Kelsey Fuller's Blog Post #2

            For my second blog post I decided to further compare Elizabeth Siddall’s and Dante Gabriel Rossetti’s poetry that we looked at in class. Both individuals address topics of love quite frequently, though often in strikingly different manners. In Siddall’s “Dead Love,” the last stanza states that:

            Sweet, never weep for what cannot be,

            For this God has not given,

            If the merest dream of love were true

            Then, sweet, we should be in heaven,

            And this is only earth, my dear,

            Where true love is not given. (“Dead Love” 13-18)

Siddall is making the claim that love can be true only in heaven, for on earth “love is seldom true”  (“Dead Love” 2) and passes on eventually. When this is compared to Rossetti’s “The Blessed Damozel” of 1881 there are a few similarities in theme. “The Blessed Damozel,” in abbreviated terms, is about two lovers separated by the death of the lady. The pair muses the fate of their love in their respective spheres, heaven and earth. While Siddall’s poem emphasizes the idea that true love is unachievable on earth, Rossetti offers a different view on the subject. Based on “The Blessed Damozel,” Rossetti paints a picture where true love is possible on earth, yet he appears unsure what will happen to this love when it is separated between heaven and earth. The final stanza states:

            (I saw her smile.) But soon their path

            Was vague in distant spheres:

            And then she cast her arms along

            The golden barriers,

            And laid her face between her hands,

            And wept. (I heard her tears.) (“The Blessed Damozel” 139-144)

I believe these “golden barriers” refer to the separation of the lovers between heaven and earth. There is a sad and desperate tone to the final stanza as though these lovers will not overcome their separation. I think it is striking to consider that the situations described in Siddall and Rossetti’s poems. Siddall’s poem claims that true love cannot be found on earth and Rossetti’s lovers are clearly meant to have found that together. While it would be easy to jump to the conclusion that Siddall and Rossetti are referencing their own relationship I don’t think it is fair to blindly apply the poem to that situation given we do not know when Siddall wrote her poems. But, I think the comparison of Rossetti’s “Body’s Beauty” and “Soul’s Beauty” to Siddall’s “The Lust of the Eyes” can aid in the connection of their poetry to their relationship.

            “The Lust of the Eyes” appears to be written from the perspective of a man leaving his wife or “lady.” On the other hand, Rossetti’s two poems contrast a woman’s sexual beauty with her soul’s beauty. I think “Body’s Beauty” and “Soul’s Beauty” could easily be interpreted as discussing the beauty of a mistress with the beauty of a wife, respectively. It is interesting then, that Siddall chooses to discuss, from a husband’s perspective, the “pros and cons” of his wife. The connection between these poems is undeniable and speaks to the issue of how the two artists should be approached from an Art History perspective. While it is important to treat each as an individual artist, significant in their own way, they are clearly intertwined with one another. These potential call and responses within Siddall and Rossetti’s poetry present a fascinating research topic.