Analysis of No Second Troy
Abstract
This paper analyses how Yeats uses symbolism emotionally and intelligently. Through linking the historical aspect (social and personal) with mythology, he manages to create a vivid image that works towards setting the tone and mood of the poem. To understand the bigger picture, it is essential that readers have a prior understanding of Yeats’ history, that of the Irish and the Greek myth, the Trojan War. Yeats establishes the harm Gonne has caused yet tries to alienate her from the destruction caused by her inciting the Irish into a revolution. The poem ends up being, on one level, a love poem and, on the other, an outlet of Yeats’ political views and his take on the culture of their time. Through the rhetorical questions, the reader is able to understand the conflicting emotions that Yeats is having about Gonne and her political ideologies. In the end, Yeats manages to create a poem that is different from other poems not only in the blending of the political and personal aspect but by portraying women with a power that could cause wars.
Analysis of No Second Troy
The Trojan War is a Greek mythology about how the Greeks destroyed the city of Troy. William Butler Yeats incorporated this mythology in his poem No Second Troy. The poem, considered as one to the most significant literary love stories composed in the 20th Century, is about his love towards Maud Gonne, an Irish revolutionary patriot. The Irish poet, through developing a similarity between Maud Gonne with Helen of Troy, shows how an alluring dazzling beauty can lead to great destruction. As Helen is blamed for the destruction of Troy, Yeats also blames Maud for spreading hatred within the hearts of the Irish men, which then led to their bloodshed and eventual destruction. This reference to the classical myth is the literary device that gives meaning to the poem. It also creates the unity of the design, which is an essential aspect of the poem.
The poem was published in 1916 as part of a collection in Responsibilities and Other Poems after Yeats had proposed several times to Maud and gotten rejected each time. Knowledge of Yeats’ biography, as well as the Greek myth of The Trojan War, is essential in the comprehension of this poem. The obsession that Yeats had with Gonne was apparent as he even dedicated many poems to her. The difference between No Second Troy and the previous poems he dedicated to her was that the prior has a passive-aggressive tone, because of his heartbreak, which later escalates to irritation. His harsh tone is especially exemplified by the comparison with the notorious Helen of Troy.
No Second Troy is made up of four sentences, each presented as a rhetoric question and developed into twelve lines of loose iambic pentameter. Evidence of the poem being a typical lyric is demonstrated by Yeats’ expression of his love, which is continuously focused on one issue. Through the use of questions, the poet finally resigns that it is not Maud’s fault that his life is filled with misery but that it is because of her inability to channel her talents in the then Ireland effectively. The first question is divided into three parts. The first is entirely personal, while the other two lean more on the political aspect. The rhetorical question comprises of Yeats wondering why he should blame Maud for bringing gloom to his life, introducing the ignorant to hatred and violence, and supporting class conflict. He somewhat reluctantly frees her from her charges of emotionally harming him. However, he stays firm on his disagreement with her incitement of extreme violence by people who were not as courageous as their desires. Here, Yeats links personal and political situations; hence, to some extent, he equates his own misery to the social suffering caused by the creation of discord between different classes, the working class, and the aristocratic class.
In the second question, Yeats describes the characteristics of Maud and metaphorically shows a contrast between her and her cultural setting. Her beauty is compared to a tightened bow, illustrating a tension between beauty and heroism, which eventually leads to a destructive nature. Moreover, this is similar to the Greek portrayal of beauty. The reason behind her being violent to him or her encouragement of violence is due to the lack of harmony between her body, mind, and soul with her world. He further used imagery to portray her extraordinary beauty and character. He describes her as ‘high’ in reference to her mind and beauty, and ‘most stern,’ in reference to her uncompromising passion and devoted single-mindedness. Yeats does not want to blame Maude; hence instead puts the blame on the period and culture that does not support a proper outlet for women with such capabilities. The last two questions seem cohesive. The third simply retells the previous question as Yeats continues to wonder about the disparity between the then culture and the character of Maude. However, the last question, through the introduction of the burning of Troy, spins the poem into a whole other facet. This comparison, initially introduced by the title, brings more light to the allusions portrayed by the imagery, arranging everything in its order.
In ancient Greek mythology, there was a place called Troy, which later came to be destroyed in the Trojan War, referenced as the pinnacle of the Greek mythological tradition. This war was mostly because Helen, the wife to King Menelaus of Sparta because she left him and ran away with the prince of Troy, Paris. Helen, although playing a small part, ended up being blamed for the devastation of Troy. Yeats establishes a parallel between these two worlds through creating similarities between Maud Gonne and Helen of Troy, and the anti-British revolution and the Trojan War. Just like Helen, Yeats places the blame of the hatred, violence, bloodshed, and eventual destruction on Maud.
The linking of the political, personal, and mythical worlds establishes the vigor of the poem. Yeats was extensively involved in the Irish’s cultural and political independence from Great Britain, and through the poetry, he is able to give not only insight on his love life but also the greater social and mythical realms. He presents a different kind of poetry, one that unifies, into a whole, personal aspects and contemporary events and myths. This he succeeds through his notable mastery over rhetoric questions.
References