Critical Analysis of "The World is Too much with Us." i.e. the sonnet written by William Wordsworth.My interpretation of the poem in comparison to the interpretation of another student.

"The world is too much with us is a statement about conflict between nature and humanity." I agree with this statement to a large extent because that is exactly the main premise of the poem written by William Wordsworth. The conflict in essence, is the one where the human race no longer appreciates nature and instead exploits it for their own material gain. However, the third sentence within the passage is only half correct. I say this because it starts off sensibly enough, i.e. "He longs for a simpler time..." This is very true. It indeed is. However, the author then proceeds to say, "...when the progress of humanity was tempered by the restriction nature imposed." My reason for disagreeing with this section is that in the olden days, nature was worshipped by the Pagans who were in turn, often ostracized by the rest of the community because of their beliefs. Nature did not impose any restrictions. Rather, decisions were based upon it because of the human mind and instinct, not because nature conflicted with humanity.

The author then moves on to describe in detail, man's reaction and behaviour towards nature. He states it in an extremely graceful, beautiful way, "'We have given our hearts away' (4) means that we have sold the part of us that is from the earth (man which is from the dust) in order to make other things more important than appreciating life..." (lines 6 - 9). Also, Wordsworth definitely describes human mentality and instinct as "powers", i.e. things of strength. However, as human beings "we lay waste our powers" (line 2). The human race is too concerned with material wealth and would do anything (including immoral actions) to gain such riches. Rather than practice virtue and fortitude, humanity is unethical while trying to benefit itself.

Yet, though I may agree with a number of the statements given, I totally disagree with others. One of them is definitely the one located in lines 22 - 24. "The destructiveness society has on the environment will proceed freely and unmerciful like the "winds that will be howling at all hours" (line 6). The reason why I strongly disagree with this statement is because Wordsworth was not making a comparison between humanity and the destructiveness of strong winds. He was merely describing all the majesties that exist within our environment and the ways in which men ignore them. I say this because in the poem, he then goes on to say, "For this, for everything, we are out of tune; It moves us not..." (lines 8 and 9). Humanity is not moved by the almost spiritual beauty and eclectic strength of nature and the elements that exist within it.

Wordsworth definitely "sees himself as one with the environment." It is merely pointed out in lines 11 and 12. However, his oneness with nature can be detected throughout the entire sonnet. A person who has studied this poet's works will know that he reveres nature and looks at it almost as if it were God Himself. Wordsworth thinks that he has no part to play in the destruction of England's natural environment. Instead, he is appealing with an evident intonation of sorrow and regret, to the other citizens to make them stop the needless destruction and ruin.

Here comes the part that I disagree with to some extent. The part where the author says, "...the change Wordsworth is hoping for will come in the form of a mighty revolt by nature." Yes, he talks about the ancient Gods, Proteus and Triton who both represent water and the re - birth of mankind. However, this re - birth won't necessarily be brought about by a revolt. Wordsworth is merely stating that people will start to pay more attention to the beauty of nature if its strength and mysteries are revealed in greater detail. Though, due to extensive research and previous knowledge, I do know that the information provided about the Gods by the author, were of sound and just truth.

Both Gods are all - powerful and all - knowing when it comes to the ocean and its mysteries. One can change his appearance and the other can summon the creatures from the depths by one blow of his shell. Probably if they can command the ocean and its creatures, they can command the minds of men? That's one way of thinking about it.

The author of the piece also says that Wordsworth thinks the idea of Paganism (and being ostracized by the Christian community) is more appealing than the modern world because then at least, he would be able to fully worship nature and appreciate its beauty. This way he can at least, get a good view of these mighty sea - Gods and ponder about all the mysteries that lay beneath the waves. Wordsworth feels at one with nature and this is what the author stressed upon when he says, "Wordsworth's use of symbolism in his poem illustrates a sense of the conviction and deep feelings he had toward nature..." This is very much true because he compares almost every element of nature to spiritual and majestic beings.

"The materialistic progress being made by mankind is not without consequence, and the destruction of the environment by mankind's shortsightedness will continue as Wordsworth has foreseen." The above statement is very true. Simply meaning that the ruining of nature by man will continue for years to come. Hence, the first line of the poem, "The World is too much with us; late and soon..." Destruction was taking place then and as the poet has predicted, it is still seen all over the world up to this day.

However, as I mentioned before, there is no place within the sonnet where Wordsworth speaks of a revolt. This is definitely not evident to my eye. What I see is merely a poet's interpretation of nature and the views most people choose to ignore in everyday life. Probably nature will start a revolt, probably it wouldn't. But there is no evidence of this within the piece of poetry.

In conclusion, there was equal agreement and disagreement concerning my interpretation and the author's interpretation of the sonnet "The World is Too much with Us." However, I would also like to mention to my intended audience that, all people are entitled to their opinions and views, and though I disagreed with the author in some cases, I am not insinuating that his assumptions were wrong or worthless.

© Petra Montague-Sylvester