Wong 1

Lawrence Wong

Ruiz

Hon Eng 10 B3

25 Oct 2016

Destiny? I Dont Have One

Destiny is a predetermined course of events often held to be an irresistible power. The

age-old question of whether or not destiny overpowers us has enticed authors to write about

mans fortitude. In Invictus, a poem by William Ernest Henley, the speaker declares that he is the

master of his own destiny. In If, a poem by Rudyard Kipling, the speaker states that manhood, or

destiny, is achievable as long as one follows a list of conditions. Through the better use of

figurative language and imagery, Henley develops a more enticing claim that destiny is

nonexistent for man.

Invictus utilizes more compelling figurative language and imagery. Henley starts his

poem with personification: Out of the night that covers me (Henley 1). In this statement, night

metaphorically refers to the speakers hardships which are black as the pit (2), and how he

must acknowledge the difficult times in order to be the master of his destiny. He continues by

thanking the gods for his unconquerable soul (4). With this line, Henley notes that there are

gods, but what they do is not control his fate, but give him the ability to control his own fate. In

the seconds stanza, the speaker states that In the fell clutch of circumstance/I have not winced

nor cried aloud (5-6). This introduces the animalistic image of the speaker captured in the fell

clutch of a predatory bird. The circumstance, like night, likely refers to his difficult

condition. Although this brings him great pain, he has not winced nor cried aloud. He will

never submit to his hardships as one who accepts his fate would. More imagery follows: Under
 Wong 2

the bludgeonings of chance/My head is bloody, but unbowed (7-8). This imagery describes any

case of one subjugated by adversity who has not submitted due to events that occur beyond his

control (chance). To begin the third stanza, Henley states Beyond this place of wrath and

tears (9). This place of wrath and tears is the world in which one is the prey of

circumstance and the captive of chance. Beyond this, furthermore, looms but the horror of

the shade (10). This personification signifies that past this place, there is a place where

horror continues. Henley ends the stanza by stating that, no matter how menac[ing] (11) his

imminent end is, it will find him unafraid (12). This indifference towards fear indicates that

unlike those who accept destiny and hide in fear of their destiny, he stands face to face with

circumstance, chance, and horror in order to display his dominance. Henleys final stanza

utilizes a biblical allusion to reinforce the idea introduced by the third stanza. It matters not how

strait the gate/How charged with punishments the scroll (13-14) is the biblical allusion of the

path towards heaven. The fact that his path is strait or narrow and that is full of punishments

denotes that his path is the right path to mastering his destiny. For if he took the path that most

people took, he would be one of the many accepting his destiny instead of controlling it.

On the other hand, If does not contain as strong figurative language and imagery. In the

first place, the speakers main intention is not about controlling ones own destiny, he is

instructing a child, likely his son, on what steps he needs to take to become a man. For instance,

the author utilizes anaphora: Or being lied about, dont deal in lies/Or being hated, dont give

way to hating (6-7). This reinforces his intention that his son should not lie or hate not that he

can control his destiny. However, there are a few lines that reference controlling ones own

destiny, Among other lines of juxtaposition, Or walk with Kingsnor lose the common touch

(26) supports Kiplings claim. What Kipling asserts is that like being able to walk with Kings
 Wong 3

but still remain one with the common, controlling ones own destiny but not falling for it is a

delicate act. Another juxtaposition that supports the claim is If you can dream - and not make

dreams your master (9). Because the speaker is instructing his son on how to become a man, he

is likely a man himself. Therefore, his ability to dream and be the master of his dreams indicates

that he does not have a destiny but instead controls it.

Furthermore, when comparing the mechanics of the poem, Invictus evokes stronger

emotion with both better meter and diction. In every line of his poem, Henley has eight syllables.

Through many different religions and cultures, the number eight is referred to as a spiritual,

lucky number. The consistency of this perfect number implies that the speaker has attained a

state where he is longer below the gods, but stands as their equal, and as the master of his

destiny. If, on the other hand, has an inconsistent number of syllables per line. Although, this

may be to draw the attention of the audience, this peculiar number of syllables in each line does

not contribute to reinforcing the claim. Furthermore, Henley utilizes more effective diction than

Kipling. From words such as unconquerable and bludgeonings, Henleys message becomes

more powerful, more forcing, and more commanding. Kipling, meanwhile, uses a more childish,

immature diction with words such as blaming and hating.

The main factor that contributes to Henleys poem as the stronger proponent of

controlling ones own destiny is that it was his intention to fight for that position. This allowed

him to use more direct figurative language and imagery and more situationally accurate diction

than Kipling.