On the side: The Iliad cont'd...

On second thought, it’s as though the story of The Iliad is not necessarily concerned with the battle between the Greeks and the Trojans – but with that of its characters.

The Iliad symbolizes character development in the way of psychological maturation. There is a contrast between characters who virtually represent and believe-in the same things. This is seen between Achilles and Hektor as they are depicted as the main “heroes” of the Iliad.

Where they may share this common bond of heroism, they are very different. They are so different that they are “extreme” in their differences. Achille’s is an extreme warrior with horrific anger and a suffocating ideological pride. Hektor is a man of “the people” – he is one with his community. He is an outstanding warrior, but he fights for a collective purpose. He fights fair, and he is just. Homer depicts him as the ideal warrior.

There are many hero’s which are evident in the book, but regardless of their capabilities, they are used mainly as vehicles to create a deep contrast between the main characters.

Among the many themes which are evident in the book, the most outstanding is the character insight which is seen with Achilles. His character in unveiled through his actions, and his development as a “human” is plotted throughout the course of the book as he is exposed to, and reacts against, various situations.

His pride is not a “heroic” pride but a selfish pride. It appears immature and child-like. His temperament supports this as he becomes irrational and enraged; all of his senses and sensibilities become consumed by his anger.

A person with such outstanding capabilities in combination with a debilitating instability is a very dangerous person.

Throughout the course of The Iliad, Achilles develops as a human being. He matures from an ignorant, self-indulgent, aggressive, and borderline psychopathic individual, into a more compassionate and logical human being.

Homer’s characters represent many of the psychological instabilities of today. They are unbalanced, extremist personalities who are in control of a vast number of people (some would say, much like a modern government).

The gods have a very important and significant role in this because they act like an “alter ego”. They might represent the idea of “the human conscious”. Because god and religion is such a dominant force, perhaps Homer was alluding to “the voices of the gods” as being a “human conscious”, because this was a “new” and more modern idea. Then, it would have made sense that “the gods were talking” when really, “the gods” represented the conflict of interest in which we all (we, today) use to deliberate the good and the bad in every situation.

The Iliad: Achilles and Priam

The following is a comment on Homer's The Iliad which discusses Achille's personal development as a result of Priam's request.



Pride and passion led to the downfall of Achilles long before his fate. As the greatest warrior in the Achaian army, he was consumed by honor. The first few lines of Book One foreshadow Achilles temperament and irrationality:

Anger be now your song, immortal one,
Akhilleus’ anger, doomed and ruinous,
That caused the Akhaians loss on bitter loss.

His wrath is provoked by his dire sense of honor- he is consumed by his personal morals (not necessarily concerned for the “greater good”) and becomes alienated from the Greeks and eventually, society. It is this distance (his inability to be truly close to anyone; to be passionate about human issues as opposed to aesthetic gain and glory) which inspires his fate. He is willing to endanger his army and the people closest to him in order to preserve his honor.

Honor and glory are driving forces which are characteristic of “the hero”. To be a hero is to accept the conditions and the expectations of a society- to uphold status and to be respected within the community. A hero “accepts his fate”. He will endure suffering and pain, and he will bring glory and good. Public opinion is important to the hero. If this relationship were to sour, his pride would be lost and he would feel as if he was of no value or purpose. This is true of Achilles.

At points, Achilles distances himself from those around him when he feels his sense of identity and honor has been attacked. This also shows Achilles feeling somewhat victimized. His being a “victim” is a result of his pride being attacked, therefore he lashes out and is aggressive towards others- when his honor is questioned, he is tyrannical and irrational and acts-out accordingly.

There is an evident “modern” psychology to Homer’s work. His characters experience distress and anxiety. Achilles is an example of this internal battle. He is never quite understood, as he is never quite “stable”. Achilles is often enraged, angry, hostile- he is never reliably rational because he is constantly consumed with his pride. Upholding his pride often endangers others.

Achilles’ mother is the goddess Thetis. Achilles is conscious of morality and immorality, which is a factor in his inability to function or interact within human society. He is an outsider- he knows he will die (in battle) but he persists because of his passion, ego, and sense of immortality.

There is a definite contrast between Achilles and Hektor. Homer depicts the theme of individual values and morals versus social values through these characters. Hektor is a hero who is motivated by responsibility and obligation to his people. Achilles is motivated in terms of defending his pride.



“The funeral games were over.”

The gods seem to be depicted throughout the Iliad, as an active human conscious. Their dialogue and interaction represents the internal struggle between right and wrong or good and bad- the gods appear as “egos” at play, like a human consciousness battling what is appropriate, fair, just, and deserving. The gods themselves seem like “visual figures” that depict the human consciousness and awareness. Their “play” or interaction with each others opposing ideals is relational to the concept of human indecision.

The gods constantly “play”[I]. This is evident at the beginning of the Iliad and continues through the book up until the end. In Book XX Zeus calls a meeting to ensure that Achilles will not “side-step” his fate- to ensure that he will die. Being immortal, the gods treat this horrific human battle almost like entertainment (maybe not fully, but it appears that way). They are constantly interjecting and changing the course of the events on earth. The gods are divided amongst themselves and debate and argue their way through designing the outcome for the individuals on earth. In Books XX and XXI the gods “instigate” the fighting between the Trojans and the Greeks , which leads to Hektors death in XXII

The goddess Athena plays a crucial and deciding role in battle. She is in support of the Achians. When Achilles and Hektor fight in Book XXII she “speaks” to Hektor, convincing him that he will survive the battle against Achilles. This shows the gods in the role of the human conscious- the battle between good/bad and right/wrong.

In Book XXII the gods have a discussion amongst themselves. Athena addresses Zeus (her father) persuading him to let her take control of the battle between Achilles and Hektor.

My dear and honoured child. I am not bent
on my suggestion, and I would indulge you.
Act as your thought inclines, refrain no longer. (p. 521)

It is evident that the gods have the “upper hand” in the battle at all times- the fate of the mortals, whether the Greek army or the Trojan army, are all in the hands of hegemony. The gods have the higher power- however- they are conveyed as being careless and carefree. This poses a detrimental issue because they are in fact “playing” with human lives.

Book XXIII brings the victory games. Achilles brutally sacrifices captive Trojan men and animals in a large fire-pit in honour of his friend Patroklos. They “wine and dine” and play games to celebrate their victory. Hektor’s body is abused. He is kept face-down in the dirt amongst all of the “festivities”. This further shows Achilles untamed and unjust anger. The gods play a role here because they keep Hektors body from deteriorating- perhaps aware of the following events which were to take place.

The vision Achilles has of Patroklos shows his human qualities. He decides Patroklos needs a proper burial and time to mourn his dead friend. The idea of “a proper burial” is to put a soul to rest. Achilles is sympathetic to this which momentarily restrains his anger.

Achilles is not compassionate towards the body of Hektor. He is brutal and immoral with him. Achilles behaviour creates a contrast between the way Hektor treated Patroklos, and the way Achilles treats him. Hektor (thinking he was fighting Achilles) killed Patroklos but did not mutilate him, whereas Achilles goes above and beyond the realm of “victory” and becomes immoral and unethical in his treatment of Hektor.

This leads to the revealing episode in Book XXIV when Priam appeals to Achilles.

It is the gods which inspire Priam to seek Achilles. Zeus holds yet another meeting discussing Achilles irrational behaviour. They argue but decide to return Hektor’s body to Priam for a proper burial.

When Priam visits Achilles in Book XXIV, it is evident that, up until this point, Achilles has been consumed by irrational feelings of anger, ego, and unjust pride. Now, Priam appeals to Achilles emotional intelligence, appearing as the father of Hektor and not as the King of Troy. He asks Achilles to remember his own father- suggesting that a father’s wish is to see his son treated with the respect he deserves.

Remember your own father,
Akhilleus, in your godlike youth: his years
Like mine are many, and he stands upon
The fearful doorstep of old age. He, too,
Is hard pressed, it may be, by those around him,
There being no one able to defend him from bane of war and ruin…

Ten days ago you killed him, fighting for his land, my prince,
Hektor.

It is for him that I have come among these ships,
to beg him back from you,
And I bring ransom without stint. (p. 584)



Achilles is compassionate. He remembers the “vision” of Patroklos, looking inside himself and understanding Priam’s pain and anguish. This adds to the psychological component of the book. Achilles is aware of himself in a more humane way- he is sympathetic to Priam. His uncontrolled anger has subsided and he has reached a state of enlightenment and personal development.

Much of the success of Homer’s Iliad is due to the psychological development of Achilles as he comes “full circle” with his wrath. His ability to give Hektor’s body back to Troy symbolizes his willingness to let go of his pride in the name of honour. He realizes here, what “honour” really represents.



[I] Book XX, p. 471



Homer's, The Iliad Anchor Books, 1974. Translated by Robert Fitzgerald.

Naming of Parts

Henry Reed was born in Birmingham, earned a BA, worked as a teacher, and served in the British Army. His poem, Naming of Parts is a clever piece which offers a glimpse into the psyche of a cadet-in-training.


Naming of Parts
Henry Reed, 1914-1986


To-day we have naming of parts. Yesterday,
We had daily cleaning. And to-morrow morning,
We shall have what to do after firing. But today,T
o-day we have naming of parts. Japonica
Glistens like coral in all of the neighbouring gardens,
And to-day we have naming of parts.


The first three lines are very forthright and factual which suggests the tone is commanding… in line four the subject matter changes and the speakers voice is contemplating nature and his environment…


This is the lower sling swivel. And this
Is the upper sling swivel, whose use you will see,
When you are given your slings. And this is the piling swivel,
Which in your case you have not got. The branches
Hold in the gardens their silent, eloquent gestures,
Which in our case we have not got.


The speakers voice is a commander, maybe an officer- an authority figure. He is addressing a classroom of cadets, showing them the machinery, how to handle a gun. Techinical and mechanical words like “upper sling swivel” is probably a reference to a gun of some sort. The tone changes in forth line as th speaker begins to talk of nature- this is such a dramatic change it alludes to the voice of a different speaker altogether. This person is a cadet, sitting in the classroom, listening to a lecture on guns, and staring out the window and thinking about how lovely and beautiful it is outside. There are two very different dynamics here- war versus nature…


This is the safety-catch, which is always released
With an easy flick of the thumb. And please do not let me
See anyone using his finger. You can do it quite easy
If you have any strength in your thumb. The blossoms
Are fragile and motionless, never letting anyone see
Any of them using their finger.


This passage confirms there are two separate voices: one is the voice of the teacher, the other is the voice of the student. The student is thinking to himself, half listening to the instructions, half day-dreaming of the day outside- away from the institutional walls. The repetiton is clever. The teacher instructs that he dosen’t want to see anyone “using his finger” and the student, who is seemingly in and out of consiousness (he’s physically in the classroom but his mind is elsewhere) is overhearing “bits and pieces” of the lecture. At the end of each stanza he repeats something his teacher said. This is a very clever and unique style of writing- there is a deep, psychological element to this piece.


And this you can see is the bolt. The purpose of this
Is to open the breech, as you see. We can slide it
Rapidly backwards and forwards: we call this Easing the spring.
And rapidly backwards and forwards
The early bees are assaulting and fumbling the flowers:
They call it easing the Spring.


This is a particularly clever stanza. Unique word choice is evident in this passage. There appears to be certain words which belong to the same category: “Bolt” and “spring” are mechanical or techincal words. “Backwards”, “forwards”, “rapidly”, and “fumbling” are chaotic action words. There is a relationship between the students observations of nature, newness, and Springtime, with the relationship of “bees assaulting and fumbling the flowers”. There is a sexual connotation here as well as with other descriptions of “opening the breech” and “easing the spring”. The contrast of war and nature is also apparent here with the description of the bees “assulting” and harrassing the flowers.


They call it easing the Spring; it is perfectly easy
If you have any strength in your thumb; like the bolt,
And the breech, and the cockingpiece, and the point of balance,
Which in our case we have not got; and the almond blossom
Silent in all of the gardens and the bees going backwards and forwards
For to-day we have naming of parts.


In the last stanza, it appears as though the student’s mind has begun to wander into the erotic- he’s fantacizing. As the teacher relays the lesson, he’s imagining sexual activity. As he looks out the window admiring nature, he’s thinking about “the birds and the bees” and the newness which tends to come in Spring.

Afterthought...the title to the poem is erotic as well (in a scientific sort-of-way)..

Modernism, continued...

In the past poets wrote for themselves or for people they knew personally. With the Modernist movement came something “difficult”- the exploration of “having patience with poetry”. This meant that “meaning” took on a “new” meaning. Things were not always evident. The idea of “patience” with poetry erupted through the “impatience” found in deciphering modernist poetry.

T. S. Eliot and Ezra Pound were the “social connection” and worked together as a consciously revolutionary team[I]. Imagery became important in poetry. Imagist poems were like photographs. Imagists like Pound and H. D. (Hilda Doolittle) found that their objectives were to, “present an emotional and intellectual complex in an instant of time."[II] This is a great way to describe the idea of Imagist poems being much like photographs. They can articulate complex emotions in only a few lines by using specific words which suggest sensuality and emotional intensity.

As a result of this heavy and rich style of writing, in order to understand the context, one might find themselves perplexed or impatient. Asking themselves (as we often do) what in the world does this mean? There came a point where poets would provide a vehicle by which to communicate their ideas, so that their ideas would reach a larger audience.

T. S. Eliot was a poet, critic, and editor. He wrote with an imagist style which unlocked the subtleties of the unconscious[III].

T. S. Eliot’s The Waste Land is one of the greatest poems in modernist literature. Eliot uses many references and sources in his work- an example of this is his reference to the bible and Christianity, as well as the work of his peers and predecessors. This shows his wide-range of interest, profound knowledge, and insight. The poem itself is a reference to the city as a wasteland. Eliot’s poem “shattered notions of poetry”[IV] in that it had to be one specific thing, with a specific purpose and a specifc structure by which to follow- Eliot encorporated references to many poets with a likeness to encorporate their ideas and style into his own, and ended-up expressing those ideas in a way that they couldn’t. The poem is divided in to five sections of the poem operate as an orientation, a reference to the earth (and all its properties: earth, fire, air, and water). He incorporated irony, metonymy, simile, paradox, personification, and metaphor which were the literary devices he used to convey his ideas.

I will attempt to decipher the whole of Eliot's The Waste Land at a later date. Characteristic of modernist poetry, understanding the poem will take time. Although there are many resources available to "walk me through" it, I would much rather attempt it first and foremost on my own, see how far I get, how much I read into it- and compare my notes.

Stay tuned..

Imagism

At the end of the 19th century it was evident that the “rules” had to be changed. Modernism was experimentation with form which challenged patience and revolutionized the way poetry was written. Ezra Pound and T.S. Eliot were at the forefront of the modernist movement. From this movement stemmed “Imagism”.

While reading-up on Imagism, I came upon information on The Poet’s Club and the inspiration of the Imagists as a result of their opposing ideas. The imagists rejected romantic and Victorian traditions and favoured imagery in “clear and sharp language”. The imagists were the first modernist “group” and included women writers.

The Poet’s Club which was established by T. E. Hulme became a platform of debate. The “new age poet” F. S. Flint, was critical of Hulme’s theories. Strangely enough, a friendship was formed from this divide. They began to meet at the Eiffel Tower (in Paris) to discuss the reformation of poetry from the confines of rigid structure to free verse (and haiku) and to take-away any “unnecessary” information or “verbiage”.

*I thought this was a very romantic image. I pictured them talking about poetry, sipping café, smoking from pipes, thinking progressively, and contemplating the day.
Ezra Pound was introduced to the group because his ideas were similar to his own. He was an American poet who studied romantic literature and whose inspiration came from the likes of Dante and Cavalcanti.

Together, and with the help of others, they determined “a few don’ts” in regards to poetry. The group’s position believed in the following:

1. Direct treatment of the "thing", whether subjective or objective.
2. To use absolutely no word that does not contribute to the presentation.
3. As regarding rhythm: to compose in sequence of the musical phrase, not in sequence of the metronome.

Pound decided to publish an anthology which were a collection of peoms he selected and that he determined, best reflected their three “rules”. Pound was a critic who was respected by many, including W.B. Yeats and James Joyce.

(Note: This information is based on readings from the online encyclopedia resource: http://en.wikipedia.org)

Among the Imagists were John Keats and D. H. Lawerence. Keats in particular felt he was “walking in the shadows” of previous poets. The themes in Keats work was often love and romance and was full of whistful imagination. His poem, Ode to a Nightingale is full of imagery and reference to beauty - it is very “fairytale-like” with a focus on free verse/thought.

Ode to a Nightingale considers the different thought-provoking characteristics of human life. Keats considers the opposite feelings of pain/happiness, the actual versus the ideal, and life and death. Ode to a Nightingale is a poem about the movement of feeling- it is about change, it is concerning yourself with all aspects of life, it is objective.

The poem alludes to escapism. He experiences joy and pain, feeling and numbness, and he searches to find some sort of higher meaning through the bird. The bird is a living thing, an object by which draws his affection, however as the poem moves forward, the birds purpose is more evident as a symbol of life- that symbol being the “ideal”. This ideal relates to the ideal “state of being” in life. Unmixed, unaffected joy- perhaps the ablity to be insightful and content in any given sitution.

The development of this is shown when he contemplates the wine. Its most obvious purpose (to become intoxicated) is not the focal point, rather, he uses the wine as “symbol” of intoxication- contemplating the state or experience he would have- of becoming “closer” to something. The word “vintage” suggests he is looking for a certain “quality” within this enlightenment. He is obviously concerned with “quality” in life, however he is pursuing the ideal- the ability to have “quality”- perhaps meaning that, when one has quality, they have everything- there is no pending injury (meaning there “are no strings attached”).

He describes the relationship of the bird, to the world. He becomes aware of his state of mind, of becoming intoxicated with the Nightingale and realizing his senses are affected. As the poem progresses he experiences both “loss” and “connection” with the bird and with relationship to the world. This relationship mimics a “real” relationship one might experience when in love. The “honeymoon” stage, willingly being intoxicated by this state, realizing that “life goes on” and having to enter the “real” together- having to leave the honeymoon and enter the real world- and in this world there are many more factors which exist, and in order to sustain the relationship, a certain “quality” must be achieved. This quality is found in the ability to objectively look at the relationship and all its components. Near the end of the poem the poet wonders if he has learned anything- if he has acheieved this connection- if he has achieved this “quality” he was intently seeking.

It is curious to relate this poem to that of a marriage or a blooming relationship, as the interactions of the poet and the Nightingale mimic the stages and actions of human relationships.

Exams

Time's Up?


My hands are numb,
I can't feel my finger or my thumb,
Still sitting on my bum,
It's almost time.

The clock strikes one,
No one is having fun,
At least we're almost done,
This time.

The clock strikes two,
I sneeze- someone says: "bless you",
I look around the room,
We're out of time.

The professor says: "Hey you",
I say: "Sir, just these last few?",
He tells me it's due,
It's time.


Ha.

**note: I am aware that this is a sad, sad, very bad poem.
I am reeling from an exam- wrote it fifteen minutes ago- this is a little reflection...
Let it rest in *piece.

Working Class Hero

Working Class Hero

By John Lennon


As soon as you're born they make you feel small
By giving you no time instead of it all
Till the pain is so big you feel nothing at all
A working class hero is something to be
A working class hero is something to be

They hurt you at home and they hit you at school
They hate you if you're clever and they despise a fool
Till you're so f****g crazy you can't follow their rules
A working class hero is something to be
A working class hero is something to be

When they've tortured and scared you for twenty odd years
Then they expect you to pick a career
When you can't really function you're so full of fear
A working class hero is something to be
A working class hero is something to be

Keep you doped with religion and sex and TV
And you think you're so clever and classless and free
But you're still f*****g peasants as far as I can see
A working class hero is something to be
A working class hero is something to be

There's room at the top they are telling you still
But first you must learn how to smile as you kil
lIf you want to be like the folks on the hill
A working class hero is something to be
A working class hero is something to be
If you want to be a hero well just follow me
If you want to be a hero well just follow me


The working class have struggled for centuries. For those of us who have read Henry Fielding’s Joseph Andrews or Charles Dicken’s Hard Times – we have a first-class glimpse into the literature which has reflected the harsh realities of later times. However, the "harsh" realities of the past are still evident in the present. Change, of course, can be accounted for through history- the rise of the "Union", the legalities following sexual offenses, and so on.

However, I believe Lennon is expressing that, the poor of the past and the poor of the present (as well as the morally poor) are all victim to the stranglehold and influence the mighty dollar has and has had, on humanity.

Lennon describes a mid-20th century perspective of “the mighty struggle” while his message rings true of centuries before (and likely centuries to come). Lennon focuses on the “corporation” and it’s influence on society. From birth to death we are consumed, driven, and fueld by dollars and cents- many of us for varying reasons.

Someone once said to me “the more you have, the more you want” just like “the more you have, the more you spend- and- the less you have, the more you need” …

I think in today’s age, many of us (speaking strictly of Western culture- aka the limit of my exposure) are in search of commodity as opposed to quality. Take for example, Christmas. The “quality” aspect would be found with Mom’s homemade pies, the hearth, funny stories, and biscuits. Now, Christmas is more of an enterprise- a corporate advantage- a marketing tool. Christmas equals money. Christmas means presents and overindulgences, and acquiring “things”.

When Lennon suggests we’re all still “peasants” I think he’s saying we don’t know what we’ve done, or what we have , or what we’ve given-up. He’s basically saying we don’t know what “quality” is- we’re conditioned, we’re too busy pursuing the “ideal” yet we don’t know what that ideal is…we just keep looking for it in “things”. In acquiring “things” we hope to discover our purpose…

I was once told that, "In order to have a stable economy there has to be suffering. There needs to be poverty in the world. Pleople need to "need" things- and the people who give these things, are the people who profit- this is the way profit is made."

Obviously we'll all jump on the banwagon and declare this untrue. I believe there is truth to this statement, however sad it may be. The difference though, is the clarification of "poverty". I do not believe that there needs to be all-out suffering in the world. I do not believe there needs to be "poverty" in the world- I belive that there is a fine balance which can be achieved, for those willing to attempt it. As it stands, I fully believe (and this might be way off topic) but I believe that the world economy is astronomically off-balance.

Something to consider too is, it is human nature to "want more" ...when you acquire something, you immediately "want more" (in whatever respect) ...so keeping that in mind, if the world was balanced in this sense, yet everyone still aspired to "have more" - what would happen then?

Thoughts on the grill.



Something to think about.

The WB

William Butler Yeats (1865-1939)

He was an Irish poet, dramatist, and prose writer. Among some of his topics, Yeats wrote about old age, the process of ageing, love, nature, war and art.

The following is a lyrical poem by W.B. Yeats:

The Lamentation of the Old Pensioner

Although I shelter from the rain
Under a broken tree,
My chair was nearest to the fireIn every company
That talked of love or politics,
Ere Time transfigured me.

Though lads are making pikes again
For some conspiracy,
And crazy rascals rage their fill
At human tyranny,
My contemplations are of Time
That has transfigured me.

There's not a woman turns her face
Upon a broken tree,
And yet the beauties that I loved
Are in my memory;
I spit into the face of Time
That has transfigured me.

"Although" and "Under" occur in the opening lines and help to slow the poem- long vowel sounds convey the mood and the element of Time passed.

In the first stanza, there is a feeling of desperation, pride, and misfortune. It sounds as though he is trying to express that the condition he appears to be in, is not a result of his doing- it is a result of his misfortune- he seems to be blaming the world for his circumstances.

An old man is taking shelter from the rain under a "broken" tree- he is describing his pitiful situation, he appears as though he is looking for compassion and for someone to feel sorry for him. He continues to suggest the reason for his misery and misfortune in the following few sentences, implying his chair was nearest to the fire (nearest to trouble) in every company (at every point in his life) - meaning- he always got screwed around- and eventually Time took its toll.

"Ere Time transfigured me." He repeats this at the end of each stanza- placing blame.

Placing blame as a result of anger or ego? Does he wants us to know it was Time which made him how he appears in order to disguise...something else? A result of his own doing? Is it easier to blame Time then to take ownership of your past decisions and mistakes?

He blames Time. And he REALLY wants us to know

(It was TIME, I swear, It was Nothing I did!) ...?

He talks about conspiracy, human tyranny, rejection, and the beauty he remembers from his 'good days' - he's given-up. He's not hiding the fact that he's down and out, he's miserable. He is so miserable, it's as though his misery has given him a new purpose. He is consumed by contemplations of 'what was and what could have been' - he is "spitting" on time, blaming time for "transfiguring" him. His bitterness seems to empower him. Judging from what we know of his history, things haven't gone so well...and this "power" is the only thing he is in control of- his anger, his frustration, his contempt.

This poem reaches me in a few ways...

At face value, I thought it was a pretty poem- filled with sarrow and turmoil, sure- but a poem that articulated "life" through the eyes of someone who had "been around the block".

Maybe he is so incredibly consumed by his situation- he's become passionate about his life again- he's fired-up- he's so full of hate, he's actually enjoying himself for once. "And yet the beauties that I loved, Are in my memory"- he living in his memory.

He may not be a homeless man, the title confirms this- he sounds like an old retiree, sitting on his front lawn, watching the young saunter by, cursing "bad luck" and circumstance.

Were things really all that bad? Could he not have made a change for himself?

"And the beauties that I loved..."

This leads me to think he perhaps loved, but didn't acquire the same love in return? Did loneliness turn him sour?

His anger must have started before...

In the first stanza he talks of politics, in the second he alludes to hegemony, and in the third he speaks of love being only a memory.

The one thing that is clear- as poetry is not often simple to decipher- is the focus on himself.

He ends each stanza with "me". He wants the last memory you have, to be of him.

At least he can have that.