|
LITR / CRCL 5734:
Colonial & Postcolonial Literature “Two Poems on the
Passing of an Empire” Reader: Rosalyn Mack Walcott’s two poems draw a connection between the Roman conquest of England and the spread of English imperialism. In the first poem, there is only nature, “a heron flies across the morning marsh,” broken by the arrival of the Roman soldiers followed by Roman law. The significance here is on the invasion, not the invaders or the conquered. It’s almost as if there were no people in the land, only wildness and freedom. But then comes “proconsuls bearing law” to attest to the need to control – there are people here and they must understand they are under Roman control now. Walcott’s tone is ironic, the “thank God” a sigh of exasperation and frustration, taking offense at the audacity of Rome’s invasion. The second poem focuses on a
retired veteran of the European-African colonial wars; it explores the same
theme as the first but from perspective of the colonized although, arguably the
first poem does that as well. Here
is a broken fighter who has defended his land and lost.
He hears the children singing the British national anthem and mourns for
the death of their culture. He
knows that their way of life is over; they were unable to repel the invasion
that, much like the Roman conquest of Britain, moved beyond just physical
occupation. It’s taken over their
lives and changed how they view the world.
They will never be the same. Question 1:
How do the two poems link the colonization of England and Africa? Question 2:
What emotional impact do the two poems create? Ginger:
The heron
represents nature and is being pursued; the Romans are violating nature.
There's also a link between Rome and it’s proconsuls and the children
singing Rule, Britania, Rule. The
children have lost their culture. Rosalyn:
the first poem shows Rome conquering Britain; in the second, the
conquered become conquerors. Britania
(Walcott’s spelling) is now part of Rome, so that even hundreds of years
later, Rome continues to conquer. It’s
the passing of empire, handing the idea along from Rome to England to Africa.
Rome as the perpetual conqueror. Mindy:
There seems to be a steady evolution here. Rosalyn:
Romans took over and area but also adopted some of the customs of the
conquered, but Britain just enforces its own culture on its conquests. April:
In the first poem, there’s nothing, just nature that’s been
conquered. But in the second it’s
the people have been conquered. Kim:
The description in the second: skull, dead, coffin, weeping – all point
to sadness. Rosalyn:
Really, I see bitterness in the second poem.
The first glorified colonialism but the second is bitter about
colonialism. The second sees the
faults missing from the first. Kristy:
The poem questions the successfulness of imperialism for Britain, sees it
as an unsuccessful “experiment.” Dr.
White: The second poem has an
emptiness or exhaustion, while the first speaks of a kind of tranquility.
There’s a painterly quality to the first poem.
Remember, Walcott’s father was a watercolorist. Rosalyn: The imagery reminds me of Audubon, coupled with the audio imagery, it’s a very interesting. I would like to ask Walcott what is his interpretation of these poems. |