What is the meaning of this?

Question

Hello,what is the meaning of this poem?I need to discuss this with my friends. once I know the meaning then it would be easier for me to write comments on it. I find it very hard to understand.Please help. I want just the meaning in very simple english.THE OLD STOICRICHES I hold in light esteem,And Love I laugh to scorn;And lust of fame was but a dreamThat vanish'd with the morn:And, if I pray, the only prayerThat moves my lips for meIs, 'Leave the heart that now I bear,And give me liberty!'Yea, as my swift days near their goal,'Tis all that I implore:In life and death a chainless soul,With courage to endure.Thank you

Usenet · Accepted Answer

[nq:1]Hello, what is the meaning of this poem? I need to discuss this with my friends. once I know the ... their goal, 'Tis all that I implore: In life and death a chainless soul, With courage to endure. Thank you[/nq]
The voice in the poem wants only to be free of spirit and soul and to be unencumbered by material and earthly wants.

Usenet · Answer

thank you sir

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]Hello, what is the meaning of this poem? I need ... death a chainless soul, With courage to endure. Thank you[/nq]
[nq:1]The voice in the poem wants only to be free of spirit and soul[/nq]
Yes.
[nq:1]and to be unencumbered by material and earthly wants.[/nq]
Here, I think you are going beyond or saying something different from what the poet said. He holds riches "in light esteem". He doesn't say he wants to not want riches. He is describing the situation he is in now.
This may seem like nit-picking, especially since this is just a poem, a personal opinion. But I think it is important to form strict habits. In other circumstances, adding to what the person actually said is an enormous problem. In religion, in politics, in simple family matters, if people would learn to quote accurately and to paraphrase fully but not more "fully" than the original person spoke, innumerable problems would be avoided.
He also, iiuc, scorns or laughs at love. I'm not sure if that is included in earthly wants. Of course you are only summarizing a poem that the OP has read already. He shouldn't have to be spoon fed every word.
BTW, he doesn't say that he would avoid riches. We can only guess if he holds them in light esteem because he has them already and sees that they don't matter much, or if he is medium poor or very poor but still still doesn't value riches much, for whatever reasons.

I was very impressed with Voltaire's seeming-to-me altruistic statement, roughly "I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." It sounds great, but much later I learned that Voltaire was in trouble with a lot of people for what he had said (was he in fear of his life?), and that is, I believe, when he made this statement. When his sentiment would benefit him himself as clearly as anyone else, more clearly, I'm sure, in his view.
How does that apply here? Like I say, we don't know if his dismissive attitude towards riches is the result of not having any or having them. Riches can get one a lot of liberty, and can promote liberty for others if one is so inclined. It can give one courage too, if you don't have to worry about being fired from your job or kicked out of your apartment for saying something people disagree with.

I also liked very much in high school the poem Invictus, "...it matters not how straight the gate... I am the master of my fate, I am the captain of my soul." It wasnt' until many years later that it occurred to me is this at all true that the author may have been depressed or in another situation where he wasn't master of anything else, and he was exaggerating in the case of his fate, perhaps totally imagining the amount that he was in control. When one is least in control, one wants most to feel in control. And saying "I'm in control" is one way to feel in control, even when it isn't true. So, maybe that peom is an expression caused by therefore of despair and helplessness more than it is the plain sense of the words.

Maybe this poem has some of the same traits.
s/ meirman
Posting from alt.english.usage

My English in this reply is colloquial, and may not always use full sentences. For gosh sakes, when you ask a question, say what sort of English you are asking about. When you give an answer, say in what part of the world you think your answer is valid.

If you are emailing me please
say if you are posting the same response.
Town NW of Pittsburgh Pa. 0 to 10 years > Brooklyn 12 years Indianapolis 7 years > Now in
Chicago 6 years > Baltimore 22 years

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]Here, I think you are going beyond or saying something different from what the poet said. He holds riches "in light esteem". He doesn't say he wants to not want riches. He is describing the situation he is in now.[/nq]
Isn't this carrying the use of the non-gendered 'he' a bit far? Or was I wrong in my picture of Emily Bronte?

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]Here, I think you are going beyond or saying something ... riches. He is describing the situation he is in now.[/nq]
[nq:1]Isn't this carrying the use of the non-gendered 'he' a bit far? Or was I wrong in my picture of Emily Bronte?[/nq]
I don't mind not knowing that it was written by Emily Bronte. Poetry is by no means my strength.
Assuming that you meant that she was the author, did she have riches or not?
s/ meirman
Posting from alt.english.usage

My English in this reply is colloquial, and may not always use full sentences. For gosh sakes, when you ask a question, say what sort of English you are asking about. When you give an answer, say in what part of the world you think your answer is valid.

If you are emailing me please
say if you are posting the same response.
Town NW of Pittsburgh Pa. 0 to 10 years > Brooklyn 12 years Indianapolis 7 years > Now in
Chicago 6 years > Baltimore 22 years

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]Here, I think you are going beyond or saying something ... riches. He is describing the situation he is in now.[/nq]
Damned with faint praise.
[nq:1]Isn't this carrying the use of the non-gendered 'he' a bit far? Or was I wrong in my picture of Emily Bronte?[/nq]
I didn't know who wrote it so I he rather than he/she/other.

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]Damned with faint praise.[/nq]
You don't know that.
There is not enough information in this poem to know that. Did you know who the author was?
If you had said "maybe" in your original reply, it would have been ok. If you had said "maybe" in this reply, it would have been ok.

This is the kind of problem I was talking about. Having a suspicion of something and portraying it as if it were certain. This practice infects the world.
You could suspect all this without my assurances, but I can assure that it is possible to hold riches in light esteem without damning them. It's also possible to have money and even spend money when one has it without being willing to do bad things, questionable things, or even honorable things that take time or effort to get money when one doesn't have it. That is as likely as your guess what is meant by holding it light esteem.
[nq:2]Isn't this carrying the use of the non-gendered 'he' a bit far? Or was I wrong in my picture of Emily Bronte?[/nq]
[nq:1]I didn't know who wrote it so I he rather than he/she/other.[/nq]
So you didn't know who the author was either. So all you had to work with were the words of the poem.
s/ meirman
Posting from alt.english.usage

My English in this reply is colloquial, and may not always use full sentences. For gosh sakes, when you ask a question, say what sort of English you are asking about. When you give an answer, say in what part of the world you think your answer is valid.

If you are emailing me please
say if you are posting the same response.
Town NW of Pittsburgh Pa. 0 to 10 years > Brooklyn 12 years Indianapolis 7 years > Now in
Chicago 6 years > Baltimore 22 years

Usenet · Answer

Which is all that is needed. I'll stand by my interpretation,your mileage may vary.
Light esteem does not mean high esteem to me it suggests just the opposite especially when one considers the tone of the poem. Stoics were not noted for thier love of wealth.

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]is[/nq]
[nq:2]You don't know that. There is not enough information in ... had to work with were the words of the poem.[/nq]
[nq:1]Which is all that is needed. I'll stand by my interpretation,your mileage may vary. Light esteem does not mean high esteem to me it suggests just the opposite[/nq]
Some people might use it that way to be polite to a person, to avoid saying something nasty about a person or a prized individual possession, but would people bother to use a euphemism for dislike of money? Maybe some would, but you don't know that this one did. Here it is more than interpretation; it's a leap.
[nq:1]especially when one considers the tone of the poem. Stoics were not noted for thier love of wealth.[/nq]
That you could not go further than you did in your last sentence says it all. They are not noted for their love of wealth. But for an individual stoic, one would be leaping to conclusions to say he was damning wealth or wanting not to have any, just because he holds it in light esteem. If esteem is graded from 0 to 100, light esteem is between 1 and 25 perhaps, but it still means giving the thing some value. Zero esteem is neither like nor dislike. Below zero, one has to use a different word or call it, fancifully I would say, "negative esteem". Light esteem is not negative, except for those who think there is something wrong with not giving riches greater esteem. Is that you?
Tell me you would only make such liberal interpretations of poetry, and not of any other statements or written texts, and I'll drop it.
**This is not a criticism of liberalism, only interpretations that are liberal in that they go beyond what was said.
s/ meirman
Posting from alt.english.usage

My English in this reply is colloquial, and may not always use full sentences. For gosh sakes, when you ask a question, say what sort of English you are asking about. When you give an answer, say in what part of the world you think your answer is valid.

If you are emailing me please
say if you are posting the same response.
Town NW of Pittsburgh Pa. 0 to 10 years > Brooklyn 12 years Indianapolis 7 years > Now in
Chicago 6 years > Baltimore 22 years

What is the meaning of this?

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions