Habiba Hussain

The Importance of Form in Deniall

George Herberts Deniall is an example of religious poetry that functions as a lament or
a complaint made to God against His indifference and His failure to hear the supplicant. The fact
that the poet still insists on praying to God, though he thinks that God does not even hear,
highlights one of the ironies of the poem encapsulated in the title; the poet is in denial. He either
fails to accept that God is in fact unhearing and that all his supplications are futile. Alternatively,
the poet, in making this reproach, is denying that Godin His wisdomresponds in ways that
the poet may not immediately understand. The form of the poem supports the latter idea; as the
poem evolves structurally, we see the poets prayer for the restoration of order and a fluid tune,
being fulfilled.
The first two stanzas of the poem are structurally the most disturbed. The poem generally
follows the iambic meter. However, this is much more disturbed in the opening stanzas and
becomes more regular as the poem progresses. The poet also uses many images of brokenness in
the beginning: Then was my heart broken, as was my verse (l. 3), and My bent thoughts, like
a brittle bow (l. 6). Other than the image itself, the fact that he uses caesura to divide these
particular verses into two sub-parts also reinforces the quality of the poets damaged heart and
disappointed mind. In reading out the poem, the readers voice would also pause at these two
commas, creating the effect of a persons voice catching when they are in pain or when their
thoughts are erratic. In the first stanza which marks the higher extremity of the poets lament
of the lack of coherence and fluency the rhyme scheme is also different and more discordant
than the rest of the poem. The first, second and third lines all rhyme, while the third one does
not. This causes a more stunted pattern of sound when compared to the other stanzas where the
first and third lines rhyme, and the second and fourth lines also rhyme.
There are some feminine endings in the opening stanzas, such as in the first line of the
poem: When my devotions could not pierce. However, these grow less in number with the
progress of the poem as well. The effect this produces is of a poet who is disoriented at the
beginning, and as he analyzes the nature of his problem, towards the heart of the poem, becomes
more collected and is able to voice his experiences better. The middle portion of the poem
presents the poets journey through his mind, heart and soul, and the impact on all of them owing
to what he perceives as Gods refusal to Come (l. 14). He emphasizes the extent of lack of
harmony in his thoughts, by showing the opposing ends of pleasure (l. 8) and thunder (l.9)
that they break off and scatter to. He also details how both his knees and heart are bent in the
attitude of worship (l.13) and furthermore, how his heart eventually sinks to his knees because of
the lack of Gods response. The continuation of the dynamic of the poets heart and the knees,
and also the repetition of the line But no hearing at the end of the third and fourth stanza
portray how, despite his lament, the poets thoughts have begun to follow a tighter structure and
have found a distinct focus. In the fifth stanza, the poet reached the next step of his professed
agony by defining how even his soul has become undone. The contrast between the structure,
which becomes stronger as the poem reaches its end, and the contentwhich bemoans the
increasing depth of separation from Godproduces the idea that God is in fact coming closer to
the poet as the poet recognizes and repents his distance from Him.
The last stanza of the poem is the most regular, and hints at the beginning of completion of
the poets request. The iambic verse is followed perfectly, and there is an increase in alliteration,
such as in the words minde and mend (l. 34 and 35). These two words also present an
instance of partial rhyme. Other than the partial rhyme and the general rhyming structure of the
poem, there is also internal rhyme in the phrase minde may chime (l. 34). All of these details
grant this stanza a more song-like sound, and show how the poet is becoming more in tune with
the Divine. The last stanza also differs thematically, since the poet has moved from complaint of
past disappointments to a continuation of prayer to God. The idea this evokes is that the poet is
in fact slowly synchronizing with Divinity because he relentlessly seeks it, despite simply giving
up prayer as his rationale would dictate. These ideas connect to the poets use of the strange and
contradictory phrase silent eares (l. 2). The presence of ears, which translates into the presence
of a Supreme Being, is not compatible with the idea of silence since it would indicate absence.
This is exactly what the course of the poem proves; the Presence responds, albeit without
speaking.