The Tyger

To view more poems I have examined, click HERE.

The Tyger

by William Blake

Tyger Tyger, burning bright,
In the forests of the night;
What immortal hand or eye,
Could frame thy fearful symmetry?

In what distant deeps or skies.
Burnt the fire of thine eyes?
On what wings dare he aspire?
What the hand, dare seize the fire?

And what shoulder, & what art,
Could twist the sinews of thy heart?
And when thy heart began to beat.
What dread hand? & what dread feet

What the hammer? what the chain,
In what furnace was thy brain?
What the anvil? what dread grasp,
Dare its deadly terrors clasp!

When the stars threw down their spears
And water’d heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the Lamb make thee?

Tyger Tyger burning bright,
In the forests of the night:
What immortal hand or eye,
Dare frame thy fearful symmetry?

____________________________________

I am unabashedly uncomfortable with William Blake and his art. As I mentioned in a previous analysis of one of his poems, he has long been associated with the occult and the Church of Satan (at least, they claim him, if not the other way around – see the link HERE.) Blake was not only a writer, but he was also a brilliant painter. Blake’s paintings, The Great Red Dragon series, are the inspiration for the fictional antagonist in Thomas Harris’ novel The Red Dragon as well as various film and TV adaptations of said book. Nevertheless, Blake is among the more celebrated artists of all time. So with this insight in mind, let us delve into an analysis of this widely acclaimed piece of poetry.

The Tyger is 24 lines, broken into six four line stanzas. Most of the lines contain seven syllables through a few contain eight. The stanzas each contain an AABB rhyme scheme (assuming at least that one’s English accent rhymes “eye” and “symmetry.”)

The poem asks readers to examine the nature of God, by examining one of God’s creations – The Tyger. He uses the archaic spelling for the animal (archaic even in the 18th century) perhaps to align the reader’s mindset to the animal at the time of its creation, rather than its present. Doing this is a clue that the Tyger might metaphorically refer to another dangerous creation.

Stanza One

Tyger Tyger, burning bright,
In the forests of the night;
What immortal hand or eye,
Could frame thy fearful symmetry?

The opening stanza introduces the subject, and calls into question its creator – noting that as created beings go, the Tyger “fearful.” Describing the Tyger as possessing symmetry, though, also lets us know that it was created with intention. Line three asks us who did it.

What does Blake mean that the Tyger is “burning bright”? That might refer to the animal’s bright colored appearance. It might also refer to its status as a living being. Another option is that the Tyger is divine, and perhaps is a metaphor for the devil or Satan.

Stanza Two

In what distant deeps or skies.
Burnt the fire of thine eyes?
On what wings dare he aspire?
What the hand, dare seize the fire?

The second stanza draws our attention to the Tyger’s eyes, and specifically “the fire” in them. This is a return to the burning bright metaphor from the first stanza, and an extension of it. The “fire” likely refers both to the life inside, but also the danger of the creature. The Speaker asks again who created this animal and wonders whether its creator is in a distant deep or a distant sky. The implication here is that God might not be its creator – perhaps some other divine hand was at work. Alternatively, God might indeed be its Creator and therefore we should have questions about that.

The third line of the stanza lets us know that there is a divine element to the metaphor, with its reference to wings. Is there any other dangerous entity, associated with wings, the divine, and daring to aspire (too much)? Yes. The poet though begins to ask us, through this metaphor, whether the creation reflects its creator. If the answer is yes, what do we make of that?

Stanza Three

And what shoulder, & what art,
Could twist the sinews of thy heart?
And when thy heart began to beat.
What dread hand? & what dread feet

This third stanza really gets to the point. If the Tyger is a created being, its heart (and its nature) were also created. If the Tyger is a fearful creature, why should we not attribute that fearfulness to its creator also? Is it not a reflection of its creator? We see that sentiment directly in the 4th line of the stanza, when the Speaker describes the Tyger’s creator as having “dread” hand and feet.

Stanza Four

What the hammer? what the chain,
In what furnace was thy brain?
What the anvil? what dread grasp,
Dare its deadly terrors clasp!

In this stanza, we see the Tyger’s creator in terms of blacksmithing. The implication is that whatever the Tyger is, it was made to be. That’s not controversial in and of itself, until we consider that the Tyger might be a metaphor for the devil, in which case the author seems to be asking the Reader to consider the idea that God is the author of the evil in the world.

The use of the blacksmithing metaphor imagines that the creation was made with some intentionality and toil. The third and fourth line describe the blacksmith grasp as “dread” just before describing the creation as “its deadly terrors.” The creation is thus a terror, but its ownership is given to its creator.

Stanza Five

When the stars threw down their spears
And water’d heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the Lamb make thee?

This stanza is a reference to the divine rebellion of Satan and his followers. The Lamb is a reference to Christ (we know that both contextually and through the capitalization of the L.) If Christ is the Lamb, then Satan is the Tyger. The Speaker asks whether God made them both.

I suspect that Blake was aware of the bad Christian theology (God the Father, in Christian theology, did not “make” the Lamb. The Lamb always was.)

The Gospel of John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ² He was in the beginning with God. ³ All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. 

The premise of the Speaker is that nature is fixed and outcomes are pre-determined based on how one is created. It does not assume the existence of choice, or it argues that choices are also predetermined by how one is created. Remember stanza three comments that the Tyger’s heart was made and stanza four argues that its brain was made.

Ezekiel 36:²⁶ I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh.

Romans 12:² Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.

John 3:³ Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” 

Is it possible for a Tyger to ask the Lamb to become like a Lamb? This is the foundational difference between the perspective of the Speaker and the core beliefs of Christianity. The Speaker seems to be questioning whether it is actually possible. Is free will real or an illusion? Have you ever met anyone who was radically transformed?

Stanza Six

Tyger Tyger burning bright,
In the forests of the night:
What immortal hand or eye,
Dare frame thy fearful symmetry?

This stanza is a repeat of the first, except that it switches “could” in its fourth line for “dare.” The change implies an application of blame.

The poet paints the Tyger – the devil – as potentially a sympathetic figure in the sense that that the Tyger is a created being. He credits the creator with the Tyger’s characteristics, and ultimately, implies that the blame for the Tyger’s character also lies with the Creator.

These are deep questions, and though Blake is often linked with Satan or the occult, it should be charitably noted that Blake does not answer these questions outright.

In case I have been a bit unfair in my own depiction of Blake, I present you with his wikipedia biography:

William Blake (28 November 1757 – 12 August 1827) was an English poet, painter, and printmaker. Largely unrecognised during his life, Blake is now considered a seminal figure in the history of the poetry and visual art of the Romantic Age. What he called his “prophetic works” were said by 20th-century critic Northrop Frye to form “what is in proportion to its merits the least read body of poetry in the English language”. His visual artistry led 21st-century critic Jonathan Jones to proclaim him “far and away the greatest artist Britain has ever produced”. In 2002, Blake was placed at number 38 in the BBC‘s poll of the 100 Greatest Britons. While he lived in London his entire life, except for three years spent in Felpham, he produced a diverse and symbolically rich collection of works, which embraced the imagination as “the body of God” or “human existence itself”.

Although Blake was considered mad by contemporaries for his idiosyncratic views, he came to be highly regarded by later critics and readers for his expressiveness and creativity, and for the philosophical and mystical undercurrents within his work. His paintings and poetry have been characterised as part of the Romantic movement and as “Pre-Romantic”. In fact, he has been said to be “a key early proponent of both Romanticism and Nationalism”. A committed Christian who was hostile to the Church of England (indeed, to almost all forms of organised religion), Blake was influenced by the ideals and ambitions of the French and American revolutions. Though later he rejected many of these political beliefs, he maintained an amiable relationship with the political activist Thomas Paine; he was also influenced by thinkers such as Emanuel Swedenborg. Despite these known influences, the singularity of Blake’s work makes him difficult to classify. The 19th-century scholar William Michael Rossetti characterised him as a “glorious luminary”, and “a man not forestalled by predecessors, nor to be classed with contemporaries, nor to be replaced by known or readily surmisable successors”.