A Comparison of London by William Blake, and Composed Upon Westminster Bridge, September 3, 1802 by William Wordsworth

A Comparison of London by William Blake, and Composed Upon Westminster Bridge, September 3, 1802 by William Wordsworth

Length: 1489 words (4.3 double-spaced pages)

Rating: Strong Essays

Open Document

Essay Preview

A Comparison of London by William Blake, and Composed Upon Westminster Bridge, September 3, 1802 by William Wordsworth

Both "London" by William Blake, and "Composed Upon Westminster Bridge,
September 3, 1802" by William Wordsworth are written about London, and
were written within ten years of each other, but both have contrasting
views of what they believe London is like. They express their ideas by
using different poem styles and techniques. They are both very
effective and create vivid images in the reader's mind.

"London" has a strong rhythm, which stresses the last word of each
line. This emphasis affects the way in which the poem is read, and
stresses on the words with the most importance, for example "weakness"
and "woe". This helps the reader understand the poem and helps create
images in their minds. The rhyme scheme of ABAB etc. is also simple,
and emphasizes how everything is controlled, or measured.

In "London" everything is said to be controlled or "chartered", which
is shown to be wrong. It is said that the most natural thing in
London, the Thames, is also chartered. It also portrays an image of
poverty, as everything is owned by the cities institutions, and
borrowed by the people of the city. The repletion of "chartered"
emphasizes how unnatural it is.

It is also shown that every person in London is unhappy, or is
suffering. He says that in "every face" he meets he sees "marks of
weakness, marks of woe." This makes the reader believe that it is an
easy thing to notice, and London has in some way affected the way in
which people look. This is used to show how bad London is that it can
actually affect people in that ...


... middle of paper ...


...on of death, blood or plagues, so there
is nothing to disrupt the peaceful image.

These two poems, both about London are complete contrasts to each
other. "London" describes London as a bad place, and "Westminster
Bridge" describes it as a good. "London" focuses on the people of the
city and "Westminster Bridge" focuses on the view. But they both
believe that the city of London can affect you in some way, either
good or bad. I preferred the poem "London" as it gave a more realistic
view of London, and I am able to relate to the idea of pollution in
the city, as that is what it is like now. I also found it more
interesting as it told me about the people in the city, not just of
the views. Also "Westminster Bridge" seems very unrealistic now as
London is a very built up area and I believe it is not very
attractive.

Need Writing Help?

Get feedback on grammar, clarity, concision and logic instantly.

Check your paper »