So I have not been able to look at other people’s blogs yet on how many chose this to blog about or what they had said, but Porphyria’s Lover is by far one of my favorites. No, not because of the weird content, but because of the many ways a critic can pick it apart and see the meaning in so many ways. And that is why I enjoy English Literature so much because it is on all how one perceives it since we are now unable to ask the author on what it was actually intended to mean.
For instance after speaking to a few other classmates about the poem their initial reaction is the same as many others I have spoken to saying that the lover obviously strangled her to keep her from going back to her upper class lifestyle at home. On top of that most of the classmates had struggled with the idea that the lover went unpunished by man or by God. As just as many other people do I may agree with some people’s opinions and disagree with the next. So I will try to prove how Porphyria was never killed and that her lover will have to be judged by God in the end of his life.
So within the beginning of the poem we know that the setting is some secluded woods where the lover lives. We know that he is not of the same social class as Porphyria when it says, “From pride, and vainer ties dissever.” So then it moves to the point where her lover says that she worships him; at this point he feels God-like. That is one moment where he cannot decipher between his imagination through his feelings and reality within the moment. Then as he says, “That moment she was mine, mine, fair, perfectly pure and good,” he steps over the boundary of sanity. It is not sanity of a criminal, but the sanity the way that pain is pleasure. Yes, my view is that when he chokes her with her own hair it is not to kill her to keep the moment forever, but he chokes her during intercourse to keep the moment forever. Yes, I understand that with the last parts of the poem he describes her as mostly dead, but if we take a deeper look then we can read that she is merely unconscious.
“No pain felt she,” means that there may have been a slight moment of discomfort, but majority of the time she was enjoying because it was heightening her level of climax. If anyone would research within the history of hangings it would show that the people that were pulled down from the gallows their corpses still had proof that they were aroused through the strangulation. Then the lover moves to the descriptions of her eyes, “I warily oped her lids; again laughed the blue eyes without a stain.” That means that he was very careful when opening her eyes while checking her pupil’s responsiveness and not to damage anything needed for future sight. Then next part is looking at her eyes for any stains with blood. When someone dies of asphyxiation the blood vessels in the eye normally explode due to lack of oxygen and the intense strain. The next part that proves she is alive is when he loosens the hair around her neck, “her cheek once more blushed bright beneath my burning kiss.” He is saying that as soon as he took the constriction off of her neck the blood returned to her face the way it is supposed to happen.
Okay, it was misleading for me when he said, “Her head, which droops upon it still,” but that means that she is unconscious not dead. So finally he can sit and think about how perfect the moment is being with her without any of the other outside pressures of family, friends or anyone else. The two can sit and enjoy the moment . . . especially when she wakes up. For him the moment feels that it was written as fate and that there clearly is no higher power working against them since they accomplished what they wanted. However, they may have not had man or God interrupt their meeting, but what the lover did not put into account is the judgment the two will have to face on judgment day when after their death. So their spirit is unclean after choosing to have premarital intercourse.
So it may not have been my initial opinion, but after doing some research and looking back through the poem it shows up as a very strong argument that Porphyria was never killed and the two lovers will eventually have to answer for their sins.
I like your reading of the poem; there's definitely evidence for it in the poem. One of the things that makes Browning so interesting to read is the way he leaves much to the reader's (or listener's) interpretation. Porphyria may be dead, or she may be unconscious, or she may not even exist (could the speaker be that out of touch with reality)?).
ReplyDeleteThis is great! The best part about Browning (in my opinion) is how he lets readers create so much meaning. I have to admit that everything you say is really backed up by textual evidence, so it's impossible to argue that this is a bad reading of the poem. I even read an analysis that said Porphyria is dying slowly from a blood illness (the group of diseases actually called Porphyrias) and that the speaker mercy kills her, which is why God can't judge him. It's crazy, but Browning leaves so much room for interpretation that I think any reading is just as valid as the next! Great job :)
ReplyDelete