what is the summary of going going by philip Larkin
Answers
Answer:
philip Larkin was one of the most established poets of his time. While he was initially inspired by Eliot and Yeats, he eventually chose his own distinctive style of writing.
Unlike Eliot and Yeats, whose works were obscure and highly intellectual, Larkin started writing in a standard colloquial style. The colloquial aspect is very import. In a poem like "Church Going," he talks about an everyday event in a very cavalier tone. He doesn’t write anything overly profound or complex. While his own particular brand of complexity stems from this initial simplicity. In "Church Going," Larkin talks about an almost ritualistic event, and the language he uses to delineate this event is just as much of a ritual to people. He doesn’t inflect the poem with complex allusions or allegories but, in a very cavalier manner, depicts a day in the life of an uncertain speaker in front of just “another church”.
Another important thing that makes the poems of Larkin distinctive is the everyday that (in parallel with the style of writing). Unlike modernist writers, Larkin doesn’t write about abstract issues and doesn’t delve to deep into the politics of war. He deals with emotions that transcend his age and time. This can be seen in "This Be The Verse," in which he very casually but forcefully tells his story. From the controversial beginning to the controversy of the content of the poem itself, what is sometimes forgotten is that this poem explores a quotidian theme, insular from the politics of the times of Larkin. This idea is reiterated in "Mr Bleaney," where a very simple tone is set. Perhaps such poems are intentionally written like this because he wishes to reach an audience that understands the same emotions like him. The poetry of Larkin doesn’t explore modernist themes; it explores universal themes.
Explanation:
Hey mate!!
here's your answer...
»Philip Larkin's “Going Going”was written in 1972 and describes about the loss of nature due to industrialization and its impact on human beings and the universe.
Larkin begins by telling that the natural persistence of the countryside would maintain for the rest of his life.
•The poem is about the loss of nature and environment and the effect this loss has on people and the whole world. The poet initially feels that the pristine beauty of the countryside is here to stay. As days and years progress, he is dismayed that the countryside is changing due to urbanisation, stress and pollution.
»In ten unrhymed lines, ‘Going’ explores death without ever mentioning it by name, instead referring to it, slightly elliptically, as ‘an evening’ that is ‘coming in’. Immediately we have a contrast: something is ‘coming’ but, as the title makes clear, something is also ‘going’: life itself.
•In summary, ‘Going’ uses the metaphor of the coming evening – an evening which ‘lights no lamps’ because there is no hope of staving off this darkness, the darkness of death. As what is effectively Larkin’s last mature poem, ‘Aubade’, would make clear over 30 years later, mankind can do nothing to stave off the inevitability of death.
In summary, ‘Going’ uses the metaphor of the coming evening – an evening which ‘lights no lamps’ because there is no hope of staving off this darkness, the darkness of death. As what is effectively Larkin’s last mature poem, ‘Aubade’, would make clear over 30 years later, mankind can do nothing to stave off the inevitability of death.Philip Larkin 1961In the second stanza of ‘Going’, Larkin refers to this coming evening as silk-like at a distance – in other words, when we’re young and the prospect of death and extinction is a long way off, we don’t mind thinking about it, and it holds few terrors. But once we have begun to feel death upon us – like a sort of sheet or duvet – later in life, the thought brings no comfort.
In the third and fourth stanzas, Larkin’s mood switches to interrogative: a series of three questions bring in first the image of a tree binding the earth to the sky – that is, something that connects the earthly to the ethereal, or, we might say, life to death – then the idea of something felt under the hands, but also on top of them, weighing them down. Death has become a heavy weight that seems to arrest the speaker’s ability to act: the very thought of it seems to paralyse, or, as ‘Aubade’ would have it decades later, ‘to hold and horrify’.
*Hope it will be helpful for you and satisfying your question ＼（○＾ω＾○）／*