The speaker is undoubtedly a lover that is parting with her beloved at the break of dawn. The situation is that the beloved is getting up, but all of the reasons to get up are invalidated by the speaker. The speaker cannot be identified with the poet since John is a man and the speaker is female.
2.Explain the comparison in line 7. To whom does "I"
(10-12) refer? Is "love" (15) the subject or object of "can
admit"?
Light is given the quality of being an eye which can be linked to a source of light, in this poem's case, the sun and that makes the comparison a metaphorical one linking the light to the sun that has been the source of the reason for the speaker to invalidate the protests of the speaker to get out of bed. I would refer to the woman in lines 10-12. Object, from what it looks like it is a promiscuous relationship and the fact that it would need to be admitted would suggest that it is adulterous in nature or out of wedlock.
3.Summarize the arguments used by the speaker to keep the
person addressed from leaving. What is the speaker's scale of value?
First of all she doesn't mind the fact that her and the man are sharing in the relationship, but her commitment to him makes her question or have to compete for his commitment. She is most definitely cherishing the time she has with him and does not want to share him with his business. Her scale of value has her relationship or quality time with the man somewhere near the top because she fights so hard to keep him in bed with her.
4.Are the two persons married or unmarried? Justify your
answer.
Probably not. The fact that it is mentioned that the love would have to be admitted would suggest that it is a deed done in darkness and therefore out of any form of legitimized marriage. The personification of light also indicates something that would reveal what they are doing, but since it is mute, it can only spy and reveal them in the way of sight and not hearing or telling.
No comments:
Post a Comment