Clods and Pebbles

"Love seeketh not itself to please,

Nor for itself hath any care,

But for another gives its ease,

And builds a Heaven in Hell's despair."

So sung a little Clod of Clay,

Trodden with the cattle's feet,

But a Pebble of the brook

Warbled out these meters meet:

"Love seeketh only Self to please,

To bind another to its delight,

Joys in another's loss of ease,

And builds a Hell in Heaven's despite."

This poem, titled The Clod & the Pebble, was penned by commentarist William Blake. Blake struck a chord of discord in The Clod & the Pebble, a chord which resonates to this day. In this piece he clearly nails a distinction between the upper and lower realms of society. By addressing the contrast of social status he politely convicts the reader to view the upper (the pebble) society as a selfish, therefore despicable, tyrant. Yet strangely enough although he provokes a sense of empathy for the clod he does not, as we might, create an uprising. Right now would be the appropriate time for a heroic revolutionary to step in to play. But no, instead he allows the piece to strike at us almost in an emotionally convicting fashion. The obvious contrast of a selfless Hell as regards a selfish Heaven (or selfless Heaven vs. a selfish Hell) is poignantly accentuated. Yet in the piece they inevitably meet. Social status, the time frame in which they lived, and so many other agents contributed to the fact that they were, for lack of description, stuck in that mould. They knew no better. Blake came along to enlighten them, show them the mistake being made. Currently we accept the huddled masses and the downtrodden, but at that time they had nowhere to turn. People were ignorant of the situation and did (here is where it gets exasperating, especially in reference to the poor children being abused) nothing to remedy the situation.

In my own ramblings I was reminiscent of The Great Divorce by C. S. Lewis. A book Lewis detonated as a response to Blake who had wedded Heaven and Hell as one. Lewis attempted to divorce this concept in his own work, and yet, one wonders if Blake, according to this piece at least, didn’t want the same divorce to occur?