Do not go gentle into that good night - Dylan Thomas

[kev67]

I have been trying to memorise a few famous poems recently. The second I attempted was Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night by Dylan Thomas. I have seen it described as one of his more accessible poems. I think I more or less understand it, although if that is Thomas being accessible, I am not sure I'd want to try his less accessible ones. The lines I am having most difficulty with now are from the second verse:

Though wise men at their end know dark is right
Because their words had forked no lightning they

I thought this meant wise men knew they were human not gods, therefore not immortal. However, I don't think this can be right.

[mounirmc]

Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

And you, my father, there on the sad height,
Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

It's a wonderful poem..i like it

[MementoMori]

Being from Wales myself I've always thought I should read Thomas, but I've always found him quite difficult. Maybe it would help if you post your interpretation of the poem as a whole.


Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

In the stanza you mentioned, and the one after it, I think Thomas is trying to convey how men who were once wise or meek approach death in an uncharacteristically defiant manner.

Wise men know that death, or the encroaching dark, is a natural, inevitable process. During their lives their own wise words have 'forked no lightning', which I take to mean that their words have not endorsed agression - in this poem lightning, as a source of light, seems wild, agressive and brief in contrast to the "good", eternal night. However, in the face of death even the wise man, who knows better, will not go gentle into that good night.

The same goes for the good men whose 'frail deeds might have danced in a green bay'. Maybe in the end all men, no matter their disposition, will wage a futile fight against the inevitable. The struggle seems to be an honourable thing, despite its futility.

I'm not too sure what I make of the other stanzas, but it's an interesting poem.

I'm sorry if this post is nonsensical, I've had a few festive beers tonight :p

Edit:


Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.

After reading the poem again I've started to think that the comma in the first line does not support my interpretation of the second line. Presumably the wise men 'do not go gentle' because their words had 'forked no lightning'. I'm not sure what that could mean.

[MorpheusSandman]

MementoMori's interpretation is solid. The link between the night and lightning as something that illuminates the night is the key to keeping those lines in mind. If their words have "forked no lightning" then they have not been able to illuminate, penetrate, or overcome death, and because of this they don't give in easily.

[MANICHAEAN]

Thank you MM. Whether sober or having had a few, it was a great help.

The bit I have trouble with is “Curse me, bless me now with your fierce tears.”

I’m interpreting that as, “Whether you bless me or curse me Lord, just don’t be indifferent to me in my final mortal struggle?”

[miyako73]

Isn't this poem about not giving up easily to death without a fight to live? The poem is about death, but I feel like gyrating with a hula hoop. No emotional effect on me at all.

I find this verse very interesting:

Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.

The "they" in the second line had two functions--to stick to the form and to be one of the subjects (the other one is "you") of the last sentence.

This is about ageing (end) wise men who accept death (dark) as the unavoidable (right) eventuality of old age, but they refuse to go because their knowledge (words) has not yet affected, destroyed, or turned over (forked) the (loud, bright) hegemonic power/force (lightning), which can be about prevailing philosophies, current beliefs, dominant ideologies, conventional opinions.

The image I have in mind for this stanza is a 90-year old retired Indian Physics professor who has been trying to prove that Einstein's theory is wrong but nobody listens maybe due to his incomplete proof. He doesn't want to die yet, although he knows his time is up, because he still wants to continue and finish and see the fruit of his labor.

Now, Morpheus, educate. I wanna learn. For real.

[YesNo]

Although this is a poem I remember having memorized decades ago, I don't think I ever liked it. Nor do I like the villanelle form. If I were writing one I would try to get away with changing the pentameter to a tetrameter line and lighten the subject matter.

I did think of this poem as my own father spent his last weeks at home in hospice care ultimately dying from congestive heart failure. I don't think I would have wanted him to rage against the dying of the light. His own beliefs didn't expect the light to die and he would have been puzzled by my entreating him to rage as Thomas does in this poem.

Regarding the lines in question:


Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Thomas seems to be saying that reasonably intelligent people know that they will die and ultimately this is "right", but since they felt they did nothing significant while they were alive, that is, their "words...forked no lightning," they regret feeling that they wasted their lives and so try to avoid death wanting to get a chance to spend their last days better.

The line Manichaean mentions, "Curse me, bless me now with your fierce tears," is, I think, the cry of a child watching his father die and wanting him to rage as the child would rage were it his own death.

[miyako73]

I don't think it is about their regret and wasted lives. They are wise men not street smart bums. They must have done something great in their lives to be called wise. I don't see any word in that verse/stanza that denotes, connotes, symbolizes, signifies regret. I only read what is on the paper. I may include cherries and watermelons if I go beyond what I read.

[YesNo]

I don't think I'm reading anything into it. Wise men, and Thomas would likely consider himself one of them, know they will die and know it is "right" that they die. That's line one. The second line expresses their realization of their failures: their "words forked no lightning". Thomas in particular might have thought that he could have written more powerful poetry. Regardless, they didn't achieve what they felt they should have achieved. That leads to the third line and their inability to accept death.

I could read into the poem some irony that Thomas is not actually expressing. A truly wise man would not rage the way Thomas says he should. However, Thomas is not being ironical and that is why I don't particularly like this poem.

[MANICHAEAN]

Thanks Yes No.

It is confusing for Dylan refers to, “And you, my father there on the sad height.”

At first I thought it was God the Father in heaven, but then its father with a small “f” and why is heaven sad?

So you may indeed be right in referring to a passed on mortal father.

But I still cannot understand the bless/curse reference.

[MorpheusSandman]

This is about ageing (end) wise men who accept death (dark) as the unavoidable (right) eventuality of old age, but they refuse to go because their knowledge (words) has not yet affected, destroyed, or turned over (forked) the (loud, bright) hegemonic power/force (lightning), which can be about prevailing philosophies, current beliefs, dominant ideologies, conventional opinions.Not a bad interpretation, but I don't know if you can really justify having "forked... lightning" symbolizing "affecting/destroying/overturned hegemonic power/force". Since lightning is something that pierces and destroys darkness (even if temporarily), it makes more sense to see it as symbolizing a force that can overcome death. "Forked" is an interesting choice of verb, but I can't help but wonder if Thomas had it in mind as an adjective for lightning but then decided to get clever and use it as a verb. How does one "fork" lightning? Lightning forks on its own. The only way I can make sense out of "forked" as a verb is that it's saying they haven't found a way to control the lightning--life--itself.


Although this is a poem I remember having memorized decades ago, I don't think I ever liked it. Nor do I like the villanelle form. If I were writing one I would try to get away with changing the pentameter to a tetrameter line and lighten the subject matter. I've never been a big fan of this poem either, but there is something about it that's memorable... kinda like one of those annoying Katy Perry songs that gets stuck in your head in spite of yourself. I like the villanelle form, but I also think that it is is one of the more exclusive and discriminating fixed forms--meaning that there is a rather limited amount of poems that really "fit" into it and work well. The need for only two rhyme sounds across 19 lines is tough in English without working in cliches, and the stasis of the two refrains is often tough to play against the other lines while creating a sense of progression. Probably the best example I know of is Elizabeth Bishop's The Art of Losing. It's such a textbook example because it shows how you can use the refrains to play ironically against the increasingly exaggerated examples of the other lines (it starts out easy to lose your house keys... ends up with losing cities!).

[OrphanPip]

Thanks Yes No.

It is confusing for Dylan refers to, “And you, my father there on the sad height.”

At first I thought it was God the Father in heaven, but then its father with a small “f” and why is heaven sad?

So you may indeed be right in referring to a passed on mortal father.

But I still cannot understand the bless/curse reference.

Well, Thomas did write it in response to his dying father. The Speaker can easily be interpreted as someone addressing their father, and then the final stanza is a personal plea that gives meaning to the examples that precede it.

[YesNo]

Probably the best example I know of is Elizabeth Bishop's The Art of Losing. It's such a textbook example because it shows how you can use the refrains to play ironically against the increasingly exaggerated examples of the other lines (it starts out easy to lose your house keys... ends up with losing cities!).

Yes, Bishop's The Art of Losing seems much better to me than Thomas's villanelle. However, technically her rhyme and meter seem off and she takes more liberties with the formal villanelle constraints than might be appropriate, but the idea she is expressing is charming and that justifies not following the form. In the last stanza she imagines losing the "you" in the poem which is the only thing she thinks might be a "disaster". This could have been a very sentimental poem. I think she used the formal structure of the villanelle as well as her minor misuse of it to guide her away from sentimentality.

Sometimes people re-read a poem because of the sound effects and other times because of the message. In Bishop's example, I would re-read the poem for the message. In Thomas's case, it would be for the sound.

Here's a link to Bishop's poem that I found from a quick search in case anyone's interested: http://musingsfromthesofa.wordpress.com/2010/06/19/the-art-of-losing-elizabeth-bishop/

[kev67]

I think maybe 'wise men' may refer to people who try and shape public opinion in some way to make the world a better place. They may be politicians, civil service mandarins, campaigners, philosophers, or maybe people not quite so grand such as clergymen, teachers, or even bar-stool philosophers down the pub. Although they may have had some successes, they are inevitably disappointed that they cannot change the world as much as they would like. Now as their powers begin to fail, they know they never will. This is sort of the opposite to the next verse in which good men are upset that they cannot continue to do their good works. I imagine these are people who work hard to provide for their family or help their community.

[MorpheusSandman]

Yes, Bishop's The Art of Losing seems much better to me than Thomas's villanelle. However, technically her rhyme and meter seem off and she takes more liberties with the formal villanelle constraints than might be appropriate, Actually, Bishop's meter is stricter than Thomas's. Thomas does away with accentual patterns and is in plain pentamter. Bishop's meter is much more regular with some occasional substitutions. Also, except for the pararhyme (where all the consonants match and the central vowel sound changes) of "fluster" and "gesture," everything else is classically rhymed. Her substitutions all seem motivated by enhancing content through form as well. The first stanza is a good example:

The art of losing isn't hard to master;
so many things seem filled with the intent
to be lost that their loss is no disaster.

The first two lines are in perfect iambic pentameter (the feminine ending of "master" excluded), so that when the third line comes there is quite an affective shift with the two opening anapests: "to be LOST that their LOSS..." notice how by using the anapest there is additional emphasis on "lost" and "loss," which signifies those words as key themes of the poem. She does the same thing in the opening of the last stanza: "Even LOSing YOU" where we place extra stress on the "lose" part of "loosing" so it makes more impact when paired with "you".

[YesNo]

I think maybe 'wise men' may refer to people who try and shape public opinion in some way to make the world a better place. They may be politicians, civil service mandarins, campaigners, philosophers, or maybe people not quite so grand such as clergymen, teachers, or even bar-stool philosophers down the pub. Although they may have had some successes, they are inevitably disappointed that they cannot change the world as much as they would like. Now as their powers begin to fail, they know they never will. This is sort of the opposite to the next verse in which good men are upset that they cannot continue to do their good works. I imagine these are people who work hard to provide for their family or help their community.

That makes sense. Each of these different groups has a reason to resist death mainly because they feel they have something left to do. Thomas expressed that well.

[YesNo]

Actually, Bishop's meter is stricter than Thomas's. Thomas does away with accentual patterns and is in plain pentamter. Bishop's meter is much more regular with some occasional substitutions. Also, except for the pararhyme (where all the consonants match and the central vowel sound changes) of "fluster" and "gesture," everything else is classically rhymed. Her substitutions all seem motivated by enhancing content through form as well. The first stanza is a good example:

The art of losing isn't hard to master;
so many things seem filled with the intent
to be lost that their loss is no disaster.

The first two lines are in perfect iambic pentameter (the feminine ending of "master" excluded), so that when the third line comes there is quite an affective shift with the two opening anapests: "to be LOST that their LOSS..." notice how by using the anapest there is additional emphasis on "lost" and "loss," which signifies those words as key themes of the poem. She does the same thing in the opening of the last stanza: "Even LOSing YOU" where we place extra stress on the "lose" part of "loosing" so it makes more impact when paired with "you".

The version I originally linked to missed the first stanza. I think this one is complete: http://www.poemhunter.com/poem/one-art/

I agree that the "fluster" and "gesture" are the only two words that don't fit the rhyme pattern in Bishop's poem. Thomas's rhymes on "night" and "day" are all perfect though monosyllabic.

The sound of Thomas's poem seems more pleasing to me, but I don't like the message as much as the one Bishop seems to be presenting. These two lines from Thomas's poem sound nice to me:


Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay

I put the accents in bold which show this is not strict iambic pentameter as you pointed out. The sound is more pleasing than Bishop's, I suspect, because of the additional internal rhymes on "cry" and "by" and "might" and "bright" and near rhyme on "deeds" and "green".

[MorpheusSandman]

It's true that Bishop doesn't make as much use of internal rhyme, assonance, and consonance as Thomas does, but I find her prosody more satisfying. Thomas's poem has that whole Gerard Manley Hopkins sprung rhythm thing going where there are a lot of densely packed monosyllables that typically take stress as well as long vowels that slows down the reader. While your bolding is a good approximation of the stresses, there are arguments to be made that words like "men," "wave," and "deeds" could also be stressed as well. Likewise, over half of the syllables (11 by my count) use long vowels, and many of those that don't use compound consonants ("last" and "danced" eg) to increase the weight of sound. It's why Thomas's poem reads so heavily, and I suspect why many like it so much, though I've never been a fan of that style. You can compare these techniques for emphasis (dense stresses, long vowels, compount consonants) to Bishop's, where she is more selective regarding the parts where she creates emphasis and is more subtle in doing it (the shift to anapests, eg).

[kev67]

Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.

The "they" in the second line had two functions--to stick to the form and to be one of the subjects (the other one is "you") of the last sentence.

This is about ageing (end) wise men who accept death (dark) as the unavoidable (right) eventuality of old age, but they refuse to go because their knowledge (words) has not yet affected, destroyed, or turned over (forked) the (loud, bright) hegemonic power/force (lightning), which can be about prevailing philosophies, current beliefs, dominant ideologies, conventional opinions.



Agree, I think.

Regarding the 'they', I listened to the poem being recited on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mRec3VbH3w). There seems to be a semicolon before 'they'. So the last phrase is, "They do not go gentle into that good night". So wise men do not give up even if they never achieve what they set out to.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1fTlIsUGks&NR=1&feature=fvwp

[Paulclem]

I like the execution of Thomas' poem - though I think Anthony Hopkins reads it too softly - not enough force. The whole aspect of it - the real relationship to his dying father and the emotional force within it - make it a good poem. On the other hand, I would disagree with the spirit of it in the sense of the futility of fighting the inevitable in an attempt to keep alive keep some sort of spiritual flame. I think anyone taking this approach to their own death - or anyone else's - is mistaken when a peaceful inevitability is possible.

having said that, it refects Thomas' own powerful grief, and it is a great confrontation with death.

[BarakiEl]

MANICHAEAN : But I still cannot understand the bless/curse reference.

I registered just so that I could answer this. :smile5:

First my background: This person in this story describes me 4 years ago, when I was sitting at my father's death bed. He had given up on life after cancer took my mom a year before. So you can see why this poem means so much to me! I get goosebumps every time I read it.

As for your questions:
I saw someone helped you with the initial question of God being the father here. And as you have found out, no. This is a poem about a young man sitting by his father's death bed. And he is exalting, inspiring, empoweing and pleading with his dying father all the things above, about Raging. He wants him to be like the blind, who rage and do not give up.
And I can imagine 2 scenarios: 1. The father is in a coma and can't respond. And 2. I imagine the father is alive, despondent, believing death is imminent, he is accepting and wishes to go, since there is nothing left to live for. He is tired and wants to sleep. His words would be "Leave me be. I am content to die."

"And you, my father, there on the sad height,
Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light."

You, my father, there on the sad height (hospital bed) [height can also mean he's on a dangerous height and about to go over, into the precipice, but let's ignore that for now]
(I look up to you from my low stool)

Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
(Curse me, if that it what you want to do! [Perhaps they have had some spats in the past and wills his father to summon that fervor, that anger: Tell me you hate that I bought that car, tell me I'm an idiot poet and should have become a doctor instead...] Anything to hear your voice.)

And bless me, if you'd rather do that.

But whatever you do, do it fervently with tears in your eyes!
(For that will show me that you are ALIVE and still want to be alive.)

I beg you

To summon the poem up: "I love you, Dad. Please don't go. Fight and stay a little longer. Remember the sunset at close of day, the lightning, the green bay, the sun in flight, live to see blazing meteors. Remember that others have fought to stay. You can do it too. Fight. Rage. Rage!"

I realize there is a lot more to this epic poem than the nonsense I just spouted. But I wanted to give a view from the son's perspective.
This is an extremely powerful poem, that should move anyone who has sat at a death bed.