Linda's Literary Home

Tag: epitaphs

  • Edgar Lee Masters’ “Dorcas Gustine”

    Image: Edgar Lee Masters https://chicagoliteraryhof.org/inductees/profile/edgar-lee-masters
    Image: Edgar Lee Masters – Chicago Literary Hall of Fame

    Edgar Lee Masters’ “Dorcas Gustine”

    Dorcas Gustine did not let any grievance go unchallenged, and her post-mortem pride is displayed in her report from beyond the grave.  As in the other epitaphs, Dorcas’ report is actually airing a grievance as it disparages the behavior and thinking of others.

    Introduction and Text of  “Dorcas Gustine”

    Edgar Lee Masters’ “Dorcas Gustine” from the poet’s American classic Spoon River Anthology is an American sonnet which dramatizes the thoughts of a strong-willed character.  Dorcas reports that she defended herself against wrongs, or perhaps perceived wrongs, and thereby was “not beloved of the villagers.”

    Because Dorcas Gustine felt great pride in her behavior of not allowing any grievance to go unchallenged, she now displays that post-mortem pride in her revealing report from beyond the grave.

    Dorcas Gustine

    I was not beloved of the villagers,
    But all because I spoke my mind,
    And met those who transgressed against me
    With plain remonstrance, hiding nor nurturing  
    Nor secret griefs nor grudges.
    That act of the Spartan boy is greatly praised,  
    Who hid the wolf under his cloak,  
    Letting it devour him, uncomplainingly.  
    It is braver, I think, to snatch the wolf forth
    And fight him openly, even in the street,
    Amid dust and howls of pain.
    The tongue may be an unruly member—  
    But silence poisons the soul.
    Berate me who will—I am content.

    Commentary on“Dorcas Gustine”

    Dorcas Gustine did not let any grievance go unchallenged, and her post-mortem pride is displayed in her report from beyond the grave.

    First Movement:   Not Well Liked

    I was not beloved of the villagers,
    But all because I spoke my mind,
    And met those who transgressed against me
    With plain remonstrance, hiding nor nurturing  
    Nor secret griefs nor grudges.

    The speaker Dorcas Gustine begins her monologue by asserting that the villagers of Spoon River did not particularly care for her.  She then offers her belief that they did not like her because she “spoke [her] mind.”   

    Dorcas did not allow any transgression against her to go unchallenged.  She calls her self-defense “plain remonstrance,” which implies that she is certain that she was simply defending herself with honesty.  

    Because of Dorcas’ habit of meeting every slight with a response, she declares that she was, therefore, able to go about without concealing those griefs, which she did not allow to grow in “secret,” nor did she keep her grudges hidden.

    What Dorcas does not seem to realize is that her failure to nurse secret griefs and grudges did not translate positively by the other villagers; she likely felt that airing each disaffection should be a healthy act.

    Second Movement:   Allusion to Plutarch

    That act of the Spartan boy is greatly praised,  
    Who hid the wolf under his cloak,  
    Letting it devour him, uncomplainingly.  

    Dorcas alludes to Plutarch’s tale of the Spartan boy who, to avoid detection, held a baby wolf—which is a fox in Plutarch’s telling—under his garment, and even though the wolf gnawed into the boy’s stomach, he did not grimace.  

    Dorcas does not realize the irony of her allusion.  The Spartan boy’s act demonstrated his severe training in conquering pain, while Dorcas demonstrates a self-involved attitude that will not accept pain or any discomfort.

    Third Movement:  An Open Fight

    It is braver, I think, to snatch the wolf forth
    And fight him openly, even in the street,
    Amid dust and howls of pain.

    Dorcas then explains that she finds the braver act “to snatch the wolf forth / And fight him openly.”  But such an act for the Spartan boy would have demonstrated weakness, as the boy explained,  ” . . . better to die without yielding to the pain than through being detected because of weakness of spirit to gain a life to be lived in disgrace.”

    Dorcas’ idea of bravery differs greatly from that of the Spartan boy.  Dorcas found that she had to remove the source of her consternation immediately.  She had no patience and probably felt herself superior to those who would “remonstrate” against her.

    Fourth Movement:  Not Content

    The tongue may be an unruly member—  
    But silence poisons the soul.
    Berate me who will—I am content.

    Dorcas concludes by admitting that “the tongue may be an unruly member,” but despite that unruliness, she believes holding one’s tongue is poisonous, that is, “silence poisons the soul.”  Dorcas then calls for those who disagree with her to “berate [her]” if they choose, and concludes by stating that she is “content.”

    The reader never discovers how Dorcas Gustine died.  That she is providing a post-mortem report, however, belies her claim that she is content.    As the reader has discovered from all the other deceased reporters, none can be thought to be content.  All of them display some grievance or strongly held tie to their former lives that they wish to share.

  • Edgar Lee Masters’ “The Town Marshal” and “Jack McGuire”

    005a Image/Edgar-Lee-Masters-Portrait.jpg
    Image: Edgar Lee Masters

    Edgar Lee Masters’ “The Town Marshal” and “Jack McGuire”

    In Edgar Lee Masters’ “The Town Marshal,” a man named Logan is hired by prohibitionists. Logan meets his demise because of his bullying personality.  In “Jack McGuire,” the protagonist escapes a lynch mob, and more is learned about the marshal he shot.

    Introduction and Text of “The Town Marshal”

    The epitaph “The Town Marshal” is followed in the sequence by “Jack McGuire” in Edgar Lee Masters’ American classic Spoon River Anthology.  The two need to be read together in order to get the total essence of the marshal’s personality, as well as his name.

    Logan, the town marshal, speaks in “The Town Marshal.” Although he remains nameless in his own poem, he is called “Logan” in the companion piece, “Jack McGuire.”   Marshal Logan, who was hired by prohibitionists,  is killed because he was a bully, but in the final analysis, he can be credited with admitting his fatal flaw.

    The Town Marshal

    The prohibitionists made me Town Marshal
    When the saloons were voted out,
    Because when I was a drinking man,  
    Before I joined the church, I killed a Swede  
    At the saw-mill near Maple Grove.
    And they wanted a terrible man,
    Grim, righteous, strong, courageous,
    And a hater of saloons and drinkers,
    To keep law and order in the village.
    And they presented me with a loaded cane
    With which I struck Jack McGuire  
    Before he drew the gun with which he killed me.
    The Prohibitionists spent their money in vain
    To hang him, for in a dream
    I appeared to one of the twelve jurymen
    And told him the whole secret story.
    Fourteen years were enough for killing me.

    Commentary on “The Town Marshal”

    The town marshal, hired by prohibitionists, is a man named Logan, who meets his demise because of his bullying personality.

    First Movement:  Marshal by Prohibition

    The prohibitionists made me Town Marshal
    When the saloons were voted out,
    Because when I was a drinking man,  
    Before I joined the church, I killed a Swede  
    At the saw-mill near Maple Grove.

    Logan begins by reporting that he became town marshal because of prohibition.  He had been “a drinking man” and had once “killed a Swede,” before he “joined the church.”  Logan’s reputation seemed to lend itself to the kind of individual the prohibitionists wanted to enlist to enforce the new statute. 

    Logan’s grating, obnoxious personality is that of a braggadocio, who is not shy about tooting his own horn.  His assessment of the conclusion of the trial of the man who shot him demonstrates this trait.

    Second Movement:  A Strong Anti-Boozer

    And they wanted a terrible man,
    Grim, righteous, strong, courageous,
    And a hater of saloons and drinkers,
    To keep law and order in the village.

    Logan explains that prohibitionists wanted a strong, anti-booze man who was “a terrible 

    man, / Grim, righteous, strong, courageous, / And a hater of saloons and drinkers.” Logan, no doubt, sees himself as his “terrible man,” who could “keep law and order in the village.” Again, the town marshal shows the high estimation he has of himself.  His strong sense of self-accomplishment motivates his actions.

    Third Movement:   Armed with a Loaded Cane

    And they presented me with a loaded cane
    With which I struck Jack McGuire  
    Before he drew the gun with which he killed me.

    Logan reveals that the prohibitionists armed him with “a loaded cane,” that is, a walking-stick that contains lead in one end, which renders it a legal weapon.   Quickly, the marshal cuts to the heart of the matter, stating that he struck Jack McGuire with this loaded cane just before McGuire pulled a gun and shot Logan dead.

    The details of the encounter with McGuire are recounted in McGuire’s testimony, the poem that follows “The Town Marshal” in the Spoon River Anthology.   After the reader is apprised of those details, Logan’s personality becomes clearer.

    Fourth Movement:  Fourteen Years instead of Hanging

    The Prohibitionists spent their money in vain
    To hang him, for in a dream
    I appeared to one of the twelve jurymen
    And told him the whole secret story.
    Fourteen years were enough for killing me.

    Logan boastfully takes credit for McGuire’s receiving a sentence of only fourteen years, despite the fact that the prohibitionists “spent their money in vain” trying to get McGuire to swing at the end of a rope.  

    Marshal Logan claims that he visited one of the jurymen in a dream and told him the whole sordid tale about how he was shot. The story vindicates McGuire, at least, enough so that hanging was not the recommended punishment.  

    Thus McGuire was sentenced to only fourteen years, and Logan feels that that punishment is appropriate.   At least, Logan does finally recognize himself as a bully and wants to see justice prevail.

    Edgar Lee Masters - Commemorative Stamp
    Image: Edgar Lee Masters – Commemorative Stamp

    Introduction and Text of “Jack McGuire”

    Edgar Lee Masters’ “Jack McGuire” from his American classic Spoon River Anthology is a companion piece to “The Town Marshal.”   In this epitaph “Jack McGuire,” the reader learns more about Logan, the town marshal, in addition to Logan’s “The Town Marshal” soliloquy.

    Jack McGuire

    They would have lynched me
    Had I not been secretly hurried away
    To the jail at Peoria.
    And yet I was going peacefully home,
    Carrying my jug, a little drunk,
    When Logan, the marshal, halted me,
    Called me a drunken hound and shook me,
    And, when I cursed him for it, struck me
    With that Prohibition loaded cane—
    All this before I shot him.
    They would have hanged me except for this:
    My lawyer, Kinsey Keene, was helping to land
    Old Thomas Rhodes for wrecking the bank,
    And the judge was a friend of Rhodes
    And wanted him to escape,
    And Kinsey offered to quit on Rhodes
    For fourteen years for me.
    And the bargain was made. I served my time
    And learned to read and write.


    Commentary on “Jack McGuire”

    Jack McGuire escapes a lynch mob, and more is learned about the marshal he shot.

    First Movement:  Potential Lynch Mob

    They would have lynched me
    Had I not been secretly hurried away
    To the jail at Peoria.

    Jack begins by reporting the startling news that he would have been hanged by a lynch mob, if he had not been “secretly hurried away / To the jail in Peoria.”   Jack then implies that his deed in Spoon River had worked up a number of folks who were ready to administer vigilante justice. this is, without a proper trial.

    Second Movement: Minding His Own Business

    And yet I was going peacefully home,
    Carrying my jug, a little drunk,
    When Logan, the marshal, halted me,
    Called me a drunken hound and shook me,

    Jack explains that he was minding his own business, “going peacefully home,” when he was accosted by “Logan, the marshal.”  Jack admits that he was “a little drunk” and that he was “carrying [his] jug” on his way home.

    But Logan, who was employed by the prohibitionists to enforce the ban on booze in Spoon River, stopped Jack and bullied him, calling him “a drunken hound.”  In his bullying fashion, Logan also invaded Jack’s personal space and “shook him.”

    Third Movement:  Violent Confrontation 

    And, when I cursed him for it, struck me
    With that Prohibition loaded cane—
    All this before I shot him.

    Jack reacted to Logan’s harassment by swearing at the marshal.  Logan then struck Jack with his “Prohibition loaded cane.”  Jack responded by drawing out his gun and shooting the marshal dead.

    Fourth Movement:  Avoiding Hanging

    They would have hanged me except for this:
    My lawyer, Kinsey Keene, was helping to land
    Old Thomas Rhodes for wrecking the bank,
    And the judge was a friend of Rhodes
    And wanted him to escape,
    And Kinsey offered to quit on Rhodes
    For fourteen years for me.

    Jack explains how he avoided the gallows, and his explanation differs from Logan’s.  Jack’s lawyer, Kinsey Keene, was also the counsel against “Old Thomas Rhodes” who was charged with “wrecking the bank.”  The judge in Jack’s case was a friend of Rhodes’ and wanted Rhodes to be acquitted.  So Jack’s lawyer Keene “offered to quit on Rhodes / For fourteen years for me.”

    The reader will recall that Logan interpreted the fourteen-year sentence very differently; Logan claimed that he appeared to a juryman in a dream and revealed his complicity in his own death, and that resulted in the short sentence for Jack.  

    Fifth Movement:  So He Learns to Read and Write

    And the bargain was made. I served my time
    And learned to read and write.

    Jack says he served his term and “learned to read and write.”  Jack, of course, knows nothing about Logan’s claim to have appeared in a dream to the juryman.   And Logan could not have known about the deal struck between the judge and Keene. 

    This disconnect opens up a fascinating arena for the evaluation of the worth of each man’s story.  While the reader accepts Jack’s version as probably the correct one, the reader cannot with certainty discount Logan’s version.

    A bitter irony prevails, however, that Jack, who actually took the life a fellow human being—as opposed to merely being a bully, as Logan was—appears to be the one who came out the winner; not only was his sentence light, but he also learned to read and write to boot.

  • Edgar Lee Masters’ “Theodore the Poet”

    Image:  Edgar Lee Masters - Portrait by Francis J. Quirk https://francisquirk.blogspot.com/2017/03/visit-to-national-portrait-gallery.html
    Image:  Edgar Lee Masters – Portrait by Francis J. Quirk

    Edgar Lee Masters’ “Theodore the Poet”

    The speaker in Edgar Lee Masters’ “Theodore the Poet” contemplates the purpose of life employing a comparison of crawfish and people.

    Introduction and Text of “Theodore the Poet”

    Edgar Lee Masters’ “Theodore the Poet” from Masters’ American classic Spoon River Anthology consists of two grand movements, each with three minor movements. The first grand movement focuses on Theodore’s intense scrutiny of crawfish. The second grand movement reveals that same level of study of people. 

    This complex arrangement fits the conception of this unique speaker as a “poet.”  As poets are makers, they need material for the making; unfortunately, Theodore offers no examples of his poetic products, only the moving part of his mind, gathered in those bits of materials.

    Theodore the Poet

    As a boy, Theodore, you sat for long hours
    On the shore of the turbid Spoon  
    With deep-set eye staring at the door of the crawfish’s burrow,
    Waiting for him to appear, pushing ahead,
    First his waving antennæ, like straws of hay,
    And soon his body, colored like soap-stone,
    Gemmed with eyes of jet.  
    And you wondered in a trance of thought  
    What he knew, what he desired, and why he lived at all.
    But later your vision watched for men and women
    Hiding in burrows of fate amid great cities,
    Looking for the souls of them to come out,
    So that you could see  
    How they lived, and for what,
    And why they kept crawling so busily
    Along the sandy way where water fails
    As the summer wanes.


    Commentary on “Theodore the Poet” 

    Edgar Lee Masters’ “Theodore the Poet” displays in a complex pattern of two grand movements, each with three minor movements.

    First Grand Movement:  Observation of Crawfish

    In the first grand movement, the speaker offers details gleaned from his hours of observing crawfish. This movement plays out in the first, second, and third minor movements.

    First Minor Movement:  Addressing His Alter Ego

    As a boy, Theodore, you sat for long hours
    On the shore of the turbid Spoon  
    With deep-set eye staring at the door of the crawfish’s burrow,
    Waiting for him to appear, pushing ahead,

    As Theodore addresses an alter ego, he is demonstrating the introspective nature of the poet. He begins by broaching the subject of his life-long habit of sitting by Spoon River “for long hours.” As Theodore sat peering intensely at the opening of the crawfish’s abode, the budding poet in him waited with curiosity for the crawfish to appear.

    Second Minor Movement:  Crawfish

    First his waving antennæ, like straws of hay,
    And soon his body, colored like soap-stone,
    Gemmed with eyes of jet.  

    The speaker then dramatizes his next act of talking to himself as he vividly describes the appearance of the crawfish followed by their activities. The crawfish’s antennae were waving, and they looked like “straws of hay.”  

    After the hay-like antennae appeared, the body of the crawfish soon emerged.  The crawfish body was the color of “soap-stone,” and it was “gemmed with eyes of jet.”  Theodore knows these details because he so studiously observed them.

    Third Minor Movement:  Philosophical Turn of Mind

    And you wondered in a trance of thought  
    What he knew, what he desired, and why he lived at all.

    In the final minor movement of the first grand movement, the speaker reveals what was on his mind as he watched the crawfish. He was, in fact, musing on and wondering about what the crawfish knew and what they desired.  Finally, he desired to understand why those creature even existed.   

    Theodore’s observations and musing demonstrate the philosophical nature of the mind of his ilk as a poet.  Poets like Ralph Waldo Emerson possessed that same kind of philosophical mind—observing, wondering, musing, and finally putting those musings down in written form.

    Second Grand Movement: Observation of People

    In the second grand movement, the speaker offers his observation of people.  This grand movement displays in the following fourth, fifth, and sixth  three minor movements.

    Fourth Minor Movement:  From Crawfish to People

    But later your vision watched for men and women
    Hiding in burrows of fate amid great cities,
    Looking for the souls of them to come out,

    In the second grand movement, later in Theodore’s life, instead of watching crawfish, he turned to observing people; thus he claims that “men and women” became the focus of his peering eye. 

    Because of Theodore’s former experience of waiting and watching for crawfish, the speaker/poet metaphorically refers to the places from which people exit as “burrows,” as he referred to the abode of the crawfish. 

    But he describes those people-burrows as great “hiding” places where those men and women play out their “fate amid great cities.”   Theodore then explains that he was watching the people to determine the nature of their souls; thus he was constantly searching for evidence of soulful behavior of the men and women he so studiously watched.

    Fifth Minor Movement:  Same Attitude

    So that you could see  
    How they lived, and for what,

    In this transitional movement, Theodore reveals that he watched the people with nearly the identical attitude that he had watched the crawfish: he wanted to understand the nature and procedure involved in the lives of those men and women as well as what those people desired out of life.  

    The philosophical mind of Theodore the Poet has drawn the inevitable parallel between human and animal life in such a way as to confound the minds of lesser observers.  Theodore’s observations have thus offered a unique poetic view of creation.

    Sixth Minor Movement:  The Question of Existence Remains

    And why they kept crawling so busily
    Along the sandy way where water fails
    As the summer wanes.

    Theodore wanted to understand people as well crawfish, but in the end, people became virtually indistinguishable from the crawfish.   In Theodore’s colorful description, just as the crawfish crawled over the sand, the people, in Theodore’s mind, took on the same quality of “crawling so busily / Along the sandy way.”

    Also like crawfish, those men and women seemed to be moving along that same “sandy way where water fails / As the summer wanes.”  Theodore has concluded that both crawfish and humankind seem to live rather useless lives.

    Because he leaves off his discussion without approaching his other main desire of knowing why those creatures, whether belonging to the animal kingdom or to the human race exist at all, he is implying that he will continue to wonder why. 

    And quite likely he has concluded that there is no answer that the human mind can ever conceive which can fully and finally answer that ultimate question of existence.

    Edgar Lee Masters - Commemorative Stamp
    Image: Edgar Lee Masters – Commemorative Stamp
  • Edgar Lee Masters’ “Zenas Witt”

    Image: Edgar Lee Masters https://www.best-poems.net/edgar_lee_masters/index.html#google_vignette
    Image: Edgar Lee Masters

    Edgar Lee Masters’ “Zenas Witt”

    One of Spoon River’s more vague speakers from the grave, “Zenas Witt” does make it clear that he suffered a miserable existence from age sixteen. 

    Introduction and Text of “Zenas Witt”

    Edgar Lee Masters’ “Zenas Witt” from Masters’ American classic Spoon River Anthology features an unfortunate character whose nerves, it would seem, led him to an early grave. Zenas is one of Edgar Lee Masters’ more vague speakers from the Spoon River graveyard.  

    This speaker does manage to impart the fact that his short life caused him great suffering before it was extinguished at an early age sometime vaguely after he had turned sixteen.  

    Zenas never becomes specific enough to let the reader know exactly when he died or what caused his demise.  That omission seems to be intentionally motivated in order to emphasize the young man’s poor memory and weakness of health.

    Zenas Witt

    I was sixteen, and I had the most terrible dreams,
    And specks before my eyes, and nervous weakness. 
    And I couldn’t remember the books I read,
    Like Frank Drummer who memorized page after page 
    And my back was weak, and I worried and worried,
    And I was embarrassed and stammered my lessons, 
    And when I stood up to recite I’d forget 
    Everything that I had studied. 
    Well, I saw Dr. Weese’s advertisement, 
    And there I read everything in print,
    Just as if he had known me; 
    And about the dreams which I couldn’t help. 
    So I knew I was marked for an early grave. 
    And I worried until I had a cough, 
    And then the dreams stopped.
    And then I slept the sleep without dreams 
    Here on the hill by the river.

    Commentary on “Zenas Witt”

    Zenas is fixated on his poor health issues.  He is especially disturbed about his inability to remember things he had learned.

    First Movement:   Fuzzy Thinking

    I was sixteen, and I had the most terrible dreams,
    And specks before my eyes, and nervous weakness. 
    And I couldn’t remember the books I read,
    Like Frank Drummer who memorized page after page 

    Zenas begins his discourse, by announcing that when he was sixteen years old, he had “the most terrible dreams.”  He saw “specks before [his] eyes.”  He reports his inability to remember books he had read. He likens his condition to “Frank Drummer,” who claimed to have memorized the entire Encyclopedia Britannica.  

    The disconnect between Zenas’ assertion that his condition was similar to Frank Drummer and his own description of his difficulty demonstrates the fuzzy thinking that the former seems to suffer in addition to his physical problems.

    Second Movement:  Bad Health

    And my back was weak, and I worried and worried,
    And I was embarrassed and stammered my lessons, 
    And when I stood up to recite I’d forget 
    Everything that I had studied. 

    Zenas continues to describe his unfortunate health issues:  he had a weak back, he worried excessively, he was easily embarrassed by his maladies, and when he had to stand up in class to recite his lessons, he would forget them.   Zenas’ memory was so bad that even though he had studied, he could never remember anything he had committed to memory.

    Third Movement:  Miracle Cure

    Well, I saw Dr. Weese’s advertisement, 
    And there I read everything in print,
    Just as if he had known me; 
    And about the dreams which I couldn’t help. 

    Zenas reports that he saw “Dr. Weese’s advertisement” and was attracted by what the ad said.  He read everything about Dr. Weese’s putative miracle cure.  Zenas felt that the doctor was describing his own situation, “just as if he had known me.” 

    The doc even knows about the dreams, and Zenas feels he must emphasis that he could not control the dreams.  Such a confession implies that Zenas might have believed he had control over his other woes but felt guilty that he did not do so.

    Fourth Movement:   No Miracle Cur

    So I knew I was marked for an early grave. 
    And I worried until I had a cough, 
    And then the dreams stopped. 

    Nothing ever came of this possible miracle cure, and Zenas admits that he was sure he would die early.  Thus, he continued to worry right up until the time developed a cough.     He says that the dreams abruptly came to a halt.  He does not elaborate or even hint at how long he continued to suffer his nervousness, nightmares, and poor memory.

    Fifth Movement:   No Dreaming on the Hill

    And then I slept the sleep without dreams 
    Here on the hill by the river.

    Suddenly, without fanfare, Zenas is dead.  He dramatically and poetically refers to his condition as “slee[ping] the sleep without dreams / Here on the hill by the river.” Zenas is one of the more tight-lipped deceased reporters from the Spoon River graveyard.  

    The reader never learns the specifics of his illnesses and is left to guess their nature as well as just how long Zenas had to suffer them.  He also leaves unclear just exactly what eventually killed him.

  • Edgar Lee Masters’ “Charlie French”

    005a Image/Edgar-Lee-Masters-Portrait.jpg
    Image: Edgar Lee Masters

    Edgar Lee Masters’ “Charlie French”

    Charlie French died of lockjaw, wondering which of his friends had shot off the cap pistol that delivered the fatal blow. 

    Introduction and Text of “Charlie French”

    Edgar Lee Masters’ “Charlie French” from Spoon River Anthology features its character musing about who might have been responsible for his contracting lockjaw which lead to his death.  

    The little drama creates a speaker in Charlie who finds himself obsessed with a specific detail.   After dying from this dreadful disease, he has his mind fixed upon who did it, who “snapped the toy pistol against” his hand.

    Charlie French

    Did you ever find out
    Which one of the O’Brien boys it was
    Who snapped the toy pistol against my hand?  
    There when the flags were red and white  
    In the breeze and “Bucky” Estil
    Was firing the cannon brought to Spoon River  
    From Vicksburg by Captain Harris;
    And the lemonade stands were running  
    And the band was playing,  
    To have it all spoiled
    By a piece of a cap shot under the skin of my hand,
    And the boys all crowding about me saying:
    “You’ll die of lock-jaw, Charlie, sure.”
    Oh, dear! oh, dear!
    What chum of mine could have done it?

    Commentary on “Charlie French”

    After dying of lockjaw, Charlie French has continued to wonder and obsess about which of his friends had shot off the cap pistol that delivered the fatal blow.

    First Movement:  Unidentified Listener

    Did you ever find out
    Which one of the O’Brien boys it was
    Who snapped the toy pistol against my hand?  

    Charlie is addressing an eclipsed listener, that is, a listener who cannot be identified.  Traditionally, when a poet’s speaker seems to be addressing no one, the context usually reveals that the speaker is, in fact, musing to him/herself.  But this is not the case with Charlie.   

    Charlie French wants to know who the culprit is who shot off a cap gun against his hand.  He asks the question at the beginning of his discourse and then concludes the discourse with the same question.  After his musing, he remains in the dark about who the cap-gun shooter was; thus he repeats the question.

    Second Movement:   A Civil War Enactment

    There when the flags were red and white  
    In the breeze and “Bucky” Estil
    Was firing the cannon brought to Spoon River  
    From Vicksburg by Captain Harris;

    Charlie describes the event at which his fatality occurred.  The description reveals a Civil War enactment or some other military observance.  There were “red and white” flags flapping in the breeze, while “Bucky” Estil was firing up the cannon.  

    The cannon had been transported to Spoon River by “Captain Harris,” who brought it all the way from Vicksburg. The Civil War era relic suggests that the celebration might have been a commemoration of that war, the American Civil War 1861–1865.

    Third Movement:  The Cap-Gun Mishap

    And the lemonade stands were running  
    And the band was playing,  
    To have it all spoiled
    By a piece of a cap shot under the skin of my hand,

    In addition to the cannon fire and flags, there were lemonade stands and a “band was playing.”  Then upon this jubilant scene intrudes Charlie’s unfortunate and ultimately fatal cap-gun shooting.  The day was moving along splendidly, “To have it all spoiled / By a piece of a cap shot under the skin of my hand.”

    Fourth Movement:   Strong Suggestibility

    And the boys all crowding about me saying:
    “You’ll die of lock-jaw, Charlie, sure.”

    Seeing the cap-shot stain under Charlie’s skin, the other boys gathered around him and started making comments:  “You’ll die of lock-jaw, Charlie, sure.”   The suggestion frightened Charlie so severely that he actually did contract the disease, and then he expired, leaving the reader little knowledge about this character other than his strong suggestibility.

    Fifth Movement:   It’s a Who Dunnit

    Oh, dear! oh, dear!
    What chum of mine could have done it?

    The exclamation, “Oh, dear! oh, dear!,” connects two strands of thought and activity:   First, the boys who were observing Charlie’s cap-gun shot hand are thinking thus, if, in fact they are not the ones projecting this utterance.

    And second, Charlie himself definitely engages this “oh dear” sentiment about his own health’s prospects; therefore, the implication is that Charlie let out this cry.    Charlie’s main reason for carrying on this discourse is further emphasized as he continues to wonder, “What chum of mine could have done it?”

  • Edgar Lee Masters’ “Johnnie Sayre”

    Image:  Edgar Lee Masters - Portrait by Francis J. Quirk https://francisquirk.blogspot.com/2017/03/visit-to-national-portrait-gallery.html
    Image:  Edgar Lee Masters – Portrait by Francis J. Quirk https://francisquirk.blogspot.com/2017/03/visit-to-national-portrait-gallery.html

    Edgar Lee Masters’ “Johnnie Sayre”

    Edgar Lee Masters’ character Johnnie Sayre speaks to the Divine Belovèd (God), remembering the excruciating pain that resulted in his death, finding grace in his early demise.

    Introduction and Text of “Johnnie Sayre”

    In Edgar Lee Masters’ “Johnnie Sayre” from his American classic Spoon River Anthology, the speaker is talking to the Divine Creator, while most of the characters address their remarks to the citizens of Spoon River or one of their relatives.

    Some of the characters who speak in this remarkable sequence become admirable in the eyes of their readers/listeners, while others invite further disdain, just as they obviously did in their miserable lifetimes. 

    Johnnie Sayre is one the more admirable characters.  He accepts responsibility for his own transgressions in life, and he humbly offers his love and appreciation to the Divine Reality (God) for the soul guidance he understands he is being given.

    Johnnie Sayre

    Father, thou canst never know
    The anguish that smote my heart  
    For my disobedience, the moment I felt
    The remorseless wheel of the engine
    Sink into the crying flesh of my leg.
    As they carried me to the home of widow Morris
    I could see the school-house in the valley  
    To which I played truant to steal rides upon the trains.  
    I prayed to live until I could ask your forgiveness—
    And then your tears, your broken words of comfort!
    From the solace of that hour I have gained infinite happiness.
    Thou wert wise to chisel for me:  
    “Taken from the evil to come.”

    Commentary of “Johnnie Sayre”

    Masters’ character Johnnie Sayre speaks to the Divine Belovèd, remembering the excruciating pain that resulted in his death, finding grace in his early demise.

    First Movement:  Addressing His Creator

    Father, thou canst never know
    The anguish that smote my heart  
    For my disobedience, the moment I felt
    The remorseless wheel of the engine
    Sink into the crying flesh of my leg.

    In a prayerful mode, Johnnie Sayre addresses his Maker, exaggerating that the Creator, Who is both omnipresent and omniscient, cannot know how much Johnnie suffered.   Of course, God knows such, but by exclaiming that He cannot, Johnnie implies that the depth is well beyond human comprehension.

    Johnnie was stealing a ride on a train, when he finds himself losing his leg to “[t]he remorseless wheel of the engine” that “[sank] into the crying flesh of [his] leg.”  Johnnie’s anguish, however, is not that his leg was being crushed.

    That unhappy accident merely triggers his guilt over the act of theft.  He suddenly becomes aware that he is paying a karmic debt, and his capability to understand and accept that debt causes him great “anguish.”

    Second Movement:  Remembering His Transgressions

    As they carried me to the home of widow Morris
    I could see the school-house in the valley  
    To which I played truant to steal rides upon the trains.

    Johnnie is reminded of his transgression against one of the commandments as he is being transported to the nearby home of the widow Morris.   As the rescuers move Johnnie to the woman’s home, he could see his “school-house in the valley.”  He admits that he played hooky from school “to steal rides upon the trains.”

    Third Movement:   Desirous of God’s Forgiveness

    I prayed to live until I could ask your forgiveness—
    And then your tears, your broken words of comfort!

    Johnnie confesses that he wanted to live until he could beg God for His forgiveness.  He talks to God as he would his human father.   Johnnie expects to see God shed tears for His son’s transgression, and he awaits God’s “broken words of comfort!”  At this point, Johnnie shows a touching sweetness in his relationship with the Divine.

    Johnnie accepts his responsibility for his own behavior; he does not blame God or the Spoon River citizens as so many others in the cemetery do, for example “Minerva Jones” and “Daisy Fraser.”  

    Fourth Movement: Crediting the Divine Creator

    From the solace of that hour I have gained infinite happiness. Thou wert wise to chisel for me:  
    “Taken from the evil to come.”

    Johnnie is amply rewarded because of his attitude.  He finds “solace” and furthermore “gain[s] infinite happiness.”  He credits the Divine Creator for “chisel[ing] for me” a life that he would probably have been too weak to have chosen for himself.

    Johnnie realizes that God has rescued him from all the “evil to come”; he knows that the way he was living could have only brought more evil into his life, and through God’s grace, he has been spared that evil, and at the same time given succor.  

    The metaphorical chiseling also implies that perhaps upon Johnnie’s tombstone is chiseled the phrase, “Taken from the evil to come.”  In that case, it becomes clear that Johnnie’s exploits were well known by those close to him, which makes Johnnie’s attitude even more admirable.    

    Instead of cursing those who knew of his “evil,” he accepts their admonitions and rightly credits Divine Intervention that finally liberates him from further wrongs.  Johnnie remains one of the more admirable characters residing in the Spoon River after-life menagerie of characters.

  • Edgar Lee Masters’ “Knowlt Hoheimer”

    005a Image/Edgar-Lee-Masters-Portrait.jpg
    Image: Edgar Lee Masters

    Edgar Lee Masters’ “Knowlt Hoheimer”

    Edgar Lee Masters’ “Knowlt Hoheimer” features a 10-line poem (epitaph) with two movements.  As usual, this epitaph reveals the character of the speaker, even as he tries to castigate others.

    Introduction and Text of “Knowlt Hoheimer”

    In Edgar Lee Masters’ Spoon River Anthology, the short poem, or epitaph as Masters called them, “Knowlt Hoheimer” features a man who regrets among other things that he had the misfortune of dying in battle.

    Knowlt Hoheimer

    I was the first fruits of the battle of Missionary Ridge.  
    When I felt the bullet enter my heart
    I wished I had staid at home and gone to jail
    For stealing the hogs of Curl Trenary,
    Instead of running away and joining the army.
    Rather a thousand times the country jail  
    Than to lie under this marble figure with wings,  
    And this granite pedestal  
    Bearing the words, “Pro Patria.”  
    What do they mean, anyway?

    Commentary on “Knowlt Hoheimer”

    According to Knowlt, he simply joined the army to avoid jail.  He stole some livestock belonging to another man, and thus faced serving time for the crime.

    First Movement:  The Costs of Avoiding Jail 

    I was the first fruits of the battle of Missionary Ridge.  
    When I felt the bullet enter my heart
    I wished I had staid at home and gone to jail
    For stealing the hogs of Curl Trenary,
    Instead of running away and joining the army.

    Knowlt is claiming to have been the first casualty of “the battle of Missionary Ridge.”  He died after “the bullet enter[ed his] heart.”  Knowlt had signed up with the army and went off to war to avoid being incarcerated.  After stealing some farm animals belonging to Curl Trenary, Knowlt simply  ran off to join the army.  

    Because he is now dead, having become the first to die in the battle in which his infantry was engaged, he deeply regrets his choice.  He discovers that serving some jail time would be preferable to dying in war.

    Second Movement:  Regretting a Decision

    Rather a thousand times the country jail  
    Than to lie under this marble figure with wings,  
    And this granite pedestal  
    Bearing the words, “Pro Patria.”  
    What do they mean, anyway?

    Knowlt now professes great regret over his deadly decision.  He now figures that being jailed a thousand times would be better than dying and now lying under a slab of concrete with an inappropriate angelic symbol marking his grave.   Knowlt supposes that he would still be living, had he served his time in jail.  He imagines that serving a thousand jail terms would beat dying.

    Apparently, Knowlt has been recognized as a war hero. He rests beneath a majestic monument which he describes: “this marble figure with wings, / And this granite pedestal / Bearing the words, “Pro Patria.”  Knowlt reveals that he does not even comprehend that “Pro Patria” means “for country.”  He asks rather sarcastically, “What do they mean, anyway?”

    That he does not even know the Latin phrase suggests that he would not believe the sentiment even if he understood the words in translation.  He likely believes along with the speaker in “Dulce et Decorum Est” that Horace’s old adage was a lie.  Knowlt, by revealing what he does not know, further reveals his ignorant narcissism.

  • Edgar Lee Masters’ “Daisy Fraser” 

    Image: Edgar Lee Masters https://chicagoliteraryhof.org/inductees/profile/edgar-lee-masters
    Image: Edgar Lee Masters – Chicago Literary Hall of Fame

    Edgar Lee Masters’ “Daisy Fraser” 

    In Edgar Lee Masters’  epitaph “Daisy Fraser,” the villainous character of “Daisy Fraser” is revealed as she tries to destroy the reputations of other residents of Spoon River.

    Introduction and Text of “Daisy Fraser”

    The character “Daisy Fraser” from Edgar Lee Masters’ American classic work Spoon River Anthology reports the immoral and illegal acts of her fellow Spoon River citizens solely for the purpose of rehabilitating her own reputation for villainy.  Readers will note her scheme of employing gossipy questions to unleash her venom.

    Daisy Fraser

    Did you ever hear of Editor Whedon
    Giving to the public treasury any of the money he received
    For supporting candidates for office?
    Or for writing up the canning factory
    To get people to invest?
    Or for suppressing the facts about the bank, 
    When it was rotten and ready to break?
    Did you ever hear of the Circuit Judge
    Helping anyone except the “Q” railroad, 
    Or the bankers? Or did Rev. Peet or Rev. Sibley
    Give any part of their salary, earned by keeping still, 
    Or speaking out as the leaders wished them to do, 
    To the building of the water works? 
    But I—Daisy Fraser who always passed 
    Along the streets through rows of nods and smiles,
    And coughs and words such as “there she goes,”
    Never was taken before Justice Arnett 
    Without contributing ten dollars and costs 
    To the school fund of Spoon River!

    Commentary on “Daisy Fraser”

    Likely a prostitute, Daisy Fraser’s nasty character comes to light as she trashes the reputations of other residents of Spoon River.

    First Movement:  Political Improprieties

    Did you ever hear of Editor Whedon
    Giving to the public treasury any of the money he received
    For supporting candidates for office?

    The speaker begins with a question that implicates “Editor Whedon” in political improprieties, that is, taking money for “supporting candidates for office.”  But the speaker wants to know if the editor ever gave that money to the “public treasury.”

    Of course, her rhetorical question is implying that he, in fact, did not. And she continues her questioning filled with further implications of political shenanigans.  The fact that she is choosing easy targets should alert the reader early on regarding what is happening in Daisy’s mind.

    Second Movement:   Kickbacks

    Or for writing up the canning factory
    To get people to invest?
    Or for suppressing the facts about the bank, 
    When it was rotten and ready to break?

    In the second movement, Daisy continues her rhetorical queries, wondering if the illegal funds from the canning factory were given to the public treasury.  Again, she is suggesting that the money was used by the editor for lining his own pocket.  The editor also received kickbacks for hiding the financial condition of the bank, when it was on the verge of folding.

    The editor of the newspaper should have been revealing these unsavory facts about these institutions, but instead, he took money and kept quiet, if the reader believes as Daisy does.  Daisy wants to demonstrate that she is decrying that fact that freedom of the press can be abused.

    Third Movement:   A Judge on the Take

    Did you ever hear of the Circuit Judge
    Helping anyone except the “Q” railroad, 
    Or the bankers? Or did Rev. Peet or Rev. Sibley
    Give any part of their salary, earned by keeping still, 
    Or speaking out as the leaders wished them to do, 
    To the building of the water works? 

    The third movement contains two movements that are blended.  The first part features the rhetorical question, asking if her listeners ever knew of the “Circuit Judge” giving aid to ordinary citizens instead of the “Q” railroad and bankers. Daisy now focuses on a judicial officer who blinks when influential parties commit illegal acts.

    The accusation again includes the implication that like the editor, the judge is also on the take.  But then she immediately focuses on the religious establishment by again questioning whether the reverends Peet and Sibley had ever contributed to the public works, that is, “water works,” any of the money they received by keeping quiet about the graft.  

    Not only was the press corrupt but the legal and religious institutions were rife with corruption as well, and of course with a press acquiescing instead of revealing the face of that corruption, the corruption is likely not only to continue but to spread.

    Fourth Movement:   Unreliable Witness

    But I—Daisy Fraser who always passed 
    Along the streets through rows of nods and smiles,
    And coughs and words such as “there she goes,”
    Never was taken before Justice Arnett 
    Without contributing ten dollars and costs 
    To the school fund of Spoon River!

    In the final movement, all of Daisy’s implied accusations take a tumble.  When Daisy Fraser appeared before Justice Arnett, she always had to pay up, “contributing ten dollars and costs / To the school fund of Spoon River!”

    Daisy reveals, if only by implication, her own misdeeds.  She bristled under the “nods and smiles” and “coughs and words such as ‘there she goes’.”  She would observe people’s reaction to her as she walked down the streets, and she keenly resented them for those responses.  

    So she attempts to make herself seem better by blackening the reputations of others; therefore, whether all of that graft took place or not, the reader does not know, because Daisy has proven herself an unreliable witness.

  • Edgar Lee Masters’  “Trainor, the Druggist”

    Image:  Edgar Lee Masters -  Alchetron https://alchetron.com/Edgar-Lee-Masters
    Image:  Edgar Lee Masters –  Alchetron

    Edgar Lee Master’  “Trainor, the Druggist”

    Trainor, the Druggist, offers an additional perspective on the Pantier marriage.

    Introduction and Text of “Trainor, the Druggist”

    Edgar Lee Masters’ “Trainor, the Druggist” from Spoon River Anthology offers a final installment covering the pitiful story of the Pantiers:  Mr. and Mrs. Benjamin Pantier and their son, Reuben. 

    Trainor, the chemist/druggist, dramatizes his take on the Pantiers’ marriage as he philosophizes about how chemicals and personalities may combine to produce results unlike either of the components.

    Trainor, the Druggist

    Only the chemist can tell, and not always the chemist,
    What will result from compounding
    Fluids or solids.
    And who can tell
    How men and women will interact
    On each other, or what children will result?
    There were Benjamin Pantier and his wife,
    Good in themselves, but evil toward each other:
    He oxygen, she hydrogen,
    Their son, a devastating fire.
    I Trainor, the druggist, a mixer of chemicals,
    Killed while making an experiment,
    Lived unwedded.

    Interpretive Reading of “Trainor the Druggist” 

    Commentary on “Trainor, the Druggist”

    Edgar Lee Masters just could not let go of the Pantiers; in “Trainor, the Druggist,” yet another and final installment focusing on the couple is offered.

    First Movement:  Begins by Contradicting Himself

    Only the chemist can tell, and not always the chemist,
    What will result from compounding
    Fluids or solids.

    Trainor begins by remarking and somewhat contradicting himself about what a chemist can know.  He first states that “only” a chemist can know the results of combining certain substances, but he quickly adds that not even a chemist can “always” know the result of “compounding / Fluids and solids.”

    By using the substances “fluids and solids,” Trainor avoids sounding overly esoteric and confusing in his statement, although later he settles on the use of “oxygen” and “hydrogen” to express the natures of the Pantiers.

    Second Movement:  Who?  Indeed!

    And who can tell
    How men and women will interact
    On each other, or what children will result?

    Trainor then asks a rhetorical question, wondering who can ever predict how a certain man and a certain woman might react to their relationship.  He also wonders, “what children will result?”

    Of course, no one can know how any given couple will eventually grow in a relationship, and the possibilities are endless, as are the possibilities of the kinds of children that might spring from any given relationship.  The chemist can know how certain chemicals will react with each, but even the chemist will have to admit that many combinations have yet to be tried.

    Third Movement:  The Pantiers

    There were Benjamin Pantier and his wife,
    Good in themselves, but evil toward each other:
    He oxygen, she hydrogen,
    Their son, a devastating fire.

    In the third movement, Trainor focuses on the Pantiers, concluding that each was “good in themselves.”  But when they were bound in a relationship, they were “evil toward each other.”

    Trainor then likens Benjamin to “oxygen,” while Mrs. Benjamin was like “hydrogen.”  But the combination was, unfortunately, not in a useful proportion that would result, for example, in water; it was some combination that produces “fire.”  Trainor says, “Their son, a devastating fire.”

    Fourth Movement:  Trainor, Somewhat Ditzy

    I Trainor, the druggist, a mixer of chemicals,
    Killed while making an experiment,
    Lived unwedded.

    In the final movement, the reader learns that Trainor was killed while “making an experiment.”  As a “mixer of chemicals,” Trainor turns out to be incompetent, but he reports that he “lived unwedded,” which, to Trainor’s way of thinking, gives him at least a measure of pride of achievement.

    Of course, the reader will remember that Reuben Pantier turned his life around and was able to extinguish the “devastating fire” in himself—an eventuality that also underscores the incompetence of the druggist.

    The Pantier Sequence

    The five epigraphs that comprise the “Pantier Sequence”: 

    1.  Benjamin Pantier  A husband who appears to be weakling allowing himself to be cowed by his wife, an arrogant bully.
    2. Mrs. Benjamin Pantier  Unbridled arrogance, overweening vanity along with cowardly weakness have combined to bring about the destruction of the marriage of Mr. and Mrs. Benjamin Pantier.
    3. Reuben Pantier  Reuben Pantier’s colorful character helps dramatize the power of spiritual love for healing the mind, heart, and soul, even through the distance of miles and decades.  Reuben is the son of the dysfunctional couple Mr. and Mrs. Benjamin Pantier.
    4. Emily Sparks  The epitaph is the fourth entry in the sequence of five epitaphs featuring a dysfunctional couple, their son, and the latter’s influential mentor.
    5.  Trainor, the Druggist  This epitaph offers a final installment covering the pitiful story of the Pantiers:  Mr. and Mrs. Benjamin Pantier and their son Reuben.
  • Edgar Lee Masters’ “Judge Somers”

    Image:   Edgar Lee Masters http://www.jackmasters.net/mastelm.html Jack Masters
    Image: Edgar Lee Masters – Jack Masters

    Edgar Lee Masters’ “Judge Somers”

    Judge Somers’ complaint demonstrates that he is jealous of a man whom he deems to occupy a lower rung on the social status ladder than himself. 

    Introduction and Text of “Judge Somers”

    The class warfare that rages in the Spoon River reportage becomes evident as readers make their way through Edgar Lee Masters‘ American classic, Spoon River Anthology.  

    Businessmen, doctors, lawyers, judges, and politicians are the special targets of many of those whose employment ranges from simple shopkeepers, to farmers, to teachers, and householders whose outside job or career is never named.  Of course, preachers and other religious figures seldom come off well in these dramas either, likely owing to the atheist leanings of their creator.

    And the truly lowly dregs of society—murderers, prostitutes, adulterers, drunks, and thieves—are often given a bit too much of the benefit of doubt.  The good-hearted prostitute is often more credible than the banker despite the fact that his heart may be of equal goodness. 

    As in contemporary society where racism remains the primary cudgel of race-baiting hypocrites, back a century or so ago, the -ism du jour was classism, thus the emphasis on class warfare.

    While many of the epitaphs in Edgar Lee Masters’ American classic reveal issues motivated by class warfare, “Judge Somers” offers one of the most pronounced, as the judge deems himself better than his peers.

    The speaker in the epitaph “Judge Somers” is the judge himself, who wants to know why a man of importance, such as himself, has died unnoticed while the town drunk has been well noted.

    Judge Somers

    How does it happen, tell me,
    That I who was the most erudite of lawyers,
    Who knew Blackstone and Coke
    Almost by heart, who made the greatest speech
    The court-house ever heard, and wrote
    A brief that won the praise of Justice Breese—
    How does it happen, tell me,
    That I lie here unmarked, forgotten,
    While Chase Henry, the town drunkard,
    Has a marble block, topped by an urn,
    Wherein Nature, in a mood ironical,
    Has sown a flowering weed? 

    Commentary on “Judge Somers”

    Judge Somers’ complaint demonstrates that he is jealous of a man he deems to occupy a lower rung on the social status ladder than he does.

    First Movement:  Why Me?

    How does it happen, tell me,
    That I who was the most erudite of lawyers,
    Who knew Blackstone and Coke
    Almost by heart, who made the greatest speech
    The court-house ever heard, and wrote
    A brief that won the praise of Justice Breese— 

    This poem consists of two movements each beginning with a command embedded in a question.  The judge is demanding an answer to his question in both instances.  

    Judge Somers begins by asserting his demand/question, posited with “How does it happen, tell me.”  But in the first movement, he does not finish the question proper; he merely prefaces it by reporting all of his achievements.

    The judge feigns no modesty in his self-evaluation but flatly asserts that he was the most brilliant of attorneys.  Part of his erudition and brilliance was due to his having “almost by heart Blackstone and Coke.”  

    The judge is alluding to two British legal writers—Sir William Blackstone (1723-1780), who wrote the Commentaries, and Sir Edward Coke(1552-1634), who wrote and published treatises titled Institutes of the laws of England.

    The judge’s knowledge of these works sounds much more important than it is; a lawyer or judge practicing in a 19th century Illinois rural community would hardly be confronted with issues dealt with in these obscure legal works.

    Judge Somers then boasts that he “made the greatest speech / The court-house ever heard.”  In his own mind, not only was he a great orator, but he also “wrote / A brief that won the praise of Justice Breese.”  

    Again, the fictional speaker Somers alludes to a real-life justice, Justice Sidney Breese, who served on the Illinois Supreme Court as both a judge and as chief justice.  

    Second Movement:  How Does It Happen to Me?

    How does it happen, tell me,
    That I lie here unmarked, forgotten,
    While Chase Henry, the town drunkard,
    Has a marble block, topped by an urn,
    Wherein Nature, in a mood ironical,
    Has sown a flowering weed?

    So with such a shining reputation for accomplishment, the judge again poses his demand/question:  “How does it happen, tell me.”  He then completes the question for he wants to know why he is left to “lie here unmarked, forgotten.”  

    And to make matters worse, that “town drunkard” and scoundrel “Chase Henry” has been afforded “a marble block, topped by an urn.”  The judge adds that, “Nature,” with a splash of irony “has sown a flowering weed.”   

    The jealous judge then takes a bit of comfort from the ironic weed, but still he continues to chafe at the fact that he is forgotten while the town drunk seems to be celebrated.

    The reader knows a secret that the judge obviously does not know: that Henry’s memorial has nothing to do with Henry but can be laid at the door of rivalry between the Protestants and the Catholics.