Sunday, May 1, 2016

An Analysis of Harlem by Langston Hughes

Harlem

What happens to a dream deferred?

      Does it dry up
      like a raisin in the sun?
      Or fester like a sore—
      And then run?
      Does it stink like rotten meat?
      Or crust and sugar over—
      like a syrupy sweet?

      Maybe it just sags
      like a heavy load.

      Or does it explode?

Here's a short poem by Langston Hughes.  A prominent member of the Harlem Renaissance.   He speaks of the dreams of the black people of his time. Having yet to achieve the Civil Rights movement the post civil war condition of the black populace in the United States was still diminished by legislature like Jim Crow and general bigotry.

The poem takes the form of multiple questions.  Possibilities in answer to the the first question, What happens to a dream deferred? The dream in the poem is explicitly ambiguous, but is imbued with implicit meaning by title of the poem, Harlem. 

   Does it dry up like a raisin in the sun?  The question is straightforward.  Will it dry up in the sun?  The poem will follow this pattern for the next three questions.  No definite answers are given for any of the questions, but their rhetorical nature bound up with the metonymy of the dream leaves the reader aware that each of them infer a bad outcome.  The general pattern the questions will follow will be one of food spoiling or wounds festering.  The natural outcomes of perishables and wounds left unattended for too long.


   Or fester like a sore-    And then run?  Again the poem addresses the possible degradation of the dream, here it becomes a wound to those that carry it, hobbling them.  Bleeding out in the manner in which a sore runs.  Here the dream is depicted as a corporeal part of those that bear it.  If the dream is has any redemptive value, then one may recognize a subtle invocation of the wounded healer on behalf of the bearers.  An archetype that is recurrent throughout the western canon. 

Does it stink like rotten meat?  The third question follows the second and is appropriate as the natural progression of an untended wound that has rotted to the point of putrefaction.  It's reached the state of rotten meat.  The last question spoke of the dream as part of the body of it's bearers, here the dream is distanced and assumes the state of foul meat. It's portrayal as sustenance  implies it's still important, but that it's become unpalatable to those who depend on it.


Or crust and sugar over-   like a syrupy sweet?  Here the question again revolves around something palatable gone rotten.  The inflection here is a little more nuanced and insidious though. The sweetness ascribed here could mean the dream has been overtaken by sentimentalism, lacking the dynamic force capable of creating change.  It's possible that the narrator is implying a state of affairs similar to the idea conveyed by the word kitsch.


Maybe it just sags  like a heavy load.  The last doublet before the final line is a statement, providing contrast to all the rhetorical/hypothetical questions preceding it.  Although it is perhaps most explicit in conveying the idea that the dream may simply become a burden to it's bearers.  Exhausted of asking questions, of pondering the possibilities of the dream.  This to makes an excellent contrast to the last line of the poem. .

  Or does it explode?  The last line contrasts the lethargy and downtrodden tone of the previous doublet.  It also contrasts the three previous questions in that instead of becoming something internalized or malignant to the people in possession of the dream it explodes.  An outward movement of force.  Here the dream isn't depicted as having lost vitality as in the first question, but is vitality itself.  It doesn't fester like a sore, it's quick and dynamic, but still dangerous.  Perhaps it contrasts most strongly with the last possibility, the dream crusted and sugar over, having become a sentimentality.  It's simply not in the same ballpark as the association.   It's an answer in defiance of all previous expectations posited by the three expectations.

The lack of explicit reference to the end,  maintains the tone of the whole poem as one of speculative possibilities  It makes no direct reference to violence, or the object upon which the dream would explode upon.  It could be a sudden mass movement of the people.  It could be an actual bombing. It's left up to the reader to interpret the meaning of the lines.  Although the last line conveys danger in a general way, it's considered preferable to languishing.

No comments:

Post a Comment