Who, do we imagine, wrote this poem for the Church Missionary Gleaner (published September 1, 1847)? Who is its intended audience? What is its objective? What is the function of poetry as opposed to prose? Does this poem seem to espouse the same religious ideology as St. John Rivers? What beliefs does it teach?
I think this poem very much connects to St. John Rivers' religious ideology in Jane Eyre. Just as the missionary's wife in the poem is sent far from home to do God's work, St. John asks Jane to leave with him for the Middle East to preach his faith. The woman in the poem makes the choice to do this, "leaning on an arm unseen." Similarly, St. John believes that Jane has a responsibility to God, even if it kills her like it does to the wife in the poem.
ReplyDeleteThough Jane might not physically die if she goes with him as a missionary's wife, she would almost certainly mentally and emotionally die, as her passion for life and love (as we know is for Mr. Rochester) would be completely restricted. For St. John, it is still her duty to do so, but Jane knows it is not a life she can lead. Even though the woman in the poem feels comforted by the fact that she did all she could for God, even giving up her life, Jane would definitely not be content with such a conclusion.
I agree with Rachel that the speaker of this poem is somewhat comparable to St. John Rivers. Both subscribe to a form of Christianity that is centered on sacrifice—the idea that a life should be devoted to God, irrespective of one’s physical or emotional health. The speaker celebrates the woman’s decision to eschew a more peaceful, less inauspicious lifestyle just as St. John was willing to abandon hope of marrying Rosamund Oliver (and in effect, forego a chance at love), praised Jane’s docility/constancy, and sought continual challenges in lieu of “domestic dissipation,”
ReplyDeleteI think it’s interesting that this epitaph is written in verse and has an incredibly simple rhyme scheme. It’s almost as if the poem seeks to understate the gravity of this woman’s death, cloaking her misfortune in pithy quatrains and hollow platitudes. As it was published in the Church Missionary Gleaner, it seems unlikely that the poem was laced with deliberate irony. I think we can assume that it was written in earnest, perhaps as a means of encouraging future missionaries.
I think the form -- poetry, as opposed to prose -- serves the purpose to relate it to the psalms in the Bible and the selfless mission that the wife’s journey represents. There’s a rhythmic, liturgical beat to the poem, especially communicated through the A-B-A-B rhyming scheme. It turns the story into a sort of chant, the same way the psalms were written. This way, even the form contributes to the religious significance of the work.
ReplyDeleteLike other students have said, I do believe this would have been something that St. John Rivers would have agreed with. He presents the opportunity to preach abroad as a duty, a calling, just as the poem says, “and she felt it was good to be there.”
However, the poem markedly leaves out the effect those missionaries would have had on the native people, referring to them only once as “heathens.” The poem makes it obvious that the natives were not only not important, but not relevant to the story. This clearly shows the point of view from which the poem is written and the audience that would be reading it.
I, too, agree that the author was someone with John Rivers's disposition, directed towards women in general in the hopes that they would take the message as encouragement to 'spread the word,' as it were. It claims that the life of a missionary's wife is 'a path now chosen by few,' and advertisement of the position in a positive light would have seemed necessary.
ReplyDeleteIt states over and over that it 'gives her a spirit serene' and that she 'felt good to be there,' emphasizing the joy she feels in her work despite the harshness and her death, both pre and post mortem.
I agree that the poetry form mimics the psalms, both in format and in function- to preach. The values it advocates apply to St. John in that they support labour in the stead of love, as he holds true in his own life (with his refusal of pursuing Rosamund Oliver). It enforces the belief of the subservient woman- to both her missionary husband and the faith- only instead of housewifery there is missionary work involved. She is expected to dedicate her life and die without regret in the end.
This poem, which is an obituary of sorts, serves the function of demonstrating a Christian life full of sacrifice. It purports a few beliefs, for example, that though we have humans around us and supporting us, there is a larger "Arm unseen" on which we should all rely. Another is that not only should we rely on God, but give everything to him and make our purpose whatever he intended for us.
ReplyDeleteBecause this is honoring her life, I think it is somewhat justifiable that it is mostly about her relation to God and what her journey was like. However, referring to the native people as "the dark Heathen", and only once, focuses the attention even more on her, and not her "work". This makes me think that the original readers were also Christians or other missionaries, who would refer to everyone else as heathens. Also, what is the function of the word "dark"? Is this a comment on their race? If so, why must their race be connected to their heathenism?
It was hard to tell after reading this poem who specifically might have written it. I can’t help to think that it may have been whoever the “one by her side to protect and cheer” is. From the feel of the poem, I get the sense that whoever the speaker is, he or she is trying to do justice to the woman. The speaker is praising the missionary’s wife for her work and wants her story to be heard so that others can join her in spreading their religious beliefs. The poem further endorses the woman’s work when it is stated that she receives salvation. If living this life leads to salvation, why wouldn’t you want to participate in it?
ReplyDeleteI agree with everyone else that this poem does espouse the same religious ideology as St. John Rivers. St. John Rivers tries to get Jane to travel with him and says that it doesn’t matter if “marrying” him is wrong because she would be doing it for God. Likewise, the poem explains that the woman did this in light of counting her costs because she kept God in view. Both St. John Rivers and the missionary’s wife believe that as long as God is your sole purpose for spreading your religious beliefs the risk is worth it.
To briefly comment on Anneke’s question about the function of the word “dark” at the end of the poem, I think the use of it is just to be more specific about the people the woman was talking to. I do think it is a comment on race but I do not see it as a negative connotation. I do not think it is necessary in a sense to even insert that word because by stating the place she died at (Sierra Leone) in the title, the reader should be able to pick up the audience she might have been talking to. I think that this is interesting observation and one worth discussing further though.
From Laura:
ReplyDeleteThis poem is very emblematic of the sacrifice that St. John invites Jane to undertake with him but here, as in the novel, there is a discrepancy between the speaker and the object of the poem. In Jane Eyre, St. John has a tendency to glorify the calling that he thrusts upon Jane although she vehemently denies it. In my interpretation, the sadness of nature in the poem vs. the joyfulness that the narrator attributes to the missionary’s wife (in death, no less!) reveals the discrepancy between the two and questions the glorification of a person’s sacrifice to fulfill their supposed duty. Nature, in the poem seems dissatisfied; “the breze seem’d to whisper of coming ills, And moan’d with a saddening voice”. This melancholy sharply contrasts the characterization of the missionary’s wife; despite her external surroundings, she “felt it was good to be there” and I suspect this characterization is not one she would attribute to herself. That is, the perspective of the missionary’s wife would be very different. Jane even describes St. John’s reaction in a very conflicting way; she noticed ‘what struggle in him between nature and grace…and strange shadows passed over his face’ (476). In both texts there rises a questioning/conflict between what calling is natural to humans and what is acted by people.