What+Is+the+Tyger?

We were discussing in class today what William Blake really meant when he mentioned the tyger in his poem. Of course, it could be taken as a literal tiger. This makes sense perfectly with the poem, but gets into troubles when it's compared with the figure of the tyger that Blake illustrated. As has been mentioned in other posts, the illustration makes the tyger look cuddly and almost sheepish. What, then, does Blake mean for the tyger to be? Could it be a toy, perhaps? Maybe it's supposed to represent people who act fearsome but really are not. I'm not sure. What are your thoughts?1205282908

This is a good question NVa, but I actually think that the illustration of a tyger does not have to be ferocious for us to assume that it is. I think that the poem defines what the tyger is much better than the illustration. In the poem it says, "Burnt the fire of thine eyes, " which I believe is a perfect description of a tyger's eyes. They are fire. A tyger, even though pictured as timid and cuddly, always has fire in his/her eyes. A tyger is not afraid of the dark, but rather, "burning bright." Blake is saying that the tyger stands out it is so spectacular, even in the dark of the night. 1205285718

The question of whether it is a toy is interesting. It was mentioned in class that there are actually toys with the lines on Blake's poem on them. Furthermore, the rhymed quatrains are similar to those of a nursery rhyme. The poem does have a childlike quality. All the sentences in the poem are questions. Obvious the narrator is fairly unsure on what the tyger actually is considering there aren't any statements in the entire poem. Brother Tom also mentioned that Blake illustrated the tyger himself. He did not draw a fierce animal. Rather, it was like a lamb. In parts on the poem, such as the third stanza, Blake made the tyger sound so extraordinary that language could not even describe it. Perhaps no one knows what the tyger really is--perhaps words won't be able to explain the nature of it. 1205290017

I don't understand where in the poem the tyger is made to look cuddly. The only line that it could be is "Did he who made the Lamb make thee," but I don't think that Blake is comparing the tyger to a lamb, rather contrasting. Blake is expressing his amazement that the one who made the Lamb could make something as fierce and as firey as the tyger. Also, today in class some people pointed out some references to a blacksmith's forge. The lines "In what distant deeps or skies/Burnt the fire of thine eyes" was a reference to the creation or forging of the tyger, not the passion or fire in his eyes, even though in common culture, tigers are seen as dangerous creatures. In the first and last stanzas when he Blake says that the tyger is burning bright, I think that it's more of a reference to the creator's forge than the creatures passion emanating through the tyger. 1205290646

This poem captivated me from the beginning. Maybe it was the short rhyming lines, or the many questions, but I found it intriguing. My thought on it was that it definitely was a real tiger. Is that just a different way of spelling it, or what was the reason to spell it with a “y”? I don’t think it’s a toy for a couple of reasons. First, when Br. Tom told us Blake drew it himself, it didn’t look like a toy; just a sheepish animal. I just didn’t see any references that could be used to show it as a toy. I think the bigger question is what is posed in the final lines of the poem, “What immortal hand or eye/ Dare frame thy fearful symmetry?” Who made this tiger? I would have thought he was praising himself because he drew it, but what does he mean by “immortal”? Also, as was brought up in class, what is the nature of symmetry in this poem? 1205291544d

Because the poem was like a nursery rhyme and because of the illistrations drawn by Blake, it seems to me like he is talking about a real tiger. Kec, you bring up an interesting point - was he praising himself for making the tiger? The referance to "immortal" could mean a couple things in my mind. At first i thought that he might be calling himself immortal because in a way he will live on forever in his work, but I think there is a better meaning - though i am not sure what. I thought the symmetry in the poem was found in the stanzas. The stanzas were written with four lines - the first two and the last two being rhyming lines. This gave the sense of being able to divide each stanza in half. Of couse, then you would have to bring up the first and last stanzas, which do not have that ryhme at the end, unless one does a little fudging with the pronunciation. But as we mentioned in class, there is that difference between what the words say and how they sound to the ear. 1205292658

It seems to me that Blake could actually be talking about a real tiger, though as any poem there may be some underlying meaning about people who act like tigers. The important thing to remember is that for all Blake's use of 'dread' or 'fearful,' it doesn't appear to me that he is against the tiger in anyway. The tiger is a part of existence, neither good nor bad in its creation; it is a fact. In reference to what MBe said about his use of "immortal" I believe it refers to the tiger's immortality in its great strength and majesty, not that Blake is trying to create his own immortality with this poem.

On a separate note, while trying to find a sample of the song my choir sang of the lamb, I found this youtube video offering one man's opinion on "The Tyger." Clearly, his is not the only interpretation and may not be correct, but he does offer some interesting insight so I thought I would post it on here for those who want to see it: media type="youtube" key="cgCVumXD2q8&hl=en" height="355" width="425"

Wow that movie was pretty interesting! Thank you, although it ends with the same question we are asking what does the tyger stand for? I thought it was fascinating that Blake was probably one of the few people in Europe to have seen a tiger, and this makes perfect sense since tigers aren't just roaming the streets. The thing that got to me was if Europeans have never seen a tiger before than Blake's drawing may have been the first time they had ever seen an image of a tiger. Thus, why did he make it meek and friendly? Well, maybe it has to do with some sort of allusion to a religious theme like this supposedly scary animal is just another one of God's beloved creatures. I'm not sure about this though. Any thoughts about this? Oh, and why of all creatures did he choose a tiger and not a lion or elephant or another intimidating creature? 1205365040

I never really understood how the topic of something cute and cuddly was brought up during class, other than the fact that it was compared to a lamb. Many of the line references seem more tough, more fierce than that of a sheepish animal. One of the bigger questions I had was why would Blake switch the spelling? It's a simple word, nothing very significant by itself. I couldn't think of any double meanings of tiger/tyger other than the animal which he describes throughout the poem. At first I thought it was just the poet personalizing his work, making it his own by changing the spelling, something a little more mild than changing the rhyme pattern, the physical shape, or the punctuation of the poem. I was also attracted to it because of its more classical scheme with the end rhymes, unlike several other poems from the same section. I guess old preferences die as hard as habits do. 1205365672

The consistant use of fire and other harsh imagery casts the theory that it could be a toy into doubt. Or at least a traditional toy, who knows these days? Anyway, I have another theory. In his poem, Blake makes several references to nonhuman beings, which I originally took to be God references. When he asks, "Did he who made the lamb make thee?" I once thought this to be a rhetorical question but now I think it is a negative question, that is a question with an expected answer of "no" if one was to be given. I read that Blake was actually a Gnostic follower and considered himself to be Milton's successor. When he states, "On what wings dare he aspire?/What the hand dare seize the fire?" and "When the stars threw down their spears/ And watered heaven with their tears" I believe he is referencing the Gnostic thought that Milton's Lucifer, or the devil, played a role in the creation of the universe, and in this case the tiger. Look at this picture of Blake's original illustration. It is clearly not an extremely imposing tiger, not baring its teeth or showing its claws, just standing there looking like an overgrown dog. I think Blake is trying to say that the devil may have created the tiger and he does not fear Satan, so he depicts an innocent tiger.user:PSp-c

I feel that the tiger certainly represents ferocity. Not only is the tiger contrasted to the lamb, as kkr pointed out, but also, the following lines, to me, represent ferocity, and thus danger, which stems from ferocity: "What immortal hand or eye Could frame thy **fearful** symmetry?" "**hammer. . . chain. . . furnace. . . anvil. . . terrors. . .** Did he smile his work to see?..." The blacksmith references refer to its wicked creation as they are preceded by the words What the. . . questioning the goodness of its creation. In laymen's terms "What kind of hammer/chain/furnace/anvil could create such a thing?" Indeed the tiger from the poem, unlike the picture, is scary, and it is scary because we fear it. We fear it because it is scary, and scary implies dangerous; the tiger could mean danger.1205387349