What do you think?
Rate this book
Queen Mab: "Fear not for the future, weep not for the past."
Shelley is one of the most revered figures in the English poetical landscape. Born on the 4th August 1792 he has, over the years, become rightly regarded as a major Romantic poet. Yet during his own lifetime little of his work was published. Publishers feared his radical views and possible charges against themselves for blasphemy and sedition. On 8th July 1822 a month before his 30th birthday, during a sudden storm, his tragic early death by drowning robbed our culture of many fine expected masterpieces. But in his short spell on earth he weaved much magic. Queen Mab was Shelley’s first major poem and he pressed only 250 copies intended for friends and not a wider distribution. It is a fairy tale that offers a vision for a utopian society that might have a history of oppression and at present be riddled with misery but can have a future where humanity’s nobler characteristics can be in harmony with the world and work with nature to create a better society for all. Mary Shelley expressed his intentions as such: He saw, in a fervent call on his fellow-creatures to share alike the blessings of the creation, to love and serve each other, the noblest work that life and time permitted him. In this spirit he composed Queen Mab.
40 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1813
About the author
Percy Bysshe Shelley
1,766 books1,437 followersWorks of Percy Bysshe Shelley, British romantic poet, include "To a Skylark" in 1820;
Prometheus Unbound
, the lyric drama; and "Adonais," an elegy of 1821 to John Keats.
The Cenci , work of art or literature of Percy Bysshe Shelley of 1819, depicts Beatrice Cenci, Italian noblewoman.
People widely consider Percy Bysshe Shelley among the finest majors of the English language. He is perhaps most famous for such anthology pieces as Ozymandias , Ode to the West Wind , and The Masque of Anarchy . His major long visionary Alastor , The Revolt of Islam , and the unfinished The Triumph of Life .
Unconventional life and uncompromising idealism of Percy Bysshe Shelley combined with his strong skeptical voice to make an authoritative and much denigrated figure during his life. He became the idol of the next two or three generations, the major Victorian and Pre-Raphaelite Robert Browning, Alfred Tennyson, Dante Gabriel Rossetti, Algernon Charles Swinburne, as well as William Butler Yeats and in other languages, such as Jibanananda Das and Subramanya Bharathy . Karl Marx, Henry Stephens Salt, and [authorm:Bertrand Russell] also admired him. Famous for his association with his contemporaries Lord Byron, he also married Mary Shelley, novelist.
The Cenci , work of art or literature of Percy Bysshe Shelley of 1819, depicts Beatrice Cenci, Italian noblewoman.
People widely consider Percy Bysshe Shelley among the finest majors of the English language. He is perhaps most famous for such anthology pieces as Ozymandias , Ode to the West Wind , and The Masque of Anarchy . His major long visionary Alastor , The Revolt of Islam , and the unfinished The Triumph of Life .
Unconventional life and uncompromising idealism of Percy Bysshe Shelley combined with his strong skeptical voice to make an authoritative and much denigrated figure during his life. He became the idol of the next two or three generations, the major Victorian and Pre-Raphaelite Robert Browning, Alfred Tennyson, Dante Gabriel Rossetti, Algernon Charles Swinburne, as well as William Butler Yeats and in other languages, such as Jibanananda Das and Subramanya Bharathy . Karl Marx, Henry Stephens Salt, and [authorm:Bertrand Russell] also admired him. Famous for his association with his contemporaries Lord Byron, he also married Mary Shelley, novelist.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 36 reviews
November 29, 2016
I’ve spent the last year of my life researching this poem, and I’ve read it no less than twenty times. It may not sound like a lot, but with nine cantos, thousands of lines, six essays attached to it along with notes, it’s taken up a lot of my reading time. Of course, I’m not complaining. It’s a beautiful piece of writing. It’s been so much fun to write my dissertation on it.
So what’s it all about? Essentially, Shelley relays his philosophy for life; he explains how he thinks man should live, and how man should embrace what he defines as nature. And within the poem, and its essays, this sense of nature is defined as vegetarianism. This is a central theme, one that unifies his anti-establishment ideas, agnosticism and environmental outlook. Shelley gives a vision at the end of the poem, one where man and animal live in a sense of peace and harmony; it is a world of interspecies equality and ecological sustainably. It is one where mankind respects the natural world and walks among it: it's a utopian future.
Here’s one of the main sections:
(-A green paradise of peace?)
Now I found this incredibly fascinating when I was reading it. Two hundred years ago this poet produced this radical argument; this argument for change. And it really is “out there.” The Romantic generation called for revolution and a change in politics of the day, but none are quite as far left and extreme as the arguments here. The arguments are not limited to the human world, but extend into the non-human. So I had to write my dissertation on it. I had to try and understand what gave birth to these ideas, and what the full implications of them were. I also wanted to look into the legacy of these arguments. As extreme as these suggestions for change may seem, they are not entirely exclusive to this one man. These arguments do, indeed, linger on to the present day.
They are in different forms, of course, and most of the idealistic qualities are gone, but elements of them can be seen in modern day Green parties, environmentalist movements and even animal rights organisations. Though, strictly speaking, these are typically modern constructs. What I wanted to explore, and perhaps try to understand, is how Shelley came about these ideas. They are unique amongst his generation, and have almost been shaped by his eclectic reading tastes. He read everything from Plato to Godwin, from scientific papers through to political pamphlets. And his arguments would go on to influence Ghandi, George Bernard Shaw and Robert Browning.
There is a fair bit of scholarship on Shelley’s diet, though not as much as there should be. I’ve really enjoyed writing on this topic, and the further I’ve got into it the more I’ve realised that there is so much more to be done on this. Within my writing, I’ve attempted to capture Shelley’s argument and to understand its implications- perhaps beyond the context in which he wrote them. But that’s only within the limitations of this poem and its essays. I’d love to research this across his body of writing and perhaps even Romanticism as a whole. There were many other influential vegetarians in the era, that’s for sure. (Time will tell, but this could be a possible basis for my PhD research.)
Some readers would likely contest my claims about this work, but that’s what my dissertation is about: to argue for this reading. I’ve written it all up now, and I have two weeks left to edit it and to try and make it as strong as possible. Here’s to hoping I get the grades I need!
___________________________________
You can connect with me on social media via My Linktree
__________________________________
So what’s it all about? Essentially, Shelley relays his philosophy for life; he explains how he thinks man should live, and how man should embrace what he defines as nature. And within the poem, and its essays, this sense of nature is defined as vegetarianism. This is a central theme, one that unifies his anti-establishment ideas, agnosticism and environmental outlook. Shelley gives a vision at the end of the poem, one where man and animal live in a sense of peace and harmony; it is a world of interspecies equality and ecological sustainably. It is one where mankind respects the natural world and walks among it: it's a utopian future.
Here’s one of the main sections:
“And man, once fleeting o'er the transient scene
Swift as an unremembered vision, stands
Immortal upon earth; no longer now
He slays the lamb that looks him in the face,
And horribly devours his mangled flesh,
Which, still avenging Nature’s broken law,
Kindled all putrid humors in his frame,
All evil passions and all vain belief,
Hatred, despair and loathing in his mind,
The germs of misery, death, disease and crime.
No longer now the wingèd habitants,
That in the woods their sweet lives sing away,
Flee from the form of man; but gather round,
And prune their sunny feathers on the hands
Which little children stretch in friendly sport
Towards these dreadless partners of their play.
All things are void of terror; man has lost
His terrible prerogative, and stands
An equal amidst equals; happiness
And science dawn, though late, upon the earth;
Peace cheers the mind, health renovates the frame;
Disease and pleasure cease to mingle here,
Reason and passion cease to combat there;
Whilst each unfettered o'er the earth extend
Their all-subduing energies, and wield
The sceptre of a vast dominion there;
Whilst every shape and mode of matter lends
Its force to the omnipotence of mind,
Which from its dark mine drags the gem of truth
To decorate its paradise of peace." (Canto VIII, Lines 219-238).
(-A green paradise of peace?)
Now I found this incredibly fascinating when I was reading it. Two hundred years ago this poet produced this radical argument; this argument for change. And it really is “out there.” The Romantic generation called for revolution and a change in politics of the day, but none are quite as far left and extreme as the arguments here. The arguments are not limited to the human world, but extend into the non-human. So I had to write my dissertation on it. I had to try and understand what gave birth to these ideas, and what the full implications of them were. I also wanted to look into the legacy of these arguments. As extreme as these suggestions for change may seem, they are not entirely exclusive to this one man. These arguments do, indeed, linger on to the present day.
They are in different forms, of course, and most of the idealistic qualities are gone, but elements of them can be seen in modern day Green parties, environmentalist movements and even animal rights organisations. Though, strictly speaking, these are typically modern constructs. What I wanted to explore, and perhaps try to understand, is how Shelley came about these ideas. They are unique amongst his generation, and have almost been shaped by his eclectic reading tastes. He read everything from Plato to Godwin, from scientific papers through to political pamphlets. And his arguments would go on to influence Ghandi, George Bernard Shaw and Robert Browning.
There is a fair bit of scholarship on Shelley’s diet, though not as much as there should be. I’ve really enjoyed writing on this topic, and the further I’ve got into it the more I’ve realised that there is so much more to be done on this. Within my writing, I’ve attempted to capture Shelley’s argument and to understand its implications- perhaps beyond the context in which he wrote them. But that’s only within the limitations of this poem and its essays. I’d love to research this across his body of writing and perhaps even Romanticism as a whole. There were many other influential vegetarians in the era, that’s for sure. (Time will tell, but this could be a possible basis for my PhD research.)
Some readers would likely contest my claims about this work, but that’s what my dissertation is about: to argue for this reading. I’ve written it all up now, and I have two weeks left to edit it and to try and make it as strong as possible. Here’s to hoping I get the grades I need!
___________________________________
You can connect with me on social media via My Linktree
__________________________________
April 4, 2013
Shelley's Political Rant
6 April 2013
This was Shelley's first long poem and it was written initially to his first wife (the Queen Mab of the title) when he was 19. All I can say is that if this was his first poem then Shelley's ability is impressive. However, the nature and contents of this poem did actually get him into quite a lot of trouble, no doubt due to the attacks against the king and also the significant atheistic overtones, and it is not that the atheistic nature of the poem is subtle: it is quite blatant, though it is not as if Shelley was necessarily walking new ground, particularly since Blake and others were writing along these lines prior to him.
Mab of the title possibly comes from the reference to her in Shakespeare (which, according to Wikipedia, is the first major literary mention of her). No doubt Shelley would have been familiar with the reference, and in Romeo and Juliet, she is described as a fairy who grants dreams of wish fulfilment to those who are asleep. Maybe the nature of the title reflects Shelley's desire to see a better world where the lower classes do not live under the heel of the ruling class. Unfortunately this has not necessarily come about, even though since Shelley's time social welfare has moved significantly from where it was then and the poorer classes, at least in the Western World, live much more luxurious lives than they did back then. However, there is still a massive distinction between the haves and have-nots, and still an underlying goal in regards to the pursuit of wealth.
One of the interesting things that I have picked up while reading this poem is how political and social criticism is nothing new, which is obvious, but having lived through the period of the Bush administration where political and social criticism reached a level of popularity which I had not seen before, it is interesting to reflect on this style of commentary in ages past. In a way, this period of history also saw a rise in such commentary, particularly since Europe had just been through the French Revolution and the United States had formed a republic out of a rebellion against the English throne. However, it was not the American Rebellion that had been the counter-point of this agitation against the ruling class, simply because it was a rebellion of the wealthy merchant classes against the aristocratic classes. What France has signified was a rebellion of the lower classes (though the leaders of the rebellion were still bourgeoisie) against the aristocratic classes, and the desire for a real democracy, not based upon land ownership (as was the case in the United States) but based upon the fact that everybody is a human being and in that everybody is equal.
It wasn't as if Shelley was writing anything new because writers before him, such as Rousseau, had already been exploring these issues, and even then writers as far back as Jonathan Swift, had been writing allegorical criticism (since in those days writing in the style of Noam Chomsky would have got you in a lot of trouble). It is not even as if he was a Romantic poet in the style of Wordsworth and Coleridge (though we know that there was a lot of influence from that sector) though he does use the romantic style to forward his political agenda. Even then, one questions whether Shelley had much of an impact in his day, but then in many cases such agitators generally do not live to see the effect that they have during their lifetime (Martin Luther King didn't).
Another interesting thing that I have noticed is how Shelley rails against Christianity in this poem. The idea is that the concept of God the Father is a reflection of our understanding of our father from when we were children. However, the tyrant God, as many view him to be, is a reflection of the tyranny of the day. The tyrant God, which is what Shelley is attacking (and what many agitators have attacked before and since) is a means of control over the population. In the same way it is as the idea of the divine right of kings was a method to prevent rebellion against a king because to rebel against the king is the same as rebelling against God. This is something that is still practised today, particularly if you look at parts of Romans which indicate that rulers are raised and deposed at God's whim, and to attempt to remove a ruler yourself is to go against God.
However, I do not believe that such passages indicate that God is a tyrant God, but rather a God of order. Nor do I believe that the passage is saying that we have to accept the ruling of any authority without questioning or challenging it. What I believe that it is talking about is armed rebellion, not political agitation. We do see that in the New Testament that where governments order us to behave in a way contrary to the Gospel then we are to question and challenge that order. It is not challenging the government, but seeking to replace a government through rebellion. Further, there are reasons for this warning, and these reasons necessarily come out in other places, and I have written about these dangers elsewhere as well so I will not necessarily dwell on them here.
6 April 2013
This was Shelley's first long poem and it was written initially to his first wife (the Queen Mab of the title) when he was 19. All I can say is that if this was his first poem then Shelley's ability is impressive. However, the nature and contents of this poem did actually get him into quite a lot of trouble, no doubt due to the attacks against the king and also the significant atheistic overtones, and it is not that the atheistic nature of the poem is subtle: it is quite blatant, though it is not as if Shelley was necessarily walking new ground, particularly since Blake and others were writing along these lines prior to him.
Mab of the title possibly comes from the reference to her in Shakespeare (which, according to Wikipedia, is the first major literary mention of her). No doubt Shelley would have been familiar with the reference, and in Romeo and Juliet, she is described as a fairy who grants dreams of wish fulfilment to those who are asleep. Maybe the nature of the title reflects Shelley's desire to see a better world where the lower classes do not live under the heel of the ruling class. Unfortunately this has not necessarily come about, even though since Shelley's time social welfare has moved significantly from where it was then and the poorer classes, at least in the Western World, live much more luxurious lives than they did back then. However, there is still a massive distinction between the haves and have-nots, and still an underlying goal in regards to the pursuit of wealth.
One of the interesting things that I have picked up while reading this poem is how political and social criticism is nothing new, which is obvious, but having lived through the period of the Bush administration where political and social criticism reached a level of popularity which I had not seen before, it is interesting to reflect on this style of commentary in ages past. In a way, this period of history also saw a rise in such commentary, particularly since Europe had just been through the French Revolution and the United States had formed a republic out of a rebellion against the English throne. However, it was not the American Rebellion that had been the counter-point of this agitation against the ruling class, simply because it was a rebellion of the wealthy merchant classes against the aristocratic classes. What France has signified was a rebellion of the lower classes (though the leaders of the rebellion were still bourgeoisie) against the aristocratic classes, and the desire for a real democracy, not based upon land ownership (as was the case in the United States) but based upon the fact that everybody is a human being and in that everybody is equal.
It wasn't as if Shelley was writing anything new because writers before him, such as Rousseau, had already been exploring these issues, and even then writers as far back as Jonathan Swift, had been writing allegorical criticism (since in those days writing in the style of Noam Chomsky would have got you in a lot of trouble). It is not even as if he was a Romantic poet in the style of Wordsworth and Coleridge (though we know that there was a lot of influence from that sector) though he does use the romantic style to forward his political agenda. Even then, one questions whether Shelley had much of an impact in his day, but then in many cases such agitators generally do not live to see the effect that they have during their lifetime (Martin Luther King didn't).
Another interesting thing that I have noticed is how Shelley rails against Christianity in this poem. The idea is that the concept of God the Father is a reflection of our understanding of our father from when we were children. However, the tyrant God, as many view him to be, is a reflection of the tyranny of the day. The tyrant God, which is what Shelley is attacking (and what many agitators have attacked before and since) is a means of control over the population. In the same way it is as the idea of the divine right of kings was a method to prevent rebellion against a king because to rebel against the king is the same as rebelling against God. This is something that is still practised today, particularly if you look at parts of Romans which indicate that rulers are raised and deposed at God's whim, and to attempt to remove a ruler yourself is to go against God.
However, I do not believe that such passages indicate that God is a tyrant God, but rather a God of order. Nor do I believe that the passage is saying that we have to accept the ruling of any authority without questioning or challenging it. What I believe that it is talking about is armed rebellion, not political agitation. We do see that in the New Testament that where governments order us to behave in a way contrary to the Gospel then we are to question and challenge that order. It is not challenging the government, but seeking to replace a government through rebellion. Further, there are reasons for this warning, and these reasons necessarily come out in other places, and I have written about these dangers elsewhere as well so I will not necessarily dwell on them here.
December 18, 2017
The greatest satire on social and political inequity, hence pointed at U.S. 2017. "Whence, thinkst thou, kings and parasites arose?/ Whence that unnatural line of droves, who heap/ Toil and unvanquishable penury/ On those who build their palaces, and bring/ Their daily bread?--From vice, black loathsome vice." Seems to me the Parasitic Party that runs the U.S. plans to pass the most parasitic budget, one inconceivable to all prior generations. But Shelley also consoles, no need for religious punishment of black vice: "There needeth not the hell that bigots frame/ To punish those who err: earth in itself/ Contains at once the evil and the cure."
Shelley's most astonishing lines meant to console:
"From kings, and priests, and statesmen, war arose,
Whose safety is man's deep unbettered woe,
Whose grandeur his debasement..."
"Yon populous city, rears its [Trumpster] tower
And seems itself a city. Gloomy troops
Of sentinels [security]...The Dweller there
Cannot be free and happy; hearest thee not
The curses of the fatherless, the groans
Of those who have no friend? He passes on:
The King, the wearer of a gilded [throne/chain]
That binds his soul to objectness, the fool
Whom courtiers nickname monarch, whilst a slave
Even to basest appetites--that man
Heeds not the shriek of penury; he smiles
At the deep curses which the destitute
Mutter in secret, and a sullen joy
Pervades his heart when thousands groan..."
The poet is not a fan of business:
"Hence commerce springs, the venal interchange
Of all that human art or nature yield..
Commerce! beneath whose poison-breathing shade*
No solitary virtue dares to spring;
But poverty and wealth with equal hand
Scatter their withering curses...
Commerce has set the mark of selfishness,
The signet of its all-enslaving power
Upon a shining ore, called it gold...
The iron rod of penury compels
Her wretched slave to bow and knee to wealth."
"A life of horror from the blighty bane
Of commerce: whilst the pestilence that springs
From unenjoying sensualism, has filled
All human life with Hydra-headed woes."
I read and taught this yearly from the Complete Works, vol I (NY: Gordian, 1968)
in my English Lit Survey, semester 2, sophomore year.
But 2017 makes its meaning precise.
Shelley died at 29, sailing his custom-made craft past the islands in the Gulf of Spezia, which we saw on a lovely but darkening day. The house where he roomed is open for visitors at certain hours.
His wife Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley created a monster, not human like the monster Shelley depicts in Queen Mab. With the Brontes, the Shelleys the most literary English family, although there are many others. (My college friend Tom Weiskel also died at 29; he’s the subject, the parodist, of “Parodies Lost,” also on GdRds.)
Shelley's most astonishing lines meant to console:
"From kings, and priests, and statesmen, war arose,
Whose safety is man's deep unbettered woe,
Whose grandeur his debasement..."
"Yon populous city, rears its [Trumpster] tower
And seems itself a city. Gloomy troops
Of sentinels [security]...The Dweller there
Cannot be free and happy; hearest thee not
The curses of the fatherless, the groans
Of those who have no friend? He passes on:
The King, the wearer of a gilded [throne/chain]
That binds his soul to objectness, the fool
Whom courtiers nickname monarch, whilst a slave
Even to basest appetites--that man
Heeds not the shriek of penury; he smiles
At the deep curses which the destitute
Mutter in secret, and a sullen joy
Pervades his heart when thousands groan..."
The poet is not a fan of business:
"Hence commerce springs, the venal interchange
Of all that human art or nature yield..
Commerce! beneath whose poison-breathing shade*
No solitary virtue dares to spring;
But poverty and wealth with equal hand
Scatter their withering curses...
Commerce has set the mark of selfishness,
The signet of its all-enslaving power
Upon a shining ore, called it gold...
The iron rod of penury compels
Her wretched slave to bow and knee to wealth."
"A life of horror from the blighty bane
Of commerce: whilst the pestilence that springs
From unenjoying sensualism, has filled
All human life with Hydra-headed woes."
I read and taught this yearly from the Complete Works, vol I (NY: Gordian, 1968)
in my English Lit Survey, semester 2, sophomore year.
But 2017 makes its meaning precise.
Shelley died at 29, sailing his custom-made craft past the islands in the Gulf of Spezia, which we saw on a lovely but darkening day. The house where he roomed is open for visitors at certain hours.
His wife Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley created a monster, not human like the monster Shelley depicts in Queen Mab. With the Brontes, the Shelleys the most literary English family, although there are many others. (My college friend Tom Weiskel also died at 29; he’s the subject, the parodist, of “Parodies Lost,” also on GdRds.)
February 17, 2012
Shelley is my all-time favourite poet. He writes with breath-taking beauty and scope to the point where he even challenges the throne of the great Bard himself, Shakespeare, as the 'greatest writer/poet of the English language'.
This is one of Shelley's long 'diatribe' poems in which he exposes the devastation brought to people's lives by the power games played by the Kings and the vice and misery that is caused by the 'priest-led slaves' (one of my favourite expressions in the book and pretty self-explanatory).
Shelley was a true revolutionary of the spirit who was not afraid to go after the big crooks - the kings, emperors and popes.
Much of what he vilifies in the world and in life in this wondrously elegant and divine poem (Beat poet Gregory Corso believes Shelley was THE ONLY DIVINE POET too) still applies (sadly) to our situation today. In fact, after reading this poem, it made me recall a famous John Lennon lyric from one of his later songs: 'you're still f$&kin' peasants as far as I can tell'.
Percy Shelley was truly a hero of the underdog, the working class and the downtrodden. Shelley's, sometimes naive, optimism almost brought me to tears as he hints at the greatness that mankind could achieve, but elusively and constantly just out of reach, if it could just realize the source of its own folly and seek out the TRUE virtues of life and shun the pursuit of wealth which, as Shelley and other great writers have pointed out, is the root of all evil. In this sense, Shelley should also be seen as a genuine philantropist, not a misanthrope which he is sometimes mistakenly believed to be.
If you are not moved while reading this poem, then I'm afraid to say it but there is something wrong with you. The language is poetic and reflects Shelley's time (the early 1800s) but the language is neither stifling nor over-flowery, which came as a huge relief to me as I have often found reading old poets to be quite a laborious task and I end up finding myself being turned off by their 'dense' language and syntax and the abstract or downright obscure symbolism. Thankfully, none of that here.
Another thing that I did not know about Percy Bysshe Shelley but which soon became apparent in this poem was how much he loved Nature - which partly explains why he was also an ardent vegetarian throughout his life.
If you are looking for top-notch poetry, a damning exposure of the vice and misery in the world wreaked by emperors and kings along with lots more metaphyical and philosophical substance to chew on, then this is the poem/book for you.
I got a version of Queen Mab with notes and on the cover it says "Woodstock Facsimile". I was a little worried about getting lost in the poem considering that the 'notes' section is rather scant and very selective but rest assured, Shelley's English walks a perfect balance between poetic elegance and clarity of message so the layperson can still figure out what's going on without much recourse to notes. Having said that, this is a book which demands your full attention and not to be read lightly. Once you get into it (for me that was like page one!) then before you know it you're hooked.
Best poem of his I have read to date although I have heard Shelley's Ode to the West Wind is also good and much of Blake's poetry (which I have yet to read) is held in pretty high esteem too.
For all ye burgeoning poets out there, Queen Mab is an absolute must-read! Get it today.
This is one of Shelley's long 'diatribe' poems in which he exposes the devastation brought to people's lives by the power games played by the Kings and the vice and misery that is caused by the 'priest-led slaves' (one of my favourite expressions in the book and pretty self-explanatory).
Shelley was a true revolutionary of the spirit who was not afraid to go after the big crooks - the kings, emperors and popes.
Much of what he vilifies in the world and in life in this wondrously elegant and divine poem (Beat poet Gregory Corso believes Shelley was THE ONLY DIVINE POET too) still applies (sadly) to our situation today. In fact, after reading this poem, it made me recall a famous John Lennon lyric from one of his later songs: 'you're still f$&kin' peasants as far as I can tell'.
Percy Shelley was truly a hero of the underdog, the working class and the downtrodden. Shelley's, sometimes naive, optimism almost brought me to tears as he hints at the greatness that mankind could achieve, but elusively and constantly just out of reach, if it could just realize the source of its own folly and seek out the TRUE virtues of life and shun the pursuit of wealth which, as Shelley and other great writers have pointed out, is the root of all evil. In this sense, Shelley should also be seen as a genuine philantropist, not a misanthrope which he is sometimes mistakenly believed to be.
If you are not moved while reading this poem, then I'm afraid to say it but there is something wrong with you. The language is poetic and reflects Shelley's time (the early 1800s) but the language is neither stifling nor over-flowery, which came as a huge relief to me as I have often found reading old poets to be quite a laborious task and I end up finding myself being turned off by their 'dense' language and syntax and the abstract or downright obscure symbolism. Thankfully, none of that here.
Another thing that I did not know about Percy Bysshe Shelley but which soon became apparent in this poem was how much he loved Nature - which partly explains why he was also an ardent vegetarian throughout his life.
If you are looking for top-notch poetry, a damning exposure of the vice and misery in the world wreaked by emperors and kings along with lots more metaphyical and philosophical substance to chew on, then this is the poem/book for you.
I got a version of Queen Mab with notes and on the cover it says "Woodstock Facsimile". I was a little worried about getting lost in the poem considering that the 'notes' section is rather scant and very selective but rest assured, Shelley's English walks a perfect balance between poetic elegance and clarity of message so the layperson can still figure out what's going on without much recourse to notes. Having said that, this is a book which demands your full attention and not to be read lightly. Once you get into it (for me that was like page one!) then before you know it you're hooked.
Best poem of his I have read to date although I have heard Shelley's Ode to the West Wind is also good and much of Blake's poetry (which I have yet to read) is held in pretty high esteem too.
For all ye burgeoning poets out there, Queen Mab is an absolute must-read! Get it today.
November 30, 2017
An anarchist manifesto wrapped in a fairytale and addressed to the Chartists.
July 11, 2022
This 1821 semi-epic by Shelley is an unrelenting diatribe against religion, monarchical authority and the inhumane practises of both power and thought which led to the sufferings of people. Henry is sleeping with Ianthe when Mercutio’s imaginary spirit comes and, like Virgil leading Dante through the depths of hell and the circles of purgatory, takes Ianthe, the ‘Spirit’ on a dream-like trip led by the ‘Fairy’, or Queen Mab.
She takes her to see Palmyra’s ruins, which show the ‘memory of senselessness and shame’ in which ‘monarchical conquerors there/proud over prostrate millions trod’. Similarly, Rome, Athens and Sparta are shown where ‘there is a moral desert now’ since wealth, that ' curse of men/blighted the land of its prosperity’ overpowering ‘Virtue and wisdom, truth and liberty … they alone can give the bliss/worthy a soul that claims/Its kindred with eternity.’
Those who serve the powerful are ‘those gilded flies/that basking in the sunshine of a court/fatten on its corruption.’ Workers are exploited, since the powerful ‘feed on the mechanic’s labour [and] force the suborn glebe to yield/its unshared harvest [while] yon squalid form wastes a sunless life in unwholesome mines.’ The powerful support themselves through ‘rapine, madness, treachery, and wrong … from lust, revenge, and murder.’ The result: ‘Look on yonder earth/the golden harvests, the unfailing sun … all things speak peace, harmony and love … all but the outcast man. He fabricates the sword which stabs his peace.’
Man was created ‘for deeds of high resolve, on fancy’s wing to soar unwearied’, but instead seems to have been ‘formed on the dunghill of his fears, to shrink at every sound, to quench the flame of natural love’. Since they have helped the latter come about, he calls on ‘priest, conqueror or prince’ asking ‘Are not thy dreams of unregretted death drear, comfortless, and horrible?’
Economic activities along with religion receives Shelley’s barbs of criticism: ‘Commerce! Beneath whose poison-breathing shade/no solitary virtue dares to spring/the iron rod of penury still compels/her wretched slave to bow the knee to wealth.’ It perverts the course of ‘Nature, impartial in munificence/has gifted man with all-subduing will/matter, with all its transitory shapes/hies subjected and plastic to his feet/that, weak from bondage tremble as they tread.’
God looks over the despair of men, rejoicing: ‘God/who, prototype of human misrule sits/high in heaven’s realm, upon a golden throne,/even like an earthly king, and whose dread work/hell gapes for ever for the unhappy slaves/of fate, whom he created in his sport,/to triumph in their torments when they fell!’
The final two cantos out of the nine which comprise the poem present ‘the future’ with resplendent images of nature: deserts becoming lush forests, nightshade losing its poisonous essence, and both tigers and lions no longer thirsting for blood. Just as the vitriol of the first seven sections largely overpowers these final elysian visions, so specificity, never one of Shelley’s strong points, is much clearer when decrying priests and conquerors than when extolling the new world of ‘kindly passions, pure desires, exhaustless love of human weal/draws on the virtuous mind’ while ‘happiness and science dawn upon the earth’ in its ‘paradise of peace’. I found this part frustratingly vague. Shelley was much better pulling down icons of respectability than in erecting anything substantial in their place.
The poem itself is about sixty-five pages, and it is followed by about eighty pages of ‘Notes’, which show, as if there ever any doubt, the overriding didactic cast of this writing. Secondary sources are quoted to prop up his expositions on selected passages from the poem. Atheism is propounded as the only logical reaction to the fact that men, unable to explain the mysteries of the universe, simply posited some all-powerful being out of their own ignorance. The doctrine of 'necessarianism' is expounded: all actions can be deduced from their prior causes. The traditional role of women and the common practise of marriage are both heavily criticized, as the former are little better than slaves while the latter condemns the majority of its practitioners to largely unsatisfactory lives. Finally, a thorough-going practise of vegetarianism and abstention from all alcoholic imbibing is proposed as an almost miracle cure for all bodily ills. There is even a bit of fanciful cosmology thrown in, as he argues that the axis on which the world is tilted is shifting and will eventually cause major climatic changes and even out of day- and night-times throughout the year.
I’ve come to feel that Shelley was a pretty good poet who saw his verses as a mere medium through which to espouse his much more important and quite revolutionary views on the society around him. The balance between art and ideas in his work is definitely titled much more to the latter.
Recommended.
She takes her to see Palmyra’s ruins, which show the ‘memory of senselessness and shame’ in which ‘monarchical conquerors there/proud over prostrate millions trod’. Similarly, Rome, Athens and Sparta are shown where ‘there is a moral desert now’ since wealth, that ' curse of men/blighted the land of its prosperity’ overpowering ‘Virtue and wisdom, truth and liberty … they alone can give the bliss/worthy a soul that claims/Its kindred with eternity.’
Those who serve the powerful are ‘those gilded flies/that basking in the sunshine of a court/fatten on its corruption.’ Workers are exploited, since the powerful ‘feed on the mechanic’s labour [and] force the suborn glebe to yield/its unshared harvest [while] yon squalid form wastes a sunless life in unwholesome mines.’ The powerful support themselves through ‘rapine, madness, treachery, and wrong … from lust, revenge, and murder.’ The result: ‘Look on yonder earth/the golden harvests, the unfailing sun … all things speak peace, harmony and love … all but the outcast man. He fabricates the sword which stabs his peace.’
Man was created ‘for deeds of high resolve, on fancy’s wing to soar unwearied’, but instead seems to have been ‘formed on the dunghill of his fears, to shrink at every sound, to quench the flame of natural love’. Since they have helped the latter come about, he calls on ‘priest, conqueror or prince’ asking ‘Are not thy dreams of unregretted death drear, comfortless, and horrible?’
Economic activities along with religion receives Shelley’s barbs of criticism: ‘Commerce! Beneath whose poison-breathing shade/no solitary virtue dares to spring/the iron rod of penury still compels/her wretched slave to bow the knee to wealth.’ It perverts the course of ‘Nature, impartial in munificence/has gifted man with all-subduing will/matter, with all its transitory shapes/hies subjected and plastic to his feet/that, weak from bondage tremble as they tread.’
God looks over the despair of men, rejoicing: ‘God/who, prototype of human misrule sits/high in heaven’s realm, upon a golden throne,/even like an earthly king, and whose dread work/hell gapes for ever for the unhappy slaves/of fate, whom he created in his sport,/to triumph in their torments when they fell!’
The final two cantos out of the nine which comprise the poem present ‘the future’ with resplendent images of nature: deserts becoming lush forests, nightshade losing its poisonous essence, and both tigers and lions no longer thirsting for blood. Just as the vitriol of the first seven sections largely overpowers these final elysian visions, so specificity, never one of Shelley’s strong points, is much clearer when decrying priests and conquerors than when extolling the new world of ‘kindly passions, pure desires, exhaustless love of human weal/draws on the virtuous mind’ while ‘happiness and science dawn upon the earth’ in its ‘paradise of peace’. I found this part frustratingly vague. Shelley was much better pulling down icons of respectability than in erecting anything substantial in their place.
The poem itself is about sixty-five pages, and it is followed by about eighty pages of ‘Notes’, which show, as if there ever any doubt, the overriding didactic cast of this writing. Secondary sources are quoted to prop up his expositions on selected passages from the poem. Atheism is propounded as the only logical reaction to the fact that men, unable to explain the mysteries of the universe, simply posited some all-powerful being out of their own ignorance. The doctrine of 'necessarianism' is expounded: all actions can be deduced from their prior causes. The traditional role of women and the common practise of marriage are both heavily criticized, as the former are little better than slaves while the latter condemns the majority of its practitioners to largely unsatisfactory lives. Finally, a thorough-going practise of vegetarianism and abstention from all alcoholic imbibing is proposed as an almost miracle cure for all bodily ills. There is even a bit of fanciful cosmology thrown in, as he argues that the axis on which the world is tilted is shifting and will eventually cause major climatic changes and even out of day- and night-times throughout the year.
I’ve come to feel that Shelley was a pretty good poet who saw his verses as a mere medium through which to espouse his much more important and quite revolutionary views on the society around him. The balance between art and ideas in his work is definitely titled much more to the latter.
Recommended.
March 5, 2025
Fortf full. Bör läsa den igen nykter men denr typ bra tror jag iaf.
October 11, 2024
This poem is wonderful. It is beautifully written and deploys such a creative spirit throughout the nine cantos. I think that this poem create a beautiful story, somewhat akin to the poem of Parmenides, and reminiscent of the Timaeus of Plato. The opening read as such:
"Whose is the love that, gleaming through the world,
Wards off the poisonous arrow of its scorn?
Whose is the warm and partial praise,
Virtue’s most sweet reward?"
The poem is atheistic, or at least anti-christian, which is refreshing to read. Shelley is brilliant in his criticism of religion and social inequalities. This poem is so aware of its dire time, that we feel this yearning of the Spirit towards the Wish.
"‘Religion! thou wert then in manhood’s prime;
But age crept on; one God would not suffice
For senile puerility; thou framedst
A tale to suit thy dotage and to glut
Thy misery-thirsting soul, that the mad fiend
Thy wickedness had pictured might afford
A plea for sating the unnatural thirst
For murder, rapine, violence and crime,"
I also loved the discussion of animals rights and vegetarianism in this poem. Shelley makes a beautiful argument against meat-eating and drawing a mythology of primordial sin around the killing of animals. I think Shelley is a brilliant philosopher and its shows very much so in this poem, which find some much familiarity with my own mind.
"Whose is the love that, gleaming through the world,
Wards off the poisonous arrow of its scorn?
Whose is the warm and partial praise,
Virtue’s most sweet reward?"
The poem is atheistic, or at least anti-christian, which is refreshing to read. Shelley is brilliant in his criticism of religion and social inequalities. This poem is so aware of its dire time, that we feel this yearning of the Spirit towards the Wish.
"‘Religion! thou wert then in manhood’s prime;
But age crept on; one God would not suffice
For senile puerility; thou framedst
A tale to suit thy dotage and to glut
Thy misery-thirsting soul, that the mad fiend
Thy wickedness had pictured might afford
A plea for sating the unnatural thirst
For murder, rapine, violence and crime,"
I also loved the discussion of animals rights and vegetarianism in this poem. Shelley makes a beautiful argument against meat-eating and drawing a mythology of primordial sin around the killing of animals. I think Shelley is a brilliant philosopher and its shows very much so in this poem, which find some much familiarity with my own mind.
July 21, 2020
If i could dine with any 5 earthlings (living or dead but not of the future), i'd seriously consider inviting Percy Bysshe Shelley.
Dude was only 18-years-old when he finished this poem! Quibble all you like with his ideas but it sure doesn't read like anything written by any 18-year-old i can reasonably imagine.
I bet it sounds beautiful, too ... certainly better than the voice in my head as i read it silently to myself. I only found a couple options on Youtube, of which i feel this link is the better: https://youtu.be/40OmegVL0iQ
If you really want a fairy story, though, this poem is not for you. It explores young Percy's thoughts about what's wrong with the world and his ideas of what a good world would look like.
Part of a 2020 Pandemic Project: using poets' repetitions to make something i'm now calling repoesy.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
if you'd like to make your own...
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
death
far
days
there is no god
is there a god
earth
go
Dude was only 18-years-old when he finished this poem! Quibble all you like with his ideas but it sure doesn't read like anything written by any 18-year-old i can reasonably imagine.
I bet it sounds beautiful, too ... certainly better than the voice in my head as i read it silently to myself. I only found a couple options on Youtube, of which i feel this link is the better: https://youtu.be/40OmegVL0iQ
If you really want a fairy story, though, this poem is not for you. It explores young Percy's thoughts about what's wrong with the world and his ideas of what a good world would look like.
Part of a 2020 Pandemic Project: using poets' repetitions to make something i'm now calling repoesy.
Death: Is there a god?
Earth: Days go far.
: There is no god.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
if you'd like to make your own...
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
death
far
days
there is no god
is there a god
earth
go
May 21, 2017
...when power of imparting joy
Is equal to the will, the human soul
Requires no other heaven.
As beautiful as beauty gets! It's going to take me time to get over this.
Recommended to everyone.
Is equal to the will, the human soul
Requires no other heaven.
As beautiful as beauty gets! It's going to take me time to get over this.
Recommended to everyone.
June 25, 2024
El man la lanza muy duro.
January 4, 2024
Maybe it's just me, but I didn't enjoy the poem as much as I enjoyed the NOTES! The book is split about 50/50 between poem/notes and the most fun section is definitely the latter.
I found the notes easy to understand and really interesting reading. I didn't agree with every point, of course, but the arguments made sense and I'm glad to have read them.
I found the notes easy to understand and really interesting reading. I didn't agree with every point, of course, but the arguments made sense and I'm glad to have read them.
November 1, 2025
“How wonderful is Death, Death, and his brother Sleep! One, pale as yonder waning moon With lips of lurid blue; The other, rosy as the morn When throned on ocean’s wave It blushes o'er the world; Yet both so passing wonderful!”
December 16, 2017
The fairy's midwife comes from a beloved speech of Mercutio occasioned by Romeo's frolicsome detours, but Shelley's Mercutio is more Hamlet (indeed, are any of these Romantic heroes NOT Hamlet?). And perhaps a bit of Pilgrim's Progress, naughtily paganized into a dialogue between Spirit and the fairy queen in which, among other topics, the existence of God is fiercely debated and Shelley's earlier Necessity of Atheism recapitulated. At other points, Shelley describes Nature in terms shimmering with cosmic energy. He is no Wordsworth; Shelley's Nature is a metaphysical battlefield. At another moment, he rails against Mammon and the tyranny of economic injustice. "Thus do the generations of the Earth go to the grave and issue from the womb." And yet, for all the fraught adolescence of Shelley's voice there is a generosity of spirit, a deep well of honest humanity I found lacking in Childe Harold.
Read
February 9, 2015I wish I had read Shelly in my wasted youth instead of Superman comics. If you read Queen Mab take time to ponder what Shelly is saying. This is just one example and it says quite a lot.
SPIRIT
I was an infant when my mother went
To see an atheist burned. She took me there.
The dark-robed priests were met around the pile;
The multitude was gazing silently;
And as the culprit passed with dauntless mien,
Tempered disdain in his unaltering eye,
Mixed with a quiet smile, shone calmly forth;
The thirsty fire crept round his manly limbs;
His resolute eyes were scorched to blindness soon;
His death-pang rent my heart! the insensate mob
Uttered a cry of triumph, and I wept.
"Weep not, child!" cried my mother, "for that man
Has said, 'There is no God.'"
-- Percy Bysshe Shelley, from Queen Mab: A Philosophical Poem VII (1813)
A excellent read I intend to read more Shelly's writings.
SPIRIT
I was an infant when my mother went
To see an atheist burned. She took me there.
The dark-robed priests were met around the pile;
The multitude was gazing silently;
And as the culprit passed with dauntless mien,
Tempered disdain in his unaltering eye,
Mixed with a quiet smile, shone calmly forth;
The thirsty fire crept round his manly limbs;
His resolute eyes were scorched to blindness soon;
His death-pang rent my heart! the insensate mob
Uttered a cry of triumph, and I wept.
"Weep not, child!" cried my mother, "for that man
Has said, 'There is no God.'"
-- Percy Bysshe Shelley, from Queen Mab: A Philosophical Poem VII (1813)
A excellent read I intend to read more Shelly's writings.
December 17, 2025
Shelley is a very intellectual poet, and this poem shows it very well. It is a strange mix of Platonic philosophy and unrepentant atheism. Shelley seems to always dance between Nihilism and Mysticism in a way that he can't be said to prefer either, but at the same time wholly represents both. What is most amazing is that his poetry is not less beautiful for it, but instead, this tension between extremes magnifies the beauty and pathos of this work.
September 15, 2011
Forgot to update...So here is a big poem by Percy Shelley. Sure, maybe it's not exactly perfectly crafted, and it is pretty awkward sometimes, but I found it interesting still. It's really just Percy rambling on about his radical views on society, spoken by a fairy in outer space. Plus, considering he was just 19 when he wrote it I'd have to give him a tip of the hat.
Read
July 31, 2011Revolutionary, atheistic, radical poem by everyone's favorite Romantic poet. It's no wonder this work was a favorite of England's working class movement for decades...and it still casts its shadow today.
September 11, 2026
"Oh! Many a widow, many an orphan cursed // The building of that fane; and many a father // Worn out with toil and slavery implored // The poor man's god to sweep it from the earth, // And spare his children the detested task // Of piling stone on stone, and poisoning // The choicest days of life, // To soothe a dotard's vanity"
"But what was he that taught them that the god // Of nature and benevolence hath given // A special sanction to the trade of blood?"
Quite outstandingly forceful, Shelley's grand poetic, didactic tale astounds with its vehemence, particularly in earlier sections, with rage, anger and sheer disdain thrust at human arrogance, monarchy, religion, the trade of blood. It is an extremely didactic poem, and whilst at times it can whirl into a tangent of self-assured righteousness, that negates stronger proofs necessary for its claims, at others it concentrates with marvellous imagery, lyricism, beauty and sheer force to really seem sublime. It is perhaps evident that it is a young author, its beauty, nor its vehemence is tempered by the wisdom of age, and instead finds its strength in the clever sharpness of youth.
Shelley's notes are something else, gone is the necessity for beauty and with it comes clinical, severe and quite illuminating ideals - the freedom of love, the balancing of workload, the innocence of prostitutes (to which the blame of their situation must solely reside with the state), the complete refusal of religious reasonings in tropes. It is an excellent read.
"But what was he that taught them that the god // Of nature and benevolence hath given // A special sanction to the trade of blood?"
Quite outstandingly forceful, Shelley's grand poetic, didactic tale astounds with its vehemence, particularly in earlier sections, with rage, anger and sheer disdain thrust at human arrogance, monarchy, religion, the trade of blood. It is an extremely didactic poem, and whilst at times it can whirl into a tangent of self-assured righteousness, that negates stronger proofs necessary for its claims, at others it concentrates with marvellous imagery, lyricism, beauty and sheer force to really seem sublime. It is perhaps evident that it is a young author, its beauty, nor its vehemence is tempered by the wisdom of age, and instead finds its strength in the clever sharpness of youth.
Shelley's notes are something else, gone is the necessity for beauty and with it comes clinical, severe and quite illuminating ideals - the freedom of love, the balancing of workload, the innocence of prostitutes (to which the blame of their situation must solely reside with the state), the complete refusal of religious reasonings in tropes. It is an excellent read.
Read
February 12, 2022I get why some people like this, but it's not for me. Good way to understand Shelley and the Romantics, but clearly repetitive for the sake of targeting a younger audience.
April 7, 2022
So good. So so so good. Burns with passion and righteous fury; full to the brim with dense philosophy and soaring rhetoric. Man's vegetarianism is based on weird grounds tho 🤔
November 29, 2023
‘Grave and hoary-headed hypocrite’ is the best diss I’ve heard!
November 9, 2025
I needed to read this for research and I wasn't expecting it to be as woke as it was, at least for the early 19thC aristocrat who authored it. I particularly found the notes section interesting.
August 6, 2019
Kindle版。诗显得自我失控，只能称为少作。但是加一星给所有的Notes和写下它们的那个少年。PS 对照本诗前两章后来的重写版，可见Shelley还是很勤奋的
October 5, 2024
This reads more like one of the pamphlets that Shelley was writing at the time than like a poem. It is embellished with some poetic imagery at the beginning and at the end, but the rest is all rhetoric. Good rhetoric at times, yes, but then it could have been all prose - the notes are an interesting read. The fairy herself is just a mouthpiece, her presence is purely formal, her speeches could have been spoken by any other symbolic presence. And it has the problem that all of Shelley's writing has - that when he goes from denunciations to his utopian vision, it can sound like he is describing a Disney movie:
No longer now the wingèd habitants,
That in the woods their sweet lives sing away,
Flee from the form of man; but gather round,
And prune their sunny feathers on the hands
Which little children stretch in friendly sport
Towards these dreadless partners of their play.
And, we learn, every single priest or king that has ever lived are evil and poison, incapable of love, judgement, or hope. Yeah, I don't know about that.
Not a bad read, but since Shelley's thought and poetry achieve much greater symbiosis in his later work, I rate this one quite a bit lower.
No longer now the wingèd habitants,
That in the woods their sweet lives sing away,
Flee from the form of man; but gather round,
And prune their sunny feathers on the hands
Which little children stretch in friendly sport
Towards these dreadless partners of their play.
And, we learn, every single priest or king that has ever lived are evil and poison, incapable of love, judgement, or hope. Yeah, I don't know about that.
Not a bad read, but since Shelley's thought and poetry achieve much greater symbiosis in his later work, I rate this one quite a bit lower.
February 17, 2017
Painful. Just painful.
This is not a fairytale, nor a children's story and has actually very little to do with Queen Mab actually. It's a criticism of Shelley's time, as most Romantic works are, and as much as I love Percy Shelley I have to say that this work is long, hard to read, and just an overall pain.
Sorry Percy.
This is not a fairytale, nor a children's story and has actually very little to do with Queen Mab actually. It's a criticism of Shelley's time, as most Romantic works are, and as much as I love Percy Shelley I have to say that this work is long, hard to read, and just an overall pain.
Sorry Percy.
October 13, 2019
I feel this one since I didn't write it only edited it I can write a review and not seem like shameless self promo.
I love this poem and thats one reason I chose to work on it. That and when I had a scan of it I noticed there was one Greek word missing and had to find it. That's when I realized how many reprints of this poem exist and how many do not include Shelley's notes. Those notes are longer than the poem and were hand selected by him he wanted them in the poem. I have only found around 3 editions that kept his notes original some translate them and others cut them out. Shelley wanted the people to know their was more to this poem. It is a poem of layers. A true scholarly work. My goal with this book and it will not be the last is to make an edition that holds the words of the original and formatting when possible but make them look as if they were published in today's world. No alterations to the original text.
This book was done in honor of Shelley a man who if he had only learnt to swim would have made a lot more changes to this world.
I love this poem and thats one reason I chose to work on it. That and when I had a scan of it I noticed there was one Greek word missing and had to find it. That's when I realized how many reprints of this poem exist and how many do not include Shelley's notes. Those notes are longer than the poem and were hand selected by him he wanted them in the poem. I have only found around 3 editions that kept his notes original some translate them and others cut them out. Shelley wanted the people to know their was more to this poem. It is a poem of layers. A true scholarly work. My goal with this book and it will not be the last is to make an edition that holds the words of the original and formatting when possible but make them look as if they were published in today's world. No alterations to the original text.
This book was done in honor of Shelley a man who if he had only learnt to swim would have made a lot more changes to this world.
May 17, 2020
I'm only giving this five stars for the inadvertently hilarious notes section where an absolutely-certain 18 year old Shelly goes on a long, long, long rant about the absolute superiority of vegetarianism and how meat eating is the source of ALL HUMAN WRONG.
Otherwise - the poetry is good. The message is what you would expect from an intelligent, alienated 18 year old atheist. At first enlivened by the poetry and then just relentlessly didactic revolutionary atheist materialism. There are NO GODS - but there is a 'world spirit', which is definitely not just a god. etc etc.
Still good lines & imagery throughout though.
Otherwise - the poetry is good. The message is what you would expect from an intelligent, alienated 18 year old atheist. At first enlivened by the poetry and then just relentlessly didactic revolutionary atheist materialism. There are NO GODS - but there is a 'world spirit', which is definitely not just a god. etc etc.
Still good lines & imagery throughout though.
August 5, 2011
Shelley seems to forget sometimes when he's supposed to be pretending that a character is speaking and not himself, but it's still pretty stirring stuff and plenty accurate for the same targets today.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 36 reviews