Dylan Thomas’s “A Refusal to Mourn” was first published in “The New Republic” in 1945. It was published soon after the end of the Second World War. The poem is an emphatic refusal to mourn the dead. Here, the dead being represented by the child. The loss of a child is the greatest tragedy; and symbolic of life lost without having blossomed. Thomas simply refuses to mourn for it would relegate the child itself to the action of mourning. This refusal to mourn is rather a celebration of every innocent life lost.

The poet points to the ambiguous nature of death as it marks the destruction of life, but paves way for newer life. Bird, beast and flower alike are common and universal to this truth. Death fathers all-it has a towering, commanding and dominating effect over all. It is a kind of all-consuming darkness, that has a humbling-effect, for, in the face of death all are equal. All distinctions of high/low, rich/poor are erased in the face of it, humbling the person with the highest earthly paradigm of virtue. The phrase ‘bird beast and flowers’ may also denote the return to the nature or the basic elements of life-a universal phenomenon that marks the end of earthly individuality. And more significantly, it speaks volumes with the power of silence as truth descends in gradually. The poet also asserts that ambiguity is inherent in the concept of death itself that is a return to nature and “Tells with silence the last light breaking.”

The three major sense perceptions are acquainted with this universal phenomenon, as echoed by the words ‘tells’,’ silence’ and ‘light breaking’. ‘Light’ that is a symbol of creation, unites life with death here. And as a response to the kinetic cosmic energy, the hour seems static (still).The image of water evokes ideas of baptism and birth; and the holy water echoes death. Therefore,’ water’ here is a symbol for the twin-sided aspects of life. Just as the Temple of Jerusalem ( in the Mount of Zion) was replaced by the synagogue, the similar idea of change is reiterated here with the words ’Zion’, ’synagogue’.etc. How death paves the way for inevitable change. By these symbols the poet also echoes the death of institutions and religions, to give way to new ones. The image of ‘corn’ alludes to the parables. The phrase ‘ear of corn’ refers to the listening to these parables that preached these stories of inevitability. The poet asks himself once again as to why he should pray for the shadow of a sound. The memory of the person in question is only the shadow of a sound, remembrance of a once-existing reality. The action of mourning is compared to the ‘sowing a salt seed’. The hope of breeding something sterile or stagnant, for the death cannot come to life with mourning.

The poet parodies the Valley of the Shadow of Death by the phrase ‘valley of sackcloth” deteriorating the action of mourning as a ritual by itself that relegates the sacredness of the funeral and dead one in question. Instead of the funeral shroud, the poet utilizes the word ‘sackcloth’ to belittle the situation caused by the human ritualistic mourning of the dead.
With generalizations over death , he will not tarnish the individuality and majesty of the child. The ‘burning’ or the passionate emotions associated with death of the child were too profound to be expressed. They were significant as compared to the mundane war. Mankind did not represent her, rather she represented mankind .She proceeded with a ‘grave’ truth. The word ‘grave has two meanings here-that of being ‘serious’ and ‘pertaining to the grave’. He makes a reference to the ‘stations’ of the cross, the several sufferings of Jesus Christ. He will not understate this ‘death’ with generalizations on the transient nature of innocence and youth. The poet utilizes the statement “I shall not murder”-a reminder of the Ten Commandments. It is indicative of how religion (also) does not advocate the mourning of the child.

The poet addresses the dead as “London’s daughter”. This is further enforced by the term”first dead”, as in ‘First Lady’. The long friends refer to the worms in the grave, says David Daiches. “One dies but once,” says Daiches , “and through that death becomes reunited with the timeless unity of things”. Sunderman asserts that the disintegrated body turns into particles of dust that are ageless since they take part in the timeless cycle of nature. These particles get ingrained in the veins of Mother Earth. The water of Thames is depicted as still and ‘unmourning’. The river that is otherwise kinetic (‘riding Thames’) is seen to be static. After the first death, there is no other. Therefore, the action of mourning is useless, for there is no further averting of the situation just because there is no death again.

© Rukhaya MK 2010

The content is the copyright of Rukhaya MK. Any line reproduced from the article has to be appropriately documented by the reader. ©Rukhaya MK. All rights reserved.