Lord Byron’s relationship with contemporary poets

Lord Byron is one of the best poets of the Romantic age, but his relationship with contemporary poets was not good at all. In particular, he had a personal conflict with poet laureate Robert Southey, and they did not even want to be in the same room. Moreover, Byron did not particularly like his senior poets of the Romantic age, William Wordsworth and S. T. Coleridge. Though he did not have any direct personal conflict with them in that way, there were conflicts in terms of poetic composition and style. If we read Canto 1 of Don Juan, we can understand this very well. Here, he criticized several of his contemporary literati, including Wordsworth, Coleridge, and Southey, in very harsh language. This part has been highlighted here.

William Wordsworth is the pioneer of the Romantic Age, and he, along with S. T. Coleridge, published Lyrical Ballads in 1798. Many people believe that the publication of this book marked the official beginning of the Romantic Age. In the preface of this book, Wordsworth mentioned that the language and style of writing poetry should be of a new kind. In terms of language, he emphasized the use of ordinary language and prioritized everyday life events of common people when selecting subjects for his poetry. Wordsworth also spoke extensively about nature. Lord Byron, with his epic poem Don Juan, tried to show the opposite of what Wordsworth said about poetry. Byron wanted to demonstrate that beautiful and great poetry could be composed by preserving the traditional forms, and Don Juan was that attempt. He called Wordsworth insane, though the exact reason for this is not known. Also, we cannot say whether he harbored any personal jealousy towards Wordsworth. However, what we see in Byron’s Don Juan is largely the opposite of the idealism found in Wordsworth’s poetry.

S. T. Coleridge is another important poet of the Romantic age, and he is famous for his use of imagination. In particular, if we look at his two poems, Kubla Khan and The Rime of the Ancient Mariner, we can see that Coleridge was one of the greatest—or perhaps the greatest—poets in English literature in terms of his use of imagination. Byron said about Coleridge that he was a drunk. One possible reason he said this is that Coleridge was addicted to drugs in his personal life. However, Byron was not in favor of Coleridge’s use of imagination, and he did not take imagination very seriously in composing poetry. 

Robert Southey was the poet laureate of that time. He held this position for a long time, and though he did not gain as much fame as Wordsworth and Coleridge after his death, during his lifetime, he was fairly recognized as a poet in contemporary England. Byron had a very bitter relationship with Southey, and the two even wrote poems attacking each other. Byron’s assessment of Southey was that he was a hypocrite and talkative.

Among the poets of that time, Byron had a very good relationship with Percy Bysshe Shelley. Their friendship was very deep, and they liked each other very much. Shelley and Byron had somewhat similar thoughts. However, Shelley did not reject imagination and was a devotee of nature. The similarity between Byron and Shelley lies mainly in their ideology, and both were rebellious poets. Byron’s ideals were John Milton, John Dryden, and Alexander Pope. They were all poets of the Neo-Classical era, and Byron was a fan of their satire. All three of them portrayed society in their poems, especially civil society. Byron also portrayed this in his poem Don Juan.

However, we can see the greatest influence of Jonathan Swift and Alexander Pope on Byron. Byron, in his poem Don Juan, has largely followed the type of satire on people and human society that Swift used in his book Gulliver’s Travels. In Byron, we can see the power of intense satire, similar to that of Pope.

By reading the poem Don Juan, we may be reminded of Homer’s epic The Odyssey. Just as Odysseus wandered from one place to another in search of adventure or was forced by the curses of the gods, similarly, Byron’s Don Juan traveled from one place to another under the pressure of circumstances and fell in love with one woman after another.

There is no doubt that Byron did not have good relations with most of the poets of his time, and his thoughts were very modern. We can relate Byron’s thoughts and ideas to this age to a great extent. It was Byron’s misfortune that he was born at a time when the social system was not in his favor. 

Lady Macbeth: The Symbol of Power and Influence in Politics

Lady Macbeth had such a profound influence over her husband that such a comparison is not often seen in literature or in real life. If we search in real life or in the pages of history, we will probably find this type of character in Nur Jahan. Nur Jahan was the wife of Mughal Emperor Jahangir, and at that time, her influence had grown so much that Jahangir was only a king in name. Before making any decision, Jahangir would consult with Nur Jahan in all matters. As a result, the outcome was not favorable for the Mughal Empire, since many in the court were dissatisfied with her growing influence. Especially, Jahangir’s son Khurram rebelled against his father and later became king under the name Shah Jahan. It is worth mentioning that Shah Jahan built Taj Mahal for his wife Nur Jahan. There is nothing wrong with a wife having influence over her husband, and husbands and wives should listen to each other. But when a queen’s influence over a head of state or king becomes too much, or when a wife has too much influence over her high-ranking military officer husband, it can bring danger. This is what Shakespeare tried to say. There is a saying that a person can become mad for power, and when a person has too much ambition for power, it creates one danger after another. Shakespeare has beautifully portrayed this aspect of human psychology through Lady Macbeth. 

Though Lady Macbeth’s thought of making her husband king was blameworthy to the people of that era, the present age is the age of democracy. So, if any wife thinks that she can make her husband the President or Prime Minister of the country, the path is open to her through elections. If Macbeth were a man of today’s age, Lady Macbeth might have entered politics and tried to win votes for her husband by giving powerful speeches. However, Lady Macbeth might have stood in the election herself instead of trying to gather votes for her husband. In England, we have seen that one of the most powerful and perhaps most popular prime ministers in the past hundred years was Lady Thatcher, or Margaret Thatcher. Margaret Thatcher was called the Iron Lady, and we can also call Lady Macbeth the Iron Lady. Through the character of Lady Macbeth, Shakespeare may have tried to show this aspect of human nature—that the matter of changing power should be systematic. One person will be king, and he cannot be replaced—this kind of system brings various dangers to a country. In the present age of democracy, we see that elections are held every four or five years, and power changes. The person who is the Prime Minister or President can remain in power if they receive the votes of the majority of the population. If he does not receive the votes of the majority of the population, a new President or Prime Minister is elected. Because of this aspect of democracy, people like Lady Macbeth are not needed in the modern world, at least in Europe and America. However, there are many aspects of Lady Macbeth’s character, and it is expected that future researchers will use it to conduct a comparative analysis between democracy and monarchy.

Is Lady Macbeth a Machiavellian character?

Lady Macbeth was completely cruel and heartless. Throughout the play, we do not see much of a touch of humanity in her, and perhaps her only good quality was that she used to love her husband with all her heart and soul. Besides that, we do not see any other good qualities in her. At every step of the play, we can see her cruelty. She encourages Macbeth to kill the king. There was not a single bit of kindness or compassion in her, and we rarely see a woman as cruel as her in a play.

To understand the psychological state of Lady Macbeth, her soliloquy in Act 1, Scene 5 is very important. In this soliloquy, we see that Macbeth writes her a letter from the battlefield. In this letter, he informs her about the prophecy of the witches. The witches prophesied that Macbeth would become a king, and Lady Macbeth became overjoyed upon reading the letter. However, according to the norms of that era, it was impossible for Macbeth to become a king. This letter demonstrates Macbeth’s deep love and unwavering trust for his wife. This is because, if the contents of the letter had been leaked somehow, Macbeth’s inevitable punishment would have been death. After reading this letter, Lady Macbeth, alongside being overjoyed, begins to think about how she can help her husband succeed on this path. Not even once did it occur to her that it was legally impossible to make Macbeth king. Rather, her cruel thoughts became even stronger, and from then on, she began to think with all her heart and soul about how to remove the king and make Macbeth king. This soliloquy highlights the distinct character traits of Macbeth and Lady Macbeth.

We can describe Lady Macbeth as a manly woman. Although she was a woman, she did not exhibit any of the typical characteristics of a woman. She did not have any woman-like charm, sweetness, or softness in her. Rather, she had the mental strength of a brave warrior. She did not hesitate to make any harsh and cruel decisions at any time, and she did not care about how much harm this caused to others. In other words, Lady Macbeth should have been a soldier. Perhaps, if she had lived in this era, she would have become a soldier, and her psychology is like that of a soldier.

When a soldier takes part in a war, he does not consider what is right or wrong. He must fight and help his side win the war. If his side wins, peace and happiness come to his heart. But if his side loses, he feels pain and sorrow. Lady Macbeth possessed this kind of psychology, and if we consider it from this perspective, she can be described as a Machiavellian character. The main principle of Machiavellian characters is that “the end justifies the means” — that is, the objective must be achieved at any cost. The thought came to Lady Macbeth’s mind that she must make her husband king, and after that, she had no other thoughts. She had only one thing on her mind: how she could make her husband king. For this, she committed unethical and immoral acts at every step and encouraged her husband to do the same. Sometimes, it felt as if Lady Macbeth were the husband and Macbeth were the wife. 

Is Lady Macbeth a villain in the play Macbeth?

William Shakespeare’s one of the most famous tragedies is Macbeth. Although Macbeth himself is the central character of the play, the role of Lady Macbeth is no less significant. Lady Macbeth can be considered the most powerful and strong-willed among Shakespeare’s female characters. Although she is primarily a negative character, her personality traits and the psychological treatment of her character have made her highly important, and both readers and audiences remain deeply inquisitive about her.

From a psychological point of view, Lady Macbeth is considered an interesting character, even though we do not see any such qualities in her throughout the play. However, a combination of many characteristics is found in her, and Shakespeare has tried to portray this character beautifully and with considerable depth. To the audience of that era, Lady Macbeth may have seemed like a negative character who was the main villain of the play. In the play Macbeth, there is no villain in the true sense, because if we consider Macbeth as the hero, then we cannot consider anyone else as the villain, since it is Macbeth himself who commits all the evil deeds in the play. Moreover, Lady Macbeth can be identified as the main villain because she had no good qualities and encouraged and supported Macbeth in carrying out all the evil acts. Sometimes, when necessary, she actively tried to take action herself. Therefore, if we judge Lady Macbeth from a modern perspective, she must be regarded as an interesting character.

The first thing that will catch everyone’s attention is that she was a very powerful woman. In those days, women did not have much freedom, and in England or Europe, they could not even keep any property in their possession. Once women got married, they would come under the authority of their husbands, and this was the normal situation. Whether rich or poor, women, in the true sense, did not have much personal freedom or power of their own. Lady Macbeth was quite exceptional in this regard, and on the one hand, she was a very powerful woman. Her power did not come from winning wars or wealth, but from her personality. We do not find women with such a powerful personality in today’s world. Shakespeare showed this woman’s power through her intelligence. That is, Lady Macbeth was intelligent, and she knew how to influence her husband. Therefore, even though there was a king in England, the reality is that Lady Macbeth was more powerful than the king.

It has been said earlier that Lady Macbeth did not become powerful by winning battles or by acquiring wealth. She became powerful through the strength of her own intelligence. That is why she had a great deal of inner strength, and inner strength is a very important quality in a person. When a person does not have much, he or she can overcome many limitations with that inner strength and move forward in life. So, we must remember this quality of Lady Macbeth. Shakespeare has portrayed this inner strength in several ways. We see that she herself began to believe that her husband would become king, and for this reason, she started thinking about how to make her husband king. Though it was impossible in those days—because the king was alive and the prince was supposed to become king after him—still, Lady Macbeth did not give up hope and tried to find a way to put her husband in power.

Supernatural elements in The Rime of the Ancient Mariner

The Rime of the Ancient Mariner is considered the best poem written by Samuel Taylor Coleridge, and various factors have contributed to making it such a memorable poem. Students studying English literature read this poem in almost every university in the world. The poet’s use of supernatural elements is one of the features that has made this poem so unforgettable.

Normally, we can see that poets frequently incorporate supernatural elements when writing epic poems. If we think about The Iliad or The Odyssey, we can easily recall the presence of gods and goddesses and other supernatural elements that play a significant role in these two epics. In poetry, supernatural elements are quite common, and almost every poet during the Romantic age used such elements.

William Wordsworth and Samuel Taylor Coleridge were close friends, and they decided to present nature in opposite ways. Wordsworth was supposed to write about natural things with a supernatural treatment. In other words, he would try to show simple things exceptionally. On the other hand, Coleridge was supposed to present supernatural elements with a natural treatment. In other words, he was supposed to present supernatural or abnormal things in a very normal and natural way. In The Rime of the Ancient Mariner, we can find this concept very clearly.

Coleridge also used the idea of the willing suspension of disbelief very successfully. While reading this poem, we know that many things are impossible, but we forget this and try to stay with the poet, accepting them as reality. This willing suspension of disbelief is at its greatest in this poem by S.T. Coleridge.

If we want to think about the supernatural elements, we have to consider the beginning of the poem. The Ancient Mariner started talking to the wedding guest in such a way that he became engrossed as if he were hypnotized. He could not move from the spot and was almost forced to listen to the Mariner. Thus, the Mariner had a magnetic power to attract the wedding guests. The writer says:

“He holds him with his glittering eye -

The Wedding-Guest stood still,

And listens like a three years’ child:

The Mariner hath his will.”

The Albatross was not a simple bird. In our everyday life, we often kill animals and birds, but the Albatross that the Ancient Mariner killed was more than an ordinary bird. It was a supernatural element, and after killing it, he suffered greatly and was severely punished by God. It was a test for the Mariner, and he failed, but later he tried to atone for his sin.

Perhaps the scariest supernatural elements in this poem are the dead sailors who came back to life and started to walk and perform their everyday tasks. The Ancient Mariner was the only living person, and the other sailors became dead men who awoke. Even imagining it can make a person feel afraid. He says:

“They groaned, they stirred, they all uprose,

Nor spake, nor moved their eyes;

It had been strange, even in a dream,

To have seen those dead men rise.”

However, as I stated earlier, Coleridge presented the supernatural elements in such a way that they seemed normal to us as readers. When we consider that all the sailors were ghosts, yet they were moving like normal people, it feels strangely natural. Even the Mariner felt it was normal, and he was suffering so much that he could not even react or think much about the matter.

Towards the end, the water snakes are also somewhat supernatural because they are not ordinary or natural snakes. They were special, and it was a test for the Ancient Mariner. He had failed his earlier test with the Albatross, but this time he did not fail. Instead, he prayed for them, and this unselfish and loving act saved him in the end. He says:

“Beyond the shadow of the ship

I watched the water-snakes:

They moved in tracks of shining white,

And when they reared, the elfish light

Fell off in hoary flakes.”

Following the Mariner’s foolish killing of the albatross, Coleridge conjures up a spirit known as “the Polar Spirit,” which brings rain and storms upon the beleaguered ship. Whether it is a pagan or divine spirit, it governs the material world to punish the Ancient Mariner and awaken his sense of awe.

Death and Life-in-Death are two important supernatural elements in The Rime of the Ancient Mariner. The Ancient Mariner discovered these two figures on the deck of the ship when he got a closer look. Death was embodied as a naked man, whereas Life-in-Death had the beauty of a woman. The poet terrifyingly described these two supernatural figures. They were seen deciding the Mariner’s fate with a dice.

The solitary Spirit from the South Pole travels aboard the ship until it reaches the Line, in compliance with the angelic troop, but still requires vengeance. The fellow demons of the Polar Spirit participated in his wrongdoing, and two of them converse with each other, stating that a lengthy and arduous penance has been granted to the Ancient Mariner by the Polar Spirit, who has returned.

Additionally, the Ancient Mariner heard the message of God from angels. The Almighty God, being the most powerful, granted forgiveness to the Mariner. Here, we can see that God is gracious to those who want to be good and punishes those who act wrongly. So, Coleridge tried to present this image of God by stating that even if we make mistakes, if we try to return to a righteous life and seek God’s forgiveness for our wrongdoings, God will always extend His mercy toward us.

In The Rime of the Ancient Mariner, Coleridge portrays the supernatural elements primarily in a favorable light. It seems that he wanted to convey the idea that people are the ones who cause problems for themselves, not the supernatural elements. Human beings should try to follow the right path and show love toward nature and its elements. They should also show kindness and mercy toward all of God’s creatures. 

Religion in Silas Marner

Silas Marner is one of George Eliot’s finest novels, first published in 1861. Religion is mentioned here, and it is considered one of the most important themes. Moreover, in this novel, George Eliot presents her thoughts about religion, and for this reason, this novel holds great importance. If we judge this novel from a religious perspective, the thing we need to understand is that though Christianity is mentioned here, it refers to a specific sect of Christianity.

Silas Marner was a Calvinist Christian. He was a member of a small local church, and here, we can see for the first time that Silas Marner was convicted by his own religious brethren, even though there was no strong evidence against him. As a result, Silas Marner became very disheartened and left his village, moving far away to a place that had no relation or connection to his homeland.

In this novel, we can see the themes of sin, punishment, and redemption repeatedly. We cannot say that Silas Marner was exactly a sinner in that sense, and we will discuss his character in more detail shortly. However, other characters—especially Dunstan Cass, who was greedy and would like to drink alcohol—were punished for their sins. He stole Silas Marner’s gold coins and died later. On the other hand, Molly Farren, who was a drug addict and not a very good person, also died. That is, they were punished for their sins.

If we look at Silas Marner, we have to say that he did not commit any sin in that sense. Rather, he was guilty only of original sin—that is, the sin committed by Adam and Eve, which resulted in the original sin carried by all humans at birth. Silas Marner was punished without any real evidence, and the punishment was extremely severe. Before his eyes, his beloved and fiancée abandoned him and married his friend—the very friend who had framed Silas Marner with a false accusation. That is why it was deeply heartbreaking for him, and, unable to bear it, he left his homeland and went far away.

According to Calvinistic Christians, life is a journey. Life on this earth is full of suffering, and God will test us regularly with various sufferings and hardships. We must endure these trials patiently and stay on the path of God. Only then will our lives become meaningful and beautiful. We can see this doctrine reflected in the character of Silas Marner in George Eliot’s novel. Silas Marner strives to remain on the path of honesty and truth, but he is defeated again and again—but even then, he does not abandon the path of God.

Towards the end of the novel, we see that Eppie and Aaron are building a garden after their marriage. This garden is much like heaven because, according to Christian belief, heaven is often described as a garden. So, although Silas Marner suffered many hardships in his life, his daughter Eppie and son-in-law Aaron enjoyed the rewards. Both Eppie and Aaron were good people, which is why they received this blessing.

It is not that George Eliot was a complete devotee of Christianity. In this novel, a conflict emerges between destiny and free will. The suffering that Silas Marner endures seems very much like his destiny as if it was written in his fate—that he was meant to suffer and be punished. However, Silas Marner used his free will every time and consistently tried to stay on the path of honesty. He never deviated from the path of righteousness. For this reason, in the conflict between destiny and free will presented in the novel, it seems that George Eliot took the side of free will.

The kind of God we see in the novel Silas Marner is kind and just. Here, truth triumphs, and falsehood is defeated. Silas Marner followed the path of honesty, and he turned out to be the most fortunate and victorious. On the other hand, the other characters were not as virtuous as Silas Marner, and they did not become as happy. Therefore, we can say that the victory of Christianity is portrayed here.

Sometimes it seems that George Eliot has praised Christianity in a very simple way in this novel. On the other hand, it also seems that the story of this novel is very complex, and here, humanity is celebrated more than religion. Silas Marner is expelled, but he wins in life by virtue of his humanity. Another explanation could be that those who are truly religious, like Silas Marner—whether they go to church or not, whether they perform religious duties or not—try to remain honest, and God loves them. In other words, George Eliot may have meant that God loves those who give more importance to human qualities such as kindness, honesty, and love than to observing religious rituals or rites.

Sin, punishment and redemption in Silas Marner

Silas Marner is one of the best novels by George Eliot, and we can see the life of a weaver named Silas Marner in this novel. The protagonist has endured significant hardships in life and has had to confront numerous challenges. He could not marry the girl he loved, and due to a false accusation of theft, he had to leave his area and move to another place. In this way, we can see the sorrows, pains, and also the joys of Silas Marner’s life from the beginning to the end of the novel. One of the central themes of this novel is sin, punishment, and redemption.

If we look at the character of Silas Marner, we can see that he does not have any significant fault. We do not know that he has committed many sins. Rather, what we see is that a great injustice has been done to him. A false accusation of theft was brought against him, and he was falsely convicted as guilty. No concrete evidence of theft was found against him, but still, he had to be punished—and it can be said that he was punished severely. As a result of this punishment, he had to leave his community on the one hand, and on the other hand, his fiancée refused to marry him and chose to marry his close friend instead. As a result of all this, Silas Marner suffered a severe blow in life, and it does not seem that he was ever able to overcome this trauma throughout his life.

If we were to find fault in Silas Marner, we might say that he had only one fault, and that was that he was a bit miserly by nature. Being a little bit miserly is not such a bad thing, but anything in excess is harmful. He used to work hard but saved money like a miser. As a result, a kind of abnormality developed in him, and when he lost his gold coins—or when they were stolen—he became even more depressed. What happened as a consequence of his miserliness was that Silas Marner got hurt, and he did not try to make his own family. He could have gotten married and started a family, but his mind never returned to that path.

Another important character in this novel is Godfrey Cass. He was a man from an aristocratic family, and he secretly married a woman who was not in a socially privileged position, keeping the marriage a secret. They had a child together, and his first wife, Molly Farren, was a drug addict and of a low caste. On the other hand, Godfrey Cass kept this a secret and planned to marry Nancy Lammeter, who was a woman from a noble family. When his first wife, Molly Farren, thought about revealing their relationship, she died, and by a twist of fate, Eppie appeared at the doorstep of Silas Marner. Though Godfrey Cass arrived at the scene, he did not admit that Eppie was his daughter or that Molly Farren was his first wife. As a result of this refusal to acknowledge them, Eppie started growing up with Silas Marner. Godfrey’s biggest wrongdoing was that although his wife was a drug addict, he did not try to raise his own child. Out of fear of society, he kept the matter hidden, and although he later tried to get Eppie back, he never succeeded.

The worst character in this novel is perhaps Dunstan Cass, who was the younger brother of Godfrey Cass. Dunstan Cass committed numerous sins. First, he knew that Godfrey Cass had secretly married Molly Farren and even had a child with her. Therefore, he always threatened Godfrey Cass that he would reveal the secret. His second crime was that he stole the gold coins that Silas Marner had saved through hard work. Dunstan Cass died while fleeing, and the real story was revealed many years later.

If we look at redemption, we will see that Silas Marner suffered the most, but he is the happiest person in life. The main reason for his redemption is that despite all the suffering in his life, he did not become a bad person. When Eppie appeared at his doorstep, he raised her with all his heart and soul. We all more or less understand that raising a child alone as a man is almost impossible. Though he was not Eppie’s biological father, he tried to raise her with the utmost care. As a result, he survived and became happy.

Later, Godfrey Cass tried to redeem himself, but he did not get Eppie back. What we can understand from this is that God might have forgiven Godfrey Cass’ sins—but not entirely. As a result, his greatest punishment was witnessing his daughter call another man her father—and not just call him that, but truly believe he was her father. His own daughter did not recognize him as her father, and that became his lifelong punishment. Godfrey Cass may have gained many things in life, but he never had a child of his own.

Dunstan Cass did not receive redemption because he was completely evil. He had no intention or desire to become a better person, and that is why he did not receive redemption. As a result, he suffered in life. From this, we understand that if we become completely evil, we will not receive any redemption from God.