speaker is a generous and an unselfish one:

Nothing on either side was said.
They knew they had but to stay their stay
And all their logic would fill my head:
As that I had no right to play
With what was another man's work for gain.
My right might be love but theirs was need.
And where the two exist in twain
Theirs was the better right-agreed. (CP 358-59)

The claim on his conscience may not have been valid or fair, but it worked all the same. Their "logic" did fill his head as they had counted on its doing, and whether he gives up the task or not is irrelevant, for once their logic had fined his head, the pleasure in the task would be gone. At first their claiming the task simply intensified his love for it ("The time when most I loved my task / These two must make me love it more / By coming with what they came to ask "); but then that was before their logic filled his head. The resolution of the poem will depend on whether feeling wins out over logic, and then the question is which feeling—sympathetic feeling for another or feeling about the task that unites work and play, love and need. The separation the speaker sees between work and play, love and need, is, after all, the separation he assumes the tramps to see—it is their logic, and he shows himself to be very sensitive in assuming it. If the conflict is resolved on his terms, we must assume he will give up the task should these claims remain separate; that he will continue to do it should they be united. "Theirs was the better right" only "when the two exist in twain."
Here, as elsewhere in Frost, we are shown the seriousness of "play," for this activity was "play" as long as one did not do it from motives of gain. Pay then was what defined it as work rather than play, that made it vital and "right." That it was hard work in either case is beside the point; that there was something at stake—pride in the quality of the workmanship and the aim—is beside the point. The crucial question is what will be the gain. Of what importance is it to the chopper? At least that becomes the question once the speaker feels himself to have been "caught" in the act (a tacit admission of guilt), which leads him to consider the wood "unimportant" despite the fact that he was loosing his soul, giving vent to whatever was pent up—"the blows that a life of self-control / spares to strike for the common good" (357). Loosing his soul in spending these blows on the wood is an important activity whether the wood is important or not.
In the inability of the tramps to understand his needs, Frost proves them inferior to the speaker who sees theirs. It is, once more, a matter of how one is reading the scene and what one brings to the reading. Frost reads them better than they read him. They see what their agenda permits them to see, a criticism we could level at the socialist critics who made the poem—and Frost—a target on their agenda, often unfairly, certainly missing rich possibilities of interpretation and maybe missing the point or mistaking the resolution.
Another need that the task answers is for a physical connection, muscular exertion, pitting oneself against an earth, a tree, a nature that shows crystal teeth, that moves capriciously between March and May and back in a moment:

You'd think I never had felt before
The weight of an ax-head poised aloft,
The grip on earth of outspread feet.
The life of muscles rocking soft
And smooth and moist in vernal heat. (CP 358)

A deed done "for. ..future's sake" must exert weighty grip and muscle in the face of so uncertain and capricious a future. It must require poise and balance as surely as does that boy mastering birches.
In this poem, as in "Birches," "love" is introduced where it has not seemed to be the subject: love of the work, love of the feel of the earth, and "the life of muscles, rocking soft / and smooth and moist in vernal heat"; love as it relates to labor, love as it relates to need. We see that only in uniting these will the speaker be entitled to make a claim that equals the claim of the tramps, for love must be related to need and to effort. Only in applying this union to any relationship, any task, or act of creativity does the last stanza seem to be genuinely a part of the poem and not simply the gratuitous nonresolution of Frost's poetic career, which it is so often taken to be.

But yield who will to their separation,
My object in living is to unite
My avocation and my vocation
As my two eyes make one in sight.
Only where love and need are one,
And the work is play for mortal stakes,
Is the deed ever really done
For Heaven and the future's sakes. (CP 359)

In two separate letters, Frost relates this poem somewhat curiously to love of a woman. In his famous assertion that Elinor had been the unspoken half of everything he wrote, he went on to add: "and both halves of many a thing from My November Guest down to the last stanzas of Two Tramps in Mud Time" (SL 450). In writing about his view of imperfection, he said: "I am not a Platonist…one who believes…the woman you have is an imperfect copy of some woman in Heaven…I am philosophically opposed to having one Iseult for my vocation and another for my avocation; as you may have inferred from a poem called Two Tramps in Mud Time…a truly gallant Platonist will remain a bachelor…from unwillingness to reduce any woman to the condition of being used without being idealized" (SL 462).
Love and need, then, must be one, or the relationship, whether in marriage, in friendship, or in art, is exploitation. But there is another factor in a love relationship—in a relationship with any other human being or with one's task—which distinguishes love and need from exploitation, and that is "spending" oneself rather than merely spending another: "be it art, politics, school, church, business, love, or marriage—in a piece of work or in a career. Strongly spent is synonymous with kept. "The speaker in this poem speaks of the soul-loosing blows he "spent on unimportant wood," and if anything entitled him to "keep" the task rather than to give it up, it is the effort, the love with which he spent himself on the task. In the above quotation from "A Constant Symbol," Frost had been speaking of writing poetry: "Every single poem written regular is a symbol small or great of the way the will has to pitch into commitments deeper and deeper to a rounded conclusion and then be judged for whether any original intention it had has been strongly spent or weakly lost (5P 24; emphasis mine). Peculiar to relationships of love and creativity is the opposition of spent and lost. In commerce, one is short by what one spends; in love and in creation, one only keeps by spending, saves one’s heart with losing it; one only fulfills oneself by giving oneself. In "Two Tramps," strongly spent, being strongly spent, is the only real justification for keeping.
The question of respect for self, of integrity of self as opposed to giving up of self, is posed in two ways in "Two Tramps in Mud Time," for there are two relationships: the relationship between the speaker and the two tramps, and the relationship between the speaker and his work. If the relationship between himself and his work is one of love, need, and spending of himself for his task and the perfection of the job for its own sake, then that may take precedence over a relationship with two strangers where there is no love, no pride in work, no effort, no mutuality of give and take. The self and its labor of love are united and preserved, kept, in the face of claims that would separate that unity. If, however, the task separates love and need, if nothing further will be "spent" on it, then the job is exploitive. It had better be given to those who can use it for gain.

While the drama of the poem is more overtly social than sexual, the relationship between love and need, keeping and spending oneself, respect for the needs of the self and the other, and willingness or unwillingness to surrender to it are clearly also applicable to a discussion of love, especially as the poet has drawn attention to this poem in such a connection. If we see the sexual undertone of "outspread feet. / The life of muscles rocking soft / And smooth and moist in vernal heat" it would not be the only poem, as we shall see, to connate earth and love, the act of earth-labor with the act of love.

Analytical essays "What is Poverty?"

Here is paragraph 1:

 "What is Poverty?" by Jo Goodwin Parker is a referential interpretation of poverty, who the poor are and how society's stereotype is injustice. Parker successfully describes poor people’s problems and the point of view that society has for people who live in poverty. Parker uses connotative language to create unpleasant images in her readers’ mind to feel guilty about stereotype and she strongly hates pathos “listen to my problems, I do not want your money.” In the other essay, "Am I Blue?" Alice Walker, a black woman, shows the black slavery, woman isolation and animals' imprisonment by telling a story about a white horse named "Blue" who is fenced by her neighbor. "Am I Blue?" is an argumentative essay. It means tries to change the reader's mind by rational appeals about animal rights and slavery "If I had been born into slavery, and my partner had been sold or killed, my eyes would have looked like that."

paragraph 2:

Walker successfully attracts the reader with a narration technique in the first two paragraphs by describing the small house in a beautiful place, but her voice of anger and concern toward animal's right and black slavery would appear in the rest of essay. At first glance, reader may think Walker's purpose is literary, but the closer look would reveal her primary purpose is persuasive to make the reader guilty toward animals. She usefully changes her voice in different times during the essay to give some opportunities to the reader to think about animals’ rights. Walker makes a persuasive claim that there is some human’s quality in animals. "I had forgotten that human animals and nonhuman animals can communicate quite well. " And in trying to persuade the reader to think about animal rights, she uses both rational and emotional appeals. "He looked always and always toward the road down which his partner had gone."

“What is Poverty?” SUMMARY

 “What is Poverty?” 

Jo Goodwin Parker gives her ideas on what poverty is. this story is written as an attack on human emotion. Her use of connotative language creates many harsh images of her experiences in a life of poverty. By using these images, Parker is capable of causing the reader to feel many emotions and forces the reader to question his or her own stereotypes of the poor. With the use of connotative language and the ability to arouse emotion, Parker successfully compels the reader to examine his or her thoughts and beliefs on who the poor are.

Parker's use of connotative language causes the reader to feel many emotions. Of these emotions, a prominent one is guilt. Parker is capable of making the reader feel guilty for the possessions that he or she has. For example, she uses the phrase 'you say in your clean clothes coming from your clean house,’ (Parker 237). This causes the reader to feel guilty for having the opportunity to be clean when we all know that she doesn't have the same. She calls hot water a 'luxury'(Parker 237). To those living in poverty hot water is a luxury. The impoverished take it for granted and never before considered it anything other than a basic possession. When the reader hears that someone else calls it a luxury that they cannot afford, he or she can't help but feel guilty for having it as a basic possession. Parker also attacks the guilt of the reader through stories of her children. She knows that some readers may not feel guilty for things that happen to her, but when children are introduced to the situation they will feel more guilt. She says, 'My children have no extra books, no magazines, no extra pencils, or crayons, or paper...'(Parker 238). The reader cannot help but feel guilty for having these basic things when her children, who need them, do not. Another thing that Parker makes the audience feel guilty for having is health. She says, talking about her children, '...most important of all, they do not have health.'(Parker 238). She goes on further to describe what is wrong with them. Parker says, 'They have worms, they have infections, they have pink-eye all summer'(238). These descriptions of her children cause the reader to feel horrible for them. By making the reader feel this way she is increasing the level of guilt the reader also feels. She is very successful in accomplishing this and this success causes her argument to become very powerful.

Not only does she make us feel guilty for having possessions that she cannot, but Parker also makes us feel guilty about the stereotypes we hold. She knows what society's stereotypes are and she successfully combats them. Parker knows that society thinks the poor don't want to work. To attack this she tells of why she can't work. She has three children. The last time she had a job the babysitter she left them with did not take care of them. She returned to find all three in dangerous situations. Her baby had not been changed since she had left it there, her other was playing with a piece of sharp glass, and her oldest was playing alone at the edge of a lake (Parker 236-237). Her chances of finding a better babysitter are slim because she cannot afford a nursery school due to fact that she makes too little (Parker 237). This is why she cannot work. Her inability to work leads to many of the other stereotypes that society has of the poor. Society questions why the poor cannot be clean. She tells of how without money she cannot afford any cleaning supplies (Parker 237). Parker tells of how she saved for two months to buy a jar of Vaseline and when she had finally saved enough the price had gone up two cents (237). She cannot wash in soap because it has to be saved to clean the baby's diapers (Parker 237). She effectively shows how society's stereotypes are incorrect. She is capable of making the reader feel guilty for the stereotypes and causes the reader to question why he or she has them. If the audience would just take a little time to try and understand her situation they would know how unfounded the stereotypes are.

Parker is also successful in evoking sympathy from the reader. She uses connotative language to create disturbing images of what poverty is. For example, she calls poverty an 'acid that drips on pride until pride is worn away (Parker 239).' Not only is poverty bad but it is an acid. An acid is a horrible thing. It burns and corrodes away at something until it no longer exists. By this reasoning poverty is destroying her life. This phrase forces the reader to consider poverty as something worse than they had ever thought before. She shows poverty as a curse, as a 'chisel that chips on honor until honor is worn away (Parker 239).' Parker starts almost every paragraph with a new definition of what poverty is. Some examples are: ‘poverty is being tired' (Parker 236), 'poverty is dirt' (237), 'poverty is asking for help' (237), and 'poverty is looking into a black future' (238). All of these phrases create a different image of poverty and each one is a success in evoking sympathy from the reader. They all force the reader to imagine poverty in a new way. We all knew it was bad but Parker makes us realize how bleak poverty is. She shows us that there is no hope for the poor without understanding.

Parker is successful in getting her point across with her use of connotative language and her ability to create images. She has done a good job of attacking the reader and getting him or her to listen to what she has to say. Even though she attacks the audience she does it in an appropriate way whereas she does not come across as offensive. All in all, Parker has done a successful job at creating images and using the readers' emotion to get an audience to listen to her plight and the struggles of other's in her situation.