I stood beside his sepulchre whose fame,
Hurled over Europe once on bolt and blast,
Now glows far off as storm-clouds overpast
Glow in the sunset flushed with glorious flame.
Has Nature marred his mould? Can Art acclaim
No hero now, no man with whom men side
As with their hearts' high needs personified?
There are will say, One such our lips could name;
Columbia gave him birth. Him Genius most
Gifted to rule. Against the world's great man
Lift their low calumny and sneering cries
The Pharisaic multitude, the host
Of piddling slanderers whose little eyes
Know not what greatness is and never can.
Notes
Full Title: At the Tomb of Napoleon Before the Elections in America -- November, 1912
Leave a guest comment (subject to review)
Comments
1 - 5 of 5
-
How can someone find this offensive? Who is this offending? It's about Seeger coming upon the Tomb (grave) of Napoleon and writing on his ideas/emotions etc., on it.
Relaying back to the 'great' man Napoleon once was to the man he became and etc., as in this part:
'I stood beside his sepulchre whose fame,
Hurled over Europe once on bolt and blast,'
and then to who he became:
'Now glows far off as storm-clouds overpast
Glow in the sunset flushed with glorious flame.'
He was once great and then he wasn't. He was exiled.
This is read, to me, in enjambments and that's how one should read it. That's, I feel, the form that Seeger wrote this in.
Is this what sycophant finds offensive:
'Him Genius most
Gifted to rule.'
Napoleon was a genius at who and what he accomplished as an Emporer and General. As that last line says 'Gifted to rule.'
All 'Great' men are notorious to someone but does that make them any less Great?
And if people read the authors comment they would see that the full title is an depiction of the Elections in the America in November of 1912 (or there's about) and thus him looking upon Napoleon's Tomb and the memory of his life, his greatness, his defeat and thus now on the Elections ..
Probably more-to-the-point Seeger was probably reflecting on World War I (or the beginning of it) etc. also of his time in the French Foreign Legion ..
There's no offence, this isn't poorly written. There is much in this piece if one would just open their eyes to history and not who the person it's centered around. That's how most things disappear in life because one is 'offended' or thinks that it's not up to par to them and they move on.
'We' have to look beyond that, I feel.
Actually if I didn't view any of the comments above I probably would have just made a minimal view and comment on this piece, probably somewhat the same but I am sure quite different.
But their comments prompted this. And I may be wrong, but then again, I may not.
A good piece written by Seeger.
-
well I like the waythat you wrote it i do think that you wrote it very well. but i do not care for it too much but i still think think that you did write it very well. so i will have to say that this all in all ws a great piece of poetry.
-
I thought it was well written but rather...offensive to some part of me. I did not appreciate it for what it is apparently.
-
i dont see the exact beauty of writing about napoleon..but in the poetic nature of it..it was well-written..sturdy structure/frame, and all in all i actually kinda liked it
~Jen -
this has an older feeling to it...i have a little trouble concentrating on it...methinks it may be a bit wordy in that way...the oldenglish sort of fluffy way...but lets see...i love the line, glow in the sunset flushed with glorious flame.
i feel like this poem is almost sneering at man. the last line is like a jabbing insult to the insufferable masses who have no concept of greatness because they are all peons in their little contruct of familiarity and sameness. very interesting emotions...not my favorite poem...but very interesting...definitely worth pondering...
Edited on Aug 16, 3:01 p.m. because ''.
Adding your comment:
1 - 5 of 5
