Innocence vs. Evil The Tyger and The Lamb reveal Blake’s interest in depicting opposites. Each item symbolizes things that are opposites. The Lamb represents good and peace, while portraying the illusion of a Godly figure. The Tyger represents evil, but in the same matter is able to show itself as a somewhat creation ary figure. As displayed many times throughout both poems, “The Lamb” and “The Tyger” move back and forth between creation and destruction, the ingenious function is that Blake uses the two poems to illustrate the biblical and wholesome actions of the Creator, from opposite directions.
The Lamb, tells of the goodness in the world and as a symbol for Christ. Blake uses the “L” and “M” sounds though out this poem to create an atmosphere of softness. Nursery rhymes do the same to create the feeling of well-being and a sweetness tone. The use of repetition and the presentation a child like atmosphere. The word choice calms and soothes. “Little,”lamb,”life,”meek,” and “mead.” The speaker has a voice of innocence and wonder.
He asks the Lamb who made something so lovely and gentle. He answers, God. All is innocent, purity, goodness and right in the world. Blake says the ‘Creator’ “calls himself a Lamb” (14) in the sense that He is one of us, and each of us are part of him. The Creator is pure, and therefore shows that we are pure. Also, he says, “I a child, & thou a Lamb, / We are called by his name” (17-18).
The Essay on God Lamb Blake Tyger
For this paper, I was thinking about comparing the two poems The Lamb and The Tyger by William Blake. My thesis for the paper would be something along the lines of in Blake's Songs of Innocence and Experience, the two poems The Lamb and The Tyger show an interesting transition from "innocence" to "experience." The Lamb is about a God who calls himself a lamb. The God is in fact meek and mild as ...
Again showing that we are on a symbiotic relationship with the Creator. The Tyger, on the other hand, obviously displays itself as a very different type of animal. Blake used harder consonant sounds, such as “B,”D,” and “T” throughout the poem. For example, “burning,”bright,”dread,” and “deadly.” The Tyger therefore portrays the power to destroy. The rhythm in this poem is heavy like a tiger stalking in the jungle or pouncing on his prey. The poem’s power and destruction is more about the fall of man than the fall of Satan.
As the poem invokes this power of God and the power to destroy, it begins to explore the nature of the Creator and not the nature of the creation itself. The Creator seems to know the answers to the questions throughout the poem even before they are asked. Almost as if they are rhetorical in nature, spoken obviously from a more worldly sense of being. He says a “hand dare[s] to seize the fire” (8) and the Tyger “could twist the sinews of thy heart” (10) where the poet’s envisioned a shifting realm of disembodied parts, for example the “hand,”heart,”feet,” and “eyes.” This Beast was apparently so treacherous, that once it was set free, “the stars threw down their spear / And water’d heaven with their tears” (17-18).
However, God created the Tyger to become a reminder of the awesome power and privilege that is open to all mankind. In comparison, The Tyger portrays the Creator’s strength and the power to destroy, where as The Lamb portrays innocence and protection of the Creators beauty.
“Simultaneously confront the Tyger and protect the Lamb and to confront the Lamb and create the Tyger, in doing so prove ourselves of the same mettle as the Creator who forged us” (Nurmi, 557).
In other words without The Tyger’s powerful creation there would be no mankind, therefore without evil there would be no good. “The God smiles, the man cowers. But while the man cowers, he has a growing sense of understanding for God’s smile.
It could be a wicked and sadistic smile, but it could also portray the smile of an artist who has forged the richest and most indispensable of conceivable worlds, a world that contains both the Tyger and the Lamb” (Tower, 53).
The Essay on The differences of power between poems ‘Ozymandias’ and ‘The River God’
Despite them having the same theme, there are many differences along with similarities between the poems. ‘Ozymandias’ is a sonnet poem about how leaders seem so powerful when they’re alive, however their achievements fade over time. Even a ruler, will be forgotten. Whereas ‘The River God’ is a dramatic monologue, about a beautiful woman who drowns in a river. The river is presented as an old god, ...
The Lamb throughout the poem shows its innocence and childlike emotions, whereas, again in total opposite, the Tyger shows more experience. The Lamb and The Tiger used alliteration. In The Lamb it was used to make it child like.
On the other hand, in The Tiger was used to show the frightening and dreadful power it possessed. The making of the Tyger seemed very difficult. “Seize the fire,” twist the sinews,” and “dread grasp.” Creation of The Lamb seemed to be the opposite. The Lamb symbolizes everything that a child would expect life to be. Such as innocence and goodness and the tone is overwhelmingly positive. The Tyger symbolizes the opposite of that of the Lamb.
Evil, strength, ferocity, fear, and dread are just a few and the tone is of awe and fear. Who created the Tyger? “Did he who made the Lamb make thee?” The last sentence in the first and last stanza are identical except for one word. “Could frame they fearful symmetry” was changed to “Dare frame they fearful symmetry.” That one changed verb tells us the answer. The Tyger represents the energy and power of the Creator. “As a biblical allusion, the idea resonates well beyond the simple idea of the animals” (Swingle, 68).
The reader in this case might wonder if the lion can lie with the lamb in this “Peaceable Kingdom” and weather or not the two can truly be reconciled.
In other words, the poems both go beyond the true biblical sense, and bypass the simple ideals of the animals. They become a much more worldly depiction of Creation and Destruction.
