Vail Hall

Professor Hague

English 370

December 7, 2013

Book V: Accident or Intention

By: Vail Hall

Book V of The Ring and Book, by Robert Browning stands out amongst other chapters of the book because it is the first time the “villain”, Guido Franceschini, speaks recalling the accounts of several terrible murders he had carried out. This chapter doesn’t stand out just because of its vitality to the plot but also as another classic Robert Browning dramatic monologue. Browning’s dramatic monologues have intrigued many scholars of Victorian literature but it is what one of these scholars, Robert Langbaum wrote in his critical essay ”The Dramatic Monologue: Sympathy vs. Judgment” that I chose to reference. The idea Langbaum purposed in his essay I believe is a much more accurate depiction of how Guido Franceschini relates to his listeners and the reader than that which Michael Yetman suggests in his essay about Book V “”Count Guido Franceschini”: The Villain as Artist in The Ring and the Book”. Yetman advocates his idea that it is Guido in Book V who is the artist of his illusive and persuasive character and not Browning, who was not conscious of how he created Guido’s character. Robert Browning had written many dramatic monologues prior to writing and publishing The Ring and the Book. There are many accounts in Browning’s other dramatic monologues that coincide with what Langbaum purposed in his essay. Its these many other examples and Book V’s similarities to those examples that leads me to believe Langbaum’s theory is correct and that Yetman is in fact mistaken in his theory. I would argue that Book V is another well-crafted dramatic monologue that applies the idea of sympathy versus judgment that Langbaum discusses and that it is not as Yetman says, a piece developed by Guido’s self-manifestation as an artist separate and hidden from Browning.

Both Yetman and Langbaum’s essays present an idea that some effect is being created between speaker and audience including reader and fictitious listener alike.  Yetman and Langbaum seem to agree on the fact that this effect has some persuasive manner to it. In Yetman’s theory this persuasion is the heart of the argument, he claims that Guido and not Browning is fully aware of the illusions he is trying to create in attempt to persuade his audience to take his accounts of the murder as truth.  Langbaum‘s theory also suggest the idea of persuading the audience. The difference lies in Langbaum stating that Browning is the mastermind behind the persuasiveness that the speaker has. Browning uses this to develop the effect of conflict for the audience between sympathizing and questioning the morals of the speaker. Although Yetman and Langbaum both agree that the main purpose of the dramatic monologue of Book V is to persuade the audience to coincide with the speakers ideology they disagree with how and who creates persuasion.

“And it is Guido as artist, as manipulator of words who creates a fiction, not as Browning’s character but as his own controlled creation” (1094) and is Yetman’s main point in his essay “”Count Guido Franceschini”: The Villain as Artist in The Ring and the Book” is that Guido should be regarded as an artist and that he is responsible for the effect of persuasion not Browning. Guido as seen by Yetman is a master of illusion. He says Guido utilizes several different resources to achieve his illusive persuasion. These resources include an extensive knowledge of literature, the bible, and common marital issues. Yetman sees Guido as having an understanding of the resources that will persuade his audience and not Browning.

Guido, as Yetman claims, “is positively fecund in his ability to suggest literary analogues to the adulterous affair.” (1095) For these literary works “Guido invokes the names of Plautus, Terence, and Boccaccio” (1095). The works of these playwrights and poets often included comedies of spousal conflicts. The conflicts centered on the idea of a love triangle that consists of an adulterous wife, her lover, and the poor foolish husband.  Yetman says Guido knowingly refers to these authors and the current popularity of the comedies and the idea of a love triangle. Sympathy of the commonly known struggle of the foolish husband in a love triangle is what Guido wants, he attempts to portray himself as the poor foolish husband. As Yetman said, Guido “…anticipated sympathy of his audience coming from his assumption of the role of the wronged husband in the triangle.” (1094)   

Another resource Yetman says Guido uses is the Bible. The person who has the power to choose Guido’s sentence, the Pope, is of high priority to Guido to try and persuade. Guido realizes this and makes many references to the bible, often comparing himself to biblical characters. Yetman claims this is Guido’s attempt to persuade the Pope. He said that Guido depicts himself in one case to be the Good Shepherd of the bible and that he “at least tried to protect the lamb, Pompilla, from the wolf, Caponsacchi.” (1095) Trying to create the illusion for the pope that he is the protector of the lamp, Pompilla, by murdering her and her lover. Murdering both Pompilla and Caponsacchi according to the illusion that Guido tries to craft was the only way he could fulfill his duty as the Good Shepherd and protect the lamb, Pompilla.

Yetman argued that the illusive ideas of the love triangle, and Biblical references used to create sympathy were not Browning’s. Instead they came from Guido Franceschini the character that Browning created.  According to Yetman the reader should perceive Guido as an individual artist free of control from his creator. I agree with Yetman that Guido should be perceived as an artist but instead of being separate from Browning is actually an intentional product of his. Langbaum’s idea as I said before I think is much more fitting in the case of Book V. Browning is who is responsible for the sympathy crafted amongst the audience.   

Now I would like to look closer at Robert Langbaum’s essay, The Dramatic Monologue: Sympathy vs. Judgment. The essay begins with Langbaum saying that we must not, as the reader of a dramatic monologue, concern ourselves so much with objective criteria but with the intended effects of a speaker with a silent audience. When we focus on the objective criteria Langbaum says “…we must abandon the exclusive concern with objective criteria…” (525 RBP).The intended effect that the author, Robert Browning, is responsible for is what Langbaum refers to as sympathy versus judgment. What Langbaum is saying is that Browning creates the speaker to have a certain manner about them that convinces the audience to sympathize despite the speaker’s immorality. Many of Browning’s speakers are villains of some sort. They always present an immoral act or thought to their audience as if it is clearly justifiable.

Throughout his essay Langbaum continuously uses Browning’s dramatic monologue “My Last Duchess” as an example of his ideas. In “My Last Duchess” a Duke is speaking to an envoy about his previous duchess who he had put to death out of jealousy. Langbaum says that as the reader we find “…that we even identify ourselves with him. (the duke)” (528 RBP). Browning, according to Langbaum, utilizes both common feelings such as jealousy and an artful creation of a confident and affable speaker to pull his reader’s into an internal conflict. The Duke is a great example of a malevolent character that somehow has a demeanor that is found agreeable to the reader. Langbaum says that it is not the duke’s wickedness that is so intriguing to the reader but rather “…his immense attractiveness.” (529 RBP) It is due to our admiration of the duke’s power and superiority that we suspend temporarily judgment upon him and indulge in sharing the feeling of superiority.  The reader, Langbaum says, does eventually recall the wicked accounts of the speaker and thus becomes involved in an internal conflict of sympathy versus judgment. “Moral Judgment is in fact important as the thing to be suspended, as a measure of the price we pay…” (529 RBP) to sympathize with the speaker.

Robert Langbaum’s theory of sympathy versus judgment can be applied to many of Robert Browning’s dramatic monologues. In ”Prophyria’s Lover” the speaker is overwhelmed by lust and strangles his lover with her own hair. Here the feeling of lust is one that the reader can relate to and thus sympathize with the speaker when he wishes to never let go of it. Power also plays a role in creating sympathy because it is a common desire to try and hold on to a feeling like lust as long as possible. Once again judgment of the act of murder is at play and creates conflict. Another example would be “The Laboratory” where the speaker wishes to poison the other girls who have romantic relations with her lover. Jealousy much like with the duke is emotion that drives the speaker and also pulls in the reader to understanding why the speaker would want to commit murder. The poison gives the speaker great feeling of power that the reader also feels as they listen to the speaker speak of how easy she could kill her enemies. All these examples fit well into Langbaum’s theory of sympathy versus judgment. I believe that Book V is also fitting.

Guido Franceschini in Book V is on trial in front of the Pope trying to appeal his original sentence to death. Being convicted of the murder of his wife, her lover, and her family. This immoral act was attempted to appear justifiable to the Pope and others including the reader through an elusive account of the murder and events leading to it. Browning’s character Guido, the speaker, like many of Browning’s speakers is equipped with feelings such as jealousy, anger, and a desire to control.

I am irremediably beaten here,--

The gross illiterate vulgar couple,--bah!

Why they have measured forces, mastered mine,

Made me their spoil and prey from first to last.    

(1393-1396 pg. 285)

In these lines Guido talks of his wife’s parents and how they used him for his wealth. The emotions of jealousy and particularly anger are very apparent. These feelings are what is used to attempt to create sympathy amongst the listeners and reader. The reader and listener can sympathize with Guido because his wife was unfaithful and her parents were greedy and only wanted his money. Feelings of extreme jealousy and anger are well understood and expected for a husband in that position. Does the terrible act of being unfaithful to your husband justify murder? Most would say no like we discover the Pope does when he sentences Guido to death again. Guido much like many of Browning’s speakers can be very convincing due to his meticulous, obsessive, and seemingly insane attempt to convince his audience otherwise. It is Browning’s expertise in crafting characters who are so cunning, obsessive, and exceptionally persuasive that can sway the reader. Browning is so talented at creating such a character he can convince readers to sympathize with speakers who committed acts that are clearly immoral. He did the same in Book V with his character, Count Guido, but one difference is apparent. Browning made it so Guido was aware of his own efforts to try and persuade his audience.

               The speakers of all of Browning’s other dramatic monologues that fall into the category of sympathy versus judgment are not at all aware of their persuasive power. Guido is made by Browning to be completely aware of his ability to try and persuade his audience. I don’t believe that because Guido was aware of himself trying to make his audience see eye to eye with him means that he is separate from Browning as Yetman claims. I say this because overall the same effect of sympathy versus judgment is presented to both the listener in the poem and the reader. Even though it is known amongst the audience that Guido’s appeal is one that he crafted to be exaggerated and illusive but sympathy for him is still generated because his feelings of anger, and jealousy are very much relatable. Browning intended this effect to take place in the dramatic monologue of Book V. Although Count Guido is different from many of the other speakers in Browning’s dramatic monologues he is still a product of Browning’s with the same purpose as the speakers in the other pieces. That purpose is to rouse the reader with a conflict between sympathy and judgment. 

 Book V can be interpreted more or less with the perspective of either Michael Yetman or Robert Langbaum. I believe that as the reader more can be understood about Robert Browning and his character Count Guido through Langbaum’s viewpoint. According to Yetman Count Guido was not deliberately designed by Browning as an artist of illusion and persuasion but rather created by accident this way. Yetman recognizes that Guido is different from Browning’s usual speaker in that he is aware of his sly ways. This realization lead Yetman to believe that Browning did not strategically design Guido as he is. Yetman may very well be correct. I however believe that Langbaum’s theory that Browning deliberately designs his speakers to produce the effect of sympathy versus judgment can be functional in Book V.  Although Count Guido differs slightly from other speakers of Browning’s work his character still has many of the main qualities that are necessary to yield sympathy from the reader. These qualities include Guido’s extreme jealousy of Caponsacchi, his wife’s lover, and anger toward all his victims which were his wife, her parents, and Caponsacchi. These emotions are key to the sympathy versus judgment effect because it is because of how relatable these emotions are that sympathizing with the speaker is even possible. The other important aspect to sympathy versus judgment is the speaker’s power. This power can come in many forms such as superior class, wealth, strength, or intelligence. Intelligence is the power that Guido holds with his extensive knowledge of literature, religion, and people. Sympathy toward Guido is achieved in Book V through Guido’s relatable emotions and his desirable intellect. The judgment of course comes into the playing field when the reader remembers the act that Count Guido is on trial for. By seeing Book V through the lens of Langbaum’s sympathy versus judgment essay the reader can understand in greater depth the ability of Robert Browning to incorporate the reader into interactions with his characters in this case Count Guido Franceschini. 

Works Cited

Browning, Robert. “Book V.” The Ring and the Book. Ed. Thomas J. Collins & Richard D. Altick. Ontario: Broadview Press Ltd., 2001. Print.

Langbaum, Robert. “The Dramatic Monologue: Sympathy versus Judgment.” Robert Browning’s Poetry (RBP). Ed. James Loucks and Andrew Stauffer. New York: W.W. Nor & Company, Inc., 2007. Print.

Yetman, Michael. “Count Guido Franceschini: The Villain as Artist in The Ring and the Book.” PMLA, Vol. 87, No. 5 (Oct., 1972), pp 1093-1102. Print.

A Summation

Throughout the course of the semester I have learned a lot about both Elizabeth and Robert Browning but I found that I took a particular liking to Robert’s work. One the first piece’s by Robert Browning that our class studied was My Last Duchess and this was the first time I had encountered a dramatic monologue or at least the first time that I was aware that I was reading a dramatic monologue. The more we analyzed Robert’s dramatic monologues the more intrigued by them I came.  I didn’t know it with the first few dramatic monologues we analyzed but the way that Robert constructed his monologues was intentional and it was meant to create the conflict I was having in my own thoughts.

            It wasn’t until we read a critical essay by Robert Langbuam that I could understand how and why I was having conflicts in my thoughts of the monologues speaker as I read. In Langbuam’s essay he elaborated on Robert’s construction of his speaker and listener through the form of a dramatic monologue. It was then that I learned about sympathy vs. judgment. The idea of sympathy vs. judgment as Langbuam purposed in his essay is that the internal conflicts the reader of one of Robert’s dramatic monologues is undergoing about the speaker is a result of that Robert intended. Robert knew that his readers would struggle going back and forth with having sympathy for the speaker and also judging them.

            Langbuam said that the speaker of many of Robert Browning’s dramatic monologues took on a similar character and that that character was the cause of the readers struggle between sympathy and judgment. Robert Browning was extremely masterful at creating these ominous, cunning, and mysterious speakers that would always craft the intended effect on the reader. The speakers Robert created always seemed dominate and powerful to the reader as they were the only ones to speak and they were extraordinarily persuasive at times due to their questionable sanity. The speaker’s almost always had an obsessive manner to them whatever it was that they wanted or thought was that they could talk about. This insane obsession leads readers into siding with the speakers ideology no matter how obscene it maybe. Eventually, though the readers own morals would come into play and an understanding that the speaker’s ideology was often not a moral one and thus the conflict arises within the readers thoughts.

            Robert Browning’s ability to create the sympathy versus judgment conflict through the meticulous development of the character of the speaker fascinates me. Even having obtained knowledge of intention of the conflict I still can read one of Robert Browning’s dramatic monologues and catch myself time and time again sympathizing with and then judging the speaker that Robert crafted.

            This course has opened my eyes to a form of writing that I had not yet experienced and I don’t think I would have liked to come across it any other way than through Robert Browning’s dramatic monologues! 

“Richelieu” [unidentified], Vanity Fair 1 (November 28, 1868):46-47

Summary:

               This passage begins with the basic summary of conflict throughout The Ring and the Book. The idea that lies will be found out and that they can greatly change things. The passage then complements Browning in his ability to write about and portray reality in The Ring and the Book. Ending by saying that if people don’t want reality “… they had better not trouble themselves to open the book,…”

Analysis:

               I would have to agree with the author of this passage. Reality of the consequences of lying is made very well apparent by Browning throughout his retelling of this story in The Ring and the Book. The adulterous wife and her lover the priest were found out by the husband. The husband then after committing murder to his wife, her parents, and her lover is found out. Then the husband after being sentenced to death tries appeal to the pope and creates a fictional account of the events to maybe get the pope and others to sympathize with him. He fails and is sentenced to death again. So all of those who lied were all ultimately killed. Browning truly shows the negative consequences of lying.

[Unsigned], Saturday Review 26 (December 26, 1868): 832-34

Summary:

               This small passage sums up the immoral and evil happening in Book I-III of The Ring and the Book. The evil of adultery and murder do not fore shadow and moral right of any characters accept maybe the pope.  

Analysis:

               I would agree that the accounts of the first three books are evil and cunning and show no hope for any moral right doings. I do believe this over the top immoral evil seen by several characters in the beginning books is purposely crafted by Browning to better the experiences of reader in the monologues of Count Guido.

[John R. deC. Wise], Westminster and Foreign Quarterly Review 91 (April 1869): 577

Summary:

               John criticizes Browning’s style of focusing on the details of the villain and his/her villainous acts. He says that this style may be pleasing for ordinary people but is dull for the intellectual. John believes that Browning’s focus on the villain over shadows the light that should be shed from a resolution to the stories conflicts.

Analysis:

               I would have to disagree in this case with John. I believe that because Browning turns the readers focus to the villain he creates a better experience for the reader when the conflict is resolved. In Book V of The Ring and the Book Browning focuses the reader on Count Guido fictional account of the murders. This focus on the cunning of Count Guido in Book V gives the reader a better experience in Book XI when Guido becomes self-aware and no longer tries to lie and trick. 

From “Mrs. Browning’s New Poem,” The leader (14 June 1851): 560-61

Summary:

               This passage starts with the complementing of Elizabeth B. Browning’s work. It was said in the passage that she has a gift that set her apart like “…poets from verse writers…” or “…singers from speakers…” After the complements the criticism is quickly exposed. Mrs. Browning, it was said, writes in a way that the read easily discover that Browning has “…a want for experience, an imperfect grasp of life, a certain unsubstantiality,” Elizabeth reveals to her readers a lack of true to life emotions and experiences. The passage then goes on to speak of Browning’s poem “Casa Guidi Windows” and how through the poems subject a development of real experience and emotion can be felt.

Analysis:

               Although I don’t agree that prior to “Casa Guidi Windows” Elizabeth did not have any true to life experiences but I do believe something about living in Casa Guidi in Florence moved Elizabeth. I believe that living in Casa Guidi and in Italy at a time of turmoil gave Elizabeth experiences with politics that saddened her and many Italians also made her very passionate. These experiences like the passage said do seem to come to life in her poem “Casa Guidi Windows.”

From [Henry Fothergill Chorley], “Poems before Congress,” The Athenaeum 1960 (17 March 1860): 371-72

Summary:

               The beginning of this passage makes the claim that Elizabeth B. Browning’s poetry is suffering from her passionate political interest. Her enthusiasm over political issues is taking its toll on Browning’s art as the passage says “Choosing to scold, she forgets to sing…” Although the beginning to this passage seems to be criticizing Browning’s political enthusiasm as some sort of distraction it goes on to praise her for doing so. The over the top political passion is what makes Browning one of the greatest poetesses of her time, claims the ending of the passage.

Analysis:         

                          I completely agree with the idea that although Browning reveals a tempered enthusiasm it does not take away from her poetry but adds to it a great amount of style. To use her poetry as a means into the debates over political issues I think is what makes Browning poetry so interesting. A woman in her era to use her poetry to make her voice heard in the masculine world of politics is incredible. Overall I agree that her political enthusiasm does not take from her poetry but adds to it.

From [Henry Fothergill Chorley], “Our Weekly Gossip,” The Athenaeum 1963 (7 April 1860): 477

Summary:

                          This small passage begins by telling us of how Elizabeth Browning asked for it to be specified that “A Curse for a Nation” was not directed toward England but toward the United States. She also whished that it be known it had nothing to do with the Italian and United States relations but rather the issues of slavery in the United States. The passage ends with the question as to why Browning would include issues of slavery in the United States in “Poems before Congress”.

Analysis:

                          I believe Elizabeth included issues of slavery because she want to make it known that issues that may not even involve your home country are still of importance and should be addressed. The issue of slavery is a humane issue and should be of interest to all people even though it is happening in a distant land. Elizabeth is not only mature in understand that these issues should important to her but also she is brave in including them in her work that mainly address issues closer to her home. 

 Vail Hall

Professor Hague

English 370

November 1, 2013

“The Laboratory-Ancien Régime” by Robert Browning, published in 1844, is a dramatic monologue set in France. Said to be set during the reign of Louis XIV, the poem relates closely to actual events during this period. As described by the title the monologue is set in a chemist’s laboratory. The speaker, a jealous woman, is plotting a murder while the chemist listens silently. This makes the chemist the listener, fitting of the dramatic monologue format.  This poem reveals the speakers all-consuming jealousy and her plans to use the chemist to seek her revenge. 

Immediately in stanza one the speaker reveals her murderous desire. Robert Browning starts stanza one by creating an ominous setting. Lines one through three create the image of a dark, unsettling laboratory. The speaker wears some sort of protective glass mask that allows her to “…gaze thro’ these faint smokes curling whitely,” (2). She then speaks to the person who works in the eerie lab or who “…pliest thy trade in this devil’s-smithy—“(3). Line three really drives home the ominous feel of the setting in the laboratory, and explains the chemist, who operates his evil trade in secrecy. A smithy is a place where a certain line of work is performed for example a blacksmith’s smithy is a stable. Thus, a devil’s-smithy is where the devil performs his work. Browning uses the idea of the devil’s-smithy to portray both the evil and confidentiality of the chemists work. With the setting in place the speaker reveals her murderous desire in line four by asking the chemist “Which is the poison to poison her, prithee?” (4). Here the speaker divulges her need for the chemist in her plot to murder another women. The speaker’s question to the chemist and the word, prithee, which is Old English for please, demonstrate her absolute desire for the chemists help. Stanza one gives the poem the setting of the dim, menacing laboratory and reveals the speaker and her plot to use the chemist’s ability to produce a poison that will kill another women.

Stanza two gives reason to why the speaker wishes to carry out murder on this other woman and just how bad she wants to. Line five sums up the speakers reason for her desire to kill. “He is with her, and they know that I know” (5) says it all, the plot to murder is fueled by jealousy. A man that the speaker longs to be with is seeing another women and the speaker wishes to dispose of this women by poisoning her. In lines six through eight the speaker’s emotions begin taking affect, she seems to be building up rage. Her jealousy is taking toll on her sanity. “Where they are, what they do: they believe my tears flow/While they laugh, laugh at me, at me fled to the drear” (7-8). Browning repeats the words they, laugh and at me throughout lines seven and eight. These lines utilize repetition to portray that the speaker is losing her sanity. The repetition gives the sense of urgency and that her jealousy is the only thing on her mind. Stanza two develops jealousy as the speaker’s motive to kill and that she is displaying a loss of sanity.

               There is a shift in the speaker’s attention in the next stanzas, three through five. Now that she has stopped her jealous rant the speaker begins observing the laboratories’ contents.  She claims she is in no hurry and says she “Better sit thus, and observe thy strange things,” (11). As she observes she begins to greatly admire all the chemist’s belongings. “And yonder soft phial, the exquisite blue, / Sure to taste sweetly,--is that poison too? / Had I but all of them, thee and thy treasures,” (15-17). In her admiration of the strange contents of the laboratory she begins to understand all the power that these poisonous ingredients have and she then perceives them as treasures. These stanzas give more insight into how the speaker is seemingly becoming obsessed with the deadly ingredients of the lab and how easily they can kill.

               Stanza six is where the speaker truly becomes consumed by her desire to commit murder with the chemist’s many poisons. The speaker falls into a sort of fantasy. In this fantasy the speaker sees the simplicity of murder using the lethal power of the laboratories ingredients. “Soon, at the King’s, a mere lozenge to give, / And Pauline should have just thirty minutes to live!” (21-22). Her first fantasy is to use a lozenge, a small pill, to kill a woman named Pauline. She is amazed and animated about the ease of killing Pauline with just a small pill. Continuing to visualize simple plots to murder the speaker moves on to a woman named Elise. Her strategy to dispose of Elise is to light a simple yet fatal pastile, a type of incense. Browning interjects the poem with these fantasies to other women beside her original target to expose the speaker’s almost complete loss of sanity and all-consuming yearning to murder. The abrupt fantasy in stanza six is used well to communicate that the speaker is being overtaking by her evil desires.

               In stanzas seven and eight the speaker starts to become impatient with and disapproving of the chemists work. “Quick—is it finished?” (25) is a clear indication of the speakers patients being tested. She went from fantasizing directly into criticizing. The speaker complains “…The colour’s too grim!” (25). She wished it to be more of an appetizing color to entice her target to drink up. This hurried, hectic feel of the speaker that Browning creates, again leads the reader to comprehend the insanity of the speaker.

               The speaker is critical of the chemist’s work again in stanza eight. “What a drop! She’s not little, no minion like me!” (29), she claims the dosage of poison is far too small. The speaker describes the women she wishes to assassinate by comparing her to the minion likes stature she thinks she has, minion here means small and gentle. Here it seems the speaker is becoming delusional. She says the other woman’s size is” … why she ensnared him:” (30). The speaker really believes the other woman’s girth was what allowed her to trap this man that the speaker desires. At the end of stanza eight, line thirty-two, the speaker slyly complements the woman. She refers to the woman’s pulse as being magnificent although she wishes to “—say, “no!” (31), to it and stop its beating or its “come-and-go” (32). Browning is indeed trying to fashion the speaker as having all attributes of insanity. She is driven by jealousy, fantasizes of murdering targets she hadn’t originally planned to kill, is impatient, excessively critical, and then she complements the pulse of the women she is plotting to murder. Browning has fitted her with all the workings of someone gone mad.

               The speaker shifts subjects again in stanza nine. She recollects the previous night’s espionage. As the speaker recalls the events she admits to an impossible attempt to murder. This takes the reader to the beginnings of her insanity, she said “My own eyes to bear on her so, that I thought / Could I keep them one half minute fixed, she would fall…” (34-35). Thinking that by staring at someone they might fall dead is madness. This confession is how Browning brings the reader back to the start of the speaker’s murderous obsession. He brings the reader here to show how the speaker’s enthusiasm is a result of her feeling that she finally has something that can carry out the evil deed. Stanza nine is utilized as a way to let the reader sympathize with the speaker. Browning draws out the sympathy from the reader by portraying the poison as a long awaited victory after previously failed attempts of murder.

               Stanza ten reveals how wicked the speaker is. “Not that I bid you spare her pain; / Let death be felt and proof remain:” (37-38) these two lines capture the speaker’s evil. She wants pain, agony, and suffering for her target. Use of alliteration is used in line 39, “Brand, burn up, bite into its grace—“(39). As the speaker describes how she wants her targets death to be painful, the alliteration here produces, again, the effect of madness taking over the speaker. The repetitive feel of line 39 exhibits the obsession of the speaker.

               Impatience of the speaker is found, again, at the beginning of stanza eleven, “Is it done?” (41).   She then orders the chemist to take her mask off and not worry about her safety, “…Take my mask off! Nay, be not morose:” (41). The speaker is feeling powerful here with her abrupt orders and feeling of immunity from the poison. In line forty-two the speaker explains that she refuses to keep her mask on because “…this prevents seeing it close:” (42). She has paid so much, “my whole fortune’s fee” (43), for this poison that she won’t go without seeing her targets death up close. Browning goes to provide more evidence that the speaker is delusional in line 44 when she says, “If it hurts her, beside, can it ever hurt me?” (44). The speaker sees herself as being almost immune to the poison once her target consumes it.

               The final stanza, twelve, expresses for the final time the overwhelming desire the speaker has to possess the power of the poison. “Now, take all my jewels, gorge gold to your fill, / You may kiss me, old man, on my mouth if you will!” (45). The speaker offers her fortune to the chemist and even a romantic offer of a kiss in return for the poison. Browning portrays the speaker as willing to give up anything as long as she gets her poison to kill her target. The last two lines of the poem, “But brush this dust off me, lest horror it brings/ Ere I know it—next moment I dance at the kings.” (47-48) leaves the reader knowing that the speaker is leaving for the king’s drunk with power and prepared to commit her crime.

               In the critical essay, “The Dramatic Monologue: Sympathy versus Judgment,” by Robert Langbaum, Langbaum describes how Browning creates a conflict in the interpretive listener as whether they should sympathize with or judge the speaker. In this poem Browning creates that very conflict in the reader. The insanity of the speaker is seemingly very apparent but Browning creates room for sympathy. Jealousy is something that everyone has felt, not likely to this extent, but everyone knows how it feels and Browning taps into that to make the reader see the speaker’s perspective. An understanding of the speaker’s desires develops in the readers mind and the conflict between sympathizing with jealousy and judging the immoral desire to murder is created in the reader’s interpretive cognition.  Browning purposely creates this conflict to leave the reader thinking about what they would do and what would be the right thing to do if faced with such all-consuming jealousy.

               The theme of jealousy in the poem is something that can be carried through to the 21^st century. Technology today is something that makes it very easy to become jealous.  Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and other social media let people who wouldn’t usually be in constant contact the ability to stay in touch.  Many people today stay connected with ex-boyfriends or girlfriends.  It is easy to become jealous or spy on others’ lives much like the speaker did in the poem. Much like the glass mask, and poison in the poem people can hide behind their computers to become powerful and hurt other people.  Jealousy is a significant theme throughout the Victorian era and continues to be today.   

              

Works Cited

Browning, Robert. “The Laboratory.” Robert Browning’s Poetry. Ed. James Loucks and Andrew Stauffer. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2007. Print.

Langbaum, Robert. “The Dramatic Monologue: Sympathy versus Judgment.”  Robert Browning’s Poetry. Ed. James Loucks and Andrew Stauffer. New York: W.W. Nor& Company, Inc., 2007. Print. 

The Politics of Dramatic Form

Isobel Armstrong

Summary:

               In “The Politics of Dramatic Form” Isobel Armstrong compared perspectives of various utilitarian thinkers on dramatic form, specifically that utilized by Robert Browning. Armstrong begins with Mill’s perspective on dramatic form. Mill is said by Armstrong to believe that for poetry to be of the dramatic form it must involve a focus on the “speaker’s” internal conflict of feelings. According to Mill the “speaker” needs to be unaware of any audience because this creates a greater since of drama. This drama is present because the character is expressing feeling as if all else no longer existed. This is the truest form of the emotion that the “speaker” and thus the poet can express. Armstrong also wrote of Bentham’s perspective on dramatic form and the importance of fiction created through language. Bentham said “fictitious entities owe their existence, their impossible, yet indispensable, existence” to language.  Thanks to language the importance of relation to fiction of dramatic form is possible. This relation to fiction is so important because it allows the reader to see him/herself in the fictitious situation of the fictitious character. The reader’s placement of him/herself into the situation is seemingly more dramatic because the emotions become theirs.  Robert Browning utilized many of these utilitarian perspectives to create many his monologues. 

Analysis:

               I agree with much of Armstrong’s opinion on the use of the utilitarian perspectives.  A major example of this I noticed was in Porphyria’s Lover.  After reading Armstrong’s essay the poem made much more sense to me.  The feelings created by the dramatic poem almost became my own, as explained in the essay.  I understood better why these feelings had occurred.  I also agree with his views of the “speaker”.  It makes a monologue much more real when it almost seems as if you, the reader, is there with their thoughts, rather than them thinking for themselves.   

Samuel B. Holcombe:

“Death of Mrs. Browning”

Southern Literacy Messenger 33 (December 1861): 412-17

Summary:

                In this section of Samuel B. Holcombe’s essay “Death of Mrs. Browning” it is made immediately known that Holcombe is very fond of Mrs. Browning’s work. Holcombe claims that Mrs. Browning is “ ..the Shakespeare of her sex…” but still unique in her womanliness. Going on in admiration Holcombe begins to talk about how well Browning incorporates her religious view into her poems. Holcombe compares Browning to Tennyson and how they are both educated in modern science and have considered the many speculations of Christianity that were present at the time. Despite her understanding of science and speculations of the time Browning’s work “confesses” her Christian views. Holcombe takes a great liking to the way Browning expresses her Christian views in her work. Holcombe enjoys how Browning recognizes God as a “divine creator of all things”, and “a being of perfect love and wisdom.”

Analysis:

                I thought it was interesting after reading “The Cry of the Children” to read Holcombe’s admiration of how Browning’s Christian belief is portrayed through God as a divine, all knowing father in her poetry. When you read through “The Cry of the Children” I don’t believe there is any depiction of God or Christianity that is that positive. Towards the end of the poem Browning makes it known that she has Christian beliefs as she describes how she feels sorry for the children who are too young to understand the liberty that Christianity can bring someone in such hard times. Clearly Browning believes that Christianity is good but in this poem she does not go great length to describe how wonderful it is, which is what I believe Holcombe was admiring in his essay.

Hanna Lawrance:

“Mrs. Browning’s Poetry”

The British Quarterly Review 42 (October 1865): 359-84

Summary:

                Much like Holcombe, Hannah Lawrence very much admires Browning’s work in “Mrs. Browning’s Poetry.” Lawrence too was fond of Browning’s way of positively portraying Christianity. Lawrence enjoyed the Virgin Mary that Browning created in her piece “Virgin Mary and the Infant Jesus.” Browning brought a Christian character that is highly admired by women to life and giving her many characteristics that any mother could relate to. 

Analysis:

                Now having read Browning’s “Virgin Mary and the Infant Jesus” or “The Virgin Mary and the Child Jesus” I can understand what both Lawrence and Holcombe mean when they talk about how well Christianity is portrayed by Browning. Browning created a Virgin Mary that was relatable, probably more so for woman, but Mary seemed kind and caring as she spoke to sleeping Jesus. I can now see where Lawrence and Holcombe are coming from and I would agree with them in saying that Browning does a great job at incorporating and expressing her Christian beliefs into her work.

Frances Trollope:

“The Life and Adventures of Michael Armstrong, The Factory Boy”

Summary:

                In this exert of “The Life and Adventures of Michael Armstrong, The Factory Boy” someone is describing the scene of a cotton factory full of child laborers.  The narrator starts by saying that the happy innocent idea of a child that many people have will forever be lost after witnessing children slaving away in a factory. The children in this factory are described as looking beaten down and old for their youthful age. The narrator is disgusted by the filth and unpleasant atmosphere that the children were working in. The narrator then speaks of a little girl of age seven and describes her job as a ”scavenger.” Her duty was to round up all the fragments of cotton debris so that it wouldn’t mess up the final product. This job could be very dangerous the narrator realizes. The little girl is crawling around, under, and in a large piece of machinery with lots of moving parts. The narrator ends by saying although a kid is small and fits without touching the big moving parts that accidents still often happen.

Analysis:

                Both Frances Trollope and Elizabeth Browning share equal horror in knowing that children are working and working in such horrible conditions. In Trollope’s “The Life and Adventures of Michael Armstrong, The Factory Boy” and Browning’s “The Cry of the children” the sense of horror and disbelief of the authors can easily understood. I thought it was interesting that both Trollope and Browning took to writing to express their feelings of disbelief on the subject.