Category: Ozymandias

Watchmen, by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons, is considered by many to be one of the greatest comics ever written as it transformed the entire comic book world. It not only criticizes comics and superheroes, but it in fact deconstructs the entire myth of the superhero. The central question that Moore and Gibbons challenge readers to think about, “who watches the Watchmen,” opens up some discussion involving the moralities of the characters. Should we as readers and members of the comic book world consider the costumed adventurers as heroes? If so, what morals are we able to empathize with, and where do we draw the line?

Rorschach and Ozymandias are two examples of characters whose moralities are shaped by different standards. However, while the audience looks like Rorschach and Ozymandias in contrasting lights, they do share some similarities. For starters, we know that Rorschach and Ozymandias come from similar backgrounds in the sense that they both lack parental figures to model themselves after early on in their adolescence. The whereabouts of Rorschach’s father are unknown, and his mother who prostitutes herself abuses him. He was also beaten by a group of men as a child. Similarly, Ozymandias is orphaned at the age of seventeen. Never having a father figure to look up to, he instead finds comfort and inspiration in the works of Alexander the Great, an important factor in the motivation of his morals.

Rorschach is a complex character but his moral beliefs are for the most part very black and white: it is good and it is evil there is no in-between. While Rorschach once abided by the laws, he eventually came to the revelation that he was too “soft” for letting evil live (Moore & Gibbons, 192). Consequently, he descends into a world of violence and relentlessness. As readers, we are challenged to question what allows Rorschach to resort to such graphic aggression, such as the slaughtering of innocent dogs that were feeding off the bones of a murdered child, or handcuffing the real murderer and burning him alive. In chapter six, a monologue given by Rorschach and delivered to the psychiatrist provides insight as to why when he claims that “existence is random…save what we choose to impose” (Moore & Gibbons, 198). It is clear that Rorschach sees each individual as independent from one another and the governance of morals should rely on the individual. He discards the law and punishes those who are evil in a way that he sees fit. Rorschach chooses his past to be the driving force behind his morality and his decisions. He relies on himself to be the determiner of who is allowed to live and who is allowed to die. In this sense, he lacks solidarity or the notion that he is part of an interdependent group and therefore fails to consider how his actions may affect those around him. Instead, his morals are driven by justice, all people should be treated equally unless there is a legitimate reason, in this case, if they are evil, to treat them unequally (“Three Systems for Ethical Reasoning”).

Rorschach is usually uncompromising when it comes to following his moral ideals, hence his untimely demise born from his decision to tell the world about Ozymandias’ crimes. However, he provides his audience with an instance in which his tendency to act with violence against those he believes to be evil is compromised. When Rorschach comes face to face with the woman who has accused him of making sexual advances on her, he initially intends to execute her as he has done with the rest of his victims. But after he stares into the woman’s child’s helpless eyes, he changes his mind and lets her go. This is a critical point in the plot because we see that Rorschach is also driven by compassion, his way of “mitigating suffering” for the young boy (“Three Systems for Ethical Reasoning”). Rorschach sees himself in the young boy and longs to indirectly give him the life he never had. In fact, executing the mother would seemingly be a direct contradiction of his morals because by killing the woman, he would be creating the similar past that he once had for the boy, the very past that drove him to become Rorschach, then making him evil. Choosing to let the mother live was a slight compromise of Rorschach’s morals, however, it was done so in order to avoid becoming the evil one himself. Had he executed the mother, he would have had to execute himself.

Ozymandias’ morals revolve mainly around the long-term consequences of his actions. As previously mentioned, Ozymandias has an obsession with Alexander the Great, and like he once did, longed to unite the world into one peaceful utopia. Readers soon discover Ozymandias’ plan to create this perpetual peace by wiping out half of the population in New York City, which ultimately causes the rest of the world to unite and the peace to be restored, at least for the time being. The ethical question then arises: is it okay to kill millions of people if it will save thousands more? Ozymandias believes so: “I’ve struggled across the backs of murdered innocents to save humanity…” (Moore & Gibbons, 402). In this way, he portrays himself to be a utilitarianist. According to his claim, killing off a smaller part of the population was necessary in order to save a much more significant amount of the population. If this is the case, he is acting in the interest of the public and not in the interest of himself. But perhaps Ozymandias’ true motives are not what he claims them to be. If the character is scrutinized, one may find that Ozymandias is the archetype for egoism more so than that of a utilitarianist. While it may seem Ozymandias kills an entire population for the good of others, he really does it for self-fulfillment and self-importance. He has a great need to feel he is making a difference and serving a purpose in the world, even if it means sacrificing thousands of lives for the sake of himself. That being said, Ozymandias’ morals are really shaped around the benefit of himself.

Given that Rorschach has the potential to be driven by compassion and Ozymandias acts according to his best interests, it is easier to empathize with and therefore sees Rorschach as the protagonist, and perhaps even Watchmen’s overall hero. Despite the fact that Rorschach lacks solidarity in the sense that his morals are shaped based upon his own personal history and therefore disregards public opinion, he acts compassionately and in a way that limits suffering for good people. In addition, there is honorability in his unwillingness to compromise when it comes to letting evil prevail. Ozymandias, no matter how good his intentions may seem, shapes his morals around the end result that must consist of his self-fulfillment.

Throughout both Ozymandias and London, the poets portray power through the corruption of both the Egyptian tyrant Ozymandias, and the most wealthy groups of society in Victorian London such as the government, monarchy and the church. Shelley uses Ozymandias’s corruptive nature to highlight how his rule over his empire, led to him becoming an arrogant leader with a love for power and an utter disregard for his own people. The poet suggests that Ozymandias believes he is superior to his people and is not merely a pharaoh but the ‘King of kings’, this poetic technique of irony is used to juxtapose his current situation, in which he is isolated and all that remains is the distant memory and ‘two vast and trunkless legs of stone in the desert. This could also be a reference to Shelley’s personal, atheist views and is ultimately mocking religion by comparing Ozymandias to the all-loving and supreme leader of Christianity. He also envisages himself on a ‘pedestal’ compared to his people as it is suggested he is an elevated version of himself in which everything belongs to him. This creates an uncomfortable tone for the reader as they feel hatred towards this cruel figure who was recognised as a military leader but has destroyed any legacy he left behind with his corruptive nature. The poet intended to highlight his hate for political power through Ozymandias’s rein and that it leads to the downfall of society and in this case an entire civilisation. Therefore, Shelley clearly conveys the power of corruption through the behaviour of the tyrant Ozymandias, and that ultimately, corruption leads to the destruction of a civilisation. Similarly, in London, Blake implies that the church, monarchy and government are corrupted organisations that had the power to enforce change but chose not to out of greed for increased wealth and financial security. Throughout, Blake implies his hatred towards organised religion and even the ‘blackening church appals’ when it comes to caring for its people. This juxtaposes with common associations we would have of the church such as belonging and safety of purity, however, had become corrupt and is permanently stained by the deaths of the young children that should be in their care. The ‘chimney sweepers cry’ out of fear due to the high risk of falling or cancer from their jobs as they have been failed by the social care system at such an early age. Not only is the church corrupted, but the monarchy is also corrupted as it is responsible for the ‘blood [that runs] down palace walls’ because the deaths of the soldiers are at the hands of the monarchy as they gave their lives to expand the empire and sacrificed the powerless for the powerful. Even if soldiers do return, instead of the promises of wealth and love, they receive no support or financial benefits, because the monarchy would have used the money for extravagant purchases instead of helping those in need. Blake even uses the form of an acrostic poem in stanza 3 to subliminally tell the government to ‘HEAR’ what he has to say, therefore enlightening other working-class people to realise the truth about those with political power. The reader may also feel anger towards the main institutions because their love of money and their corruptive nature has blinded them to hardships their own people face. As a result, both Blake and Shelley convey their hate for corrupted organisations and highlight the power in society.

Throughout both poems, Shelley and Blake portray the powerless in both Egyptian and Victorian society. Shelley presents the powerless in society by enforcing the lack of control slaves had in comparison to the Egyptian pharaoh. He had firm control over his people, whilst his ‘ hand mocked them’ because, with just one movement of his hand, he could affect all that is below him, or those who had no influence upon his reign He used his slaves to build large, unnecessary structures that are now a ‘colossal wreck’, this metaphor also implies the downfall of Ozymandias and his powerful image has been destroyed. The poem is written in iambic pentameter to convey the love Ozymandias has for himself and the control he once had over his own people who were powerless.

However, this juxtaposes with the irregular rhyme scheme that represents his current situation as a broken statue, and the lack of power he now has. Ozymandias is now powerless due to nature’s destructive capabilities, and now ‘nothing beside remains’ of the once-powerful civilisation. Shelley intends to highlight that a majority of people in the Egyptian period lived in extreme poverty, similar to which of the lower classes in the 18th century, this could cause the reader to feel sympathy towards the slaves that were forced into unpaid labour and would have taught victorian people about the archaeological discoveries that had taken place 20 years before. Similarly, in London, Blake implies the lack of power of the working-class people who are forced to work in horrific conditions with little money as a result. He highlights that ‘every’ working-class person has marks of weakness and marks of woe’ as everyone had been affected by the Industrial revolution. as consequence, they have been physically marked by hardship due to the working conditions and were likely to be malnourished and liable to disease. The technique of woeful alteration only further highlights the semantic field of despair and sadness. Not only are adults powerless, with little control over their own lives, but young women who have been forced into prostitution are also exploited and have little power in society, they are shamed upon by the church and are accused of ‘Plaguing the marriage hearse’ for accordingly ‘ruining’ the tradition of marriage because young men are going to prostitutes because they are also unhappy. It juxtaposes the idea that women were supposedly required to remain ‘clean’ however now she is plagued with an STD because she was lead into child prostitution as a last resort. However, this could also be inferred as marriage is the death of a women’s freedom because men had control over their wives and were treated like objects instead of people, with no poet to change their own life.

Not only can women be heard cursing, but ‘infants also cry’ due to the constant suffering both in the present and throughout their whole life, the oral imagery is so vivid that we can infer that instead of enjoying their youth, they are working in workhouses without a chance of a happy future. The child has no way of escaping poverty, with little chance of ever being able to enjoy their youth and has been born into a world of fear and inequality. He shares his personal experience to entice the reader, this leads the reader to feel sympathetic towards the poorer classes, especially women and children because they were powerless. Readers at the time might have even felt inspired to protest or revolt in order to gain new rights to protect those in danger. Blake successfully portrays life in London as a horrific place where the government controls everything.

The power of nature is also implied through both Ozymandias and London but differs in both poems in the quantity of power nature has. Throughout the poem, Shelley clearly emphasis that nature has claimed back what is rightfully theirs and even though it was not immediate, it will always dominate over mortals. Even though the’ Shattered visage’ of broken power is still visible, the once-powerful civilisation has been destroyed and he is now a fraction of the leader he once was because nature has prevailed and will continue to do so. The sibilance used here imitates the wind whistling over the sand to further create a sense of eeriness and unimportance. Even though power corrupted him, it is ironic that nature continues to erode at his legacy until only ‘sands’ remain and that the desert created by nature imprisons the statue, possibly giving Ozymandias time to reflect on what he has done. His ‘works’ are no longer recognisable due to nature’s destructive capabilities, nature has not only taken his physical properties but has enforced that the moral of the poem is that, whilst power and wealth are substantial at the moment, more is needed to create a legacy that will be left behind. The poet intends to reveal the little power humans have in comparison to nature, in order for the reader to realise that we rely on natural sources to survive and its recourses should be used wisely instead of being wasted on tyrant figures such as Ozymandias. Therefore, Shelley clearly conveys the power of nature because Ozymandias’ civilisation is no longer, and it is a consequence of the immense power nature has over humans and will ultimately take back everything. Unlike Ozymandias, Blake implies that the government have control over everything in society, including nature and it is powerless in this case. The poem begins with Blake ‘Wander[ing] through each chartered street’ of London. This is the opening line which tells us this is a personal monologue of experiences whilst living in London at the time of the Industrial Revolution. Every street is mapped by the rich government whilst the peasants who live in the streets have poor conditions. Not only have the government got control over the land of the city, but they also have maintained a level of control over the river Thames as it does continue to ‘flow’ even though it is ‘chartered’ It is an oxymoron

because it juxtaposes the freedom of the river and the control the government has over everyone’s life and even natural things such as a river. The repetition of the word chartered puts emphasis on the fact that nature can no longer go free and has too managed to be controlled. This differs from the poem Ozymandias, as nature has currently got no power, however, due to London being set in Georgian England, that is quite recent in caparison to Ozymandias so there is still time for nature to take back control. With the immense population increase, forests and other natural sites would have been destroyed in order to build new factories on the land, and space for agricultural sites. Therefore, Blake indicates that nature has little power in society, by expressing his personal views to highlight for the reader that not only does the government have power over the people, but natural things too.

In conclusion, both poets consistently portray the theme of power in society, by the corruptive nature of those who rule over the people, how in one case nature prevailed but in ‘London’ it remained powerless and they both explore the lack of power in both London and Ancient Egypt which was symbolic of the Georgian period. Shelley and Blake were both advocates of the romantic movement and portray strong emotion throughout their poetry to make their poetry more memorable and more emotional for the reader. The poems have a long-lasting message that people can connect to even in 2020, and until there is no corruption or social class gap, people will continue to do so. Therefore, both poets intend to use their popular platform as an advantage to highlight to their audiences that something must be done about corrupted figures at the top of society, the powerless must be helped and people should not exploit nature’s natural recourses.

Power is presented in Ozymandias by a king’s statue. The statue says a lot about Rameses II the king, his attitude, and how he ruled.

Firstly, the phrase “vast and trunkless” suggests the statue was large but “trunkless” meaning that it’s without a body. This phrase shows that even without the body the legs alone are huge enough. Time has passed and part of the structure is still standing, not completely ruined.

In line 5 the quote “wrinkled lip and sneer” may imply that the king was arrogant. Throughout the text, there are negative connotations about the king. Along with the negative connotations, it’s fair to say that the sculptor disliked the king because this is an unflattering depiction of him. Another clue to the sculptor’s hatred towards the king was “Tell that it’s sculptor well those passions read”. A passion is a strong emotion, a strong emotion could be hatred, this is the only example of a strong emotion the sculptor has towards the king. He intended to ridicule his leader by art. It shows the effect of how art can conquer power.

Linking with the last paragraph, the phrase “Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things gives the impression the king’s alive because of his statue which may be an accurate representation of his personality although he was dead several years ago. Since this was a ruin, it’s not easy to understand the ruins in detail but passerby’s if any would be able to understand that there was once a monarchy in the area, they’re in.

Following on, the cite “The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed” portrays the king being a man who made fun of his own people. His power made him get away with his wrongdoings. “The heart that fed” indicates that people depend on him for them to be alive. The metaphor suggests that he’s so significant that without him, his population would die.

From Line 13 – 15 there was a contrast from the beginning explaining how nature and time had taken the king’s power away. “Round the decay” suggests that he’s nothing but a ruin. “Of that colossal wreck links back to the beginning phrase “vast and trunkless legs”. Even though the statue is massive it is still a wreck, therefore, it’s a forgotten ruin. Nowadays there are many statues so there is insignificance about this statue. The other 3 phrases “boundless and bare”, “lone and level”, “sands stretch far away” all show how the king has been overruled by nature and art. There aren’t many visitors that visit this site as it’s isolated. It’s abandoned which shows that the current population doesn’t care about an outdated king’s statue. Power had gone, it’s not immortal.

The overall message of this poem is power is never permanent even if Rameses II a ruler who thought his powers were everlasting, it can be taken over by the most innocent of things.

Percy Bysshe Shelley represents throughout the entirety of the poem that eventually power won’t amount to anything and will be forgotten or to have no importance.

All that remains of the statue are two “vast” stone legs standing upright and a head half-buried in sand, along with a boastful inscription describing the ruler as the “king of kings” whose mighty achievements invoke awe and despair in all who behold them. The inscription stands in ironic contrast to the decrepit reality of the statue, however, underscoring the ultimate transience of political power. The poem critiques such power through its suggestion that both great rulers and their kingdoms will fall to the sands of time. In the poem, the speaker relates a story a traveller told him about the ruins of a “colossal wreck” of a sculpture whose decaying physical state mirrors the dissolution of its subject’s (Ozymandias’s) power. Only two upright legs, a face, and a pedestal remain of Ozymandias’s original statue, and even these individual parts of the statue are not in great shape: the face, for instance, is “shattered.’ Clearly, time hasn’t been kind to this statue, whose pitiful state undercuts the bold assertion of its inscription. The fact that even this “king of kings” lies decaying in a distant desert suggests that no amount of power can withstand the merciless and unceasing passage of time.

The speaker goes on to explain that time not only destroyed this statue, it also essentially erased the entire kingdom the statue was built to overlook. The speaker immediately follows the king’s declaration found on the pedestal of the statue—“Look upon my works, ye Mighty, and despair!”—with the line “Nothing beside remains.” Such a savage contradiction makes the king’s prideful dare almost comically naïve. Ozymandias had believed that while he himself would die, he would leave a lasting and intimidating legacy through everything he built. Yet his words are ultimately empty, as everything he built has crumbled. The people and places he ruled over are gone, leaving only an abandoned desert whose “lone and level sands” imply that not even a trace of the kingdom’s former glory can be discerned. The pedestal’s claim that onlookers should despair at Ozymandias’s works thus takes on a new and ironic meaning: one despairs not at Ozymandias’s power, but at how powerless time and decay make everyone.

The speaker also uses the specific example of Ozymandias to make a broader pronouncement about the ephemeral nature of power and, in turn, to implicitly critique tyranny. The speaker evokes the image of a cruel leader; Ozymandias wears a “frown” along with the “sneer of cold command.’ That such “passions” are now recorded only on “lifeless things” (i.e., the statue) is a clear rebuke of such a ruler, and suggests that the speaker believes such tyranny now only exists on the face of a dead and crumbling piece of stone.

The poem’s depiction of the destruction of Ozymandias and his tyranny isn’t entirely fictional: Ozymandias is the Greek name for the Egyptian pharaoh Ramses II, who dramatically expanded Egypt’s empire and who had several statues of himself built throughout Egypt.

By alluding to an actual ancient empire, and an actual king, the poem reminds readers that history is full of the rises and falls of empires. No power is permanent, regardless of how omnipotent a ruler believes himself to be. Even the “king of kings” may one day be a forgotten relic of an “antique land.”

In Ozymandias and London shows us that nature is the most powerful thing and that humans can not control it. The statue in Ozymandias shows the importance of human power and how we as humans thing we can dominate nature. This can be portrayed in the quote ‘near them, on the sand half sunk, a shattered visage lies’. Sibilance is used in this section because is shows that we can almost imagine the sight of the statue sinking and it shows to the reader how incredibly strong nature is .This can also be seen in London when the poet says ‘near where the chartered Thames does flow. There is juxtaposition between ‘chartered’ and ‘Flow’ and this shows that the river will flow unconditionally even if a human try to intervened with nature humans will never win The poem London is written iniambic tetrameter which suggest to us that its rethemed ABAB and this creates a tone of consistency and purity. London and Ozymandias show us that nature is powerful and that no matter how hard a human may try they will never defeat it.

In Ozymandias shelly writes about how the city has fallen and how the city must have gone downhill because there is not a sign of any people near or around the statue. In London It tells us about all the poorer people in the city and how they are experiencing a bad time in the money department. But in London the city still lives whereas in Ozymandias the city has fallen and could not be helped. This can be seen in the poem London where Blake states ‘mind forged manacles I hear’ the personification of the manacles shows the reader that the people in the city are forced their minds to stay in the lace they live and make them think that In every sound that they hear they can feel and hear the pain. This quote created the imagery of a old time prisoner walking and his chains clashing against one and other creating the feeling of being trapped in a place they can no longer escape from. The poem Ozymandias is written in sonnet form whereas London is is written in iambic tetrameter. The tone of the two poems are quite sad and low tones because both poems created a feeling of pain and suffering to the reader.

Also, In Ozymandias the sand slips through the hands just like Ozymandias power slips away. In London, the power disappears from the hierarchy as soon as the poem mentions how actually London is not a nice place to be living in. In Ozymandias, the sand gets into every small piece of space which could symbolise or represent how power affects the people and when the statue falls or sinks into the sand it could symbolise the fact that power never dies. Whereas in London Blake talks about how the ‘blood runs down the palace walls’ this can symbolise that the people with the money have blood on their hands and there the most powerful people. The verb ’runs’ shows us that the blood is always on the walls of the palace and that there are always people dying due to the rich instead of the poor. This creates imagery of falling and the purity of the colour red and how it links to Ozymandias because the quote ‘nothing beside remains. round the decay’.

Additionally, the imagery in London that has been created is loud sounds pf pain and sorrow through the city, this can be seen in the quote ‘a mark in every face I meet ‘and ’in every cry of every man’ this created a tone of pain and empathy to the reader because of the pain you can metaphorically hear through the quotes of the poem. Whereas in Ozymandias the imagery of the statue of the sunken king ‘half sunk a shattered visage lies’ this creates a tone of powerlessness and isolation to the reader because the statue of the ‘most powerful’ person has sunk and everyone has forgotten about the ‘king of kings’.

Finally, the rhythm of the two poems the rhythm of London is extremely basic and has repeated sounds and he uses rhythm to keep going over the feeling of sorrow and emptiness in the poem. The rhythm also sows us that the as the poet walks through the streets, he can see the sorrow and the pain in everyone face. Whereas is Ozymandias the rhythm of the poem is in sonnet form and the writer uses this is used because it creates a feeling of enlarging the poem and stretching out the feelings conveyed .

Power is presented in Ozymandias as one like a dictatorship. For example, important figures or people in power are usually celebrated through statues and monuments. In Ozymandias, the state of the statue can symbolise the change in power. For example, when Ozymandias was in power it is suggested that he was controlling and cruel. This is evident in the line, ‘sneer of cold command’. The use of plosive alliteration exaggerates the idea that he is powerful and feared. In contrast, in the line ’Half sunk, a shattered visage lies’ and ‘trunkless legs of stone’. The use of these adjectives to describe the statue suggest the downfall in Ozymandias’ power. It implies that overtime his power was lost and that power can have negative influences even though it does not last forever. On the other hand, in London, power is presented as controlling. For example, the repetition of ‘chartered’ suggests ownership and that most things are restricted. The quote, ‘chartered Thames does flow’ exaggerates the idea that even natural environments and nature is being controlled and owned by wealthier people. Both poems present power in different ways, Ozymandias as a dictator and London as collective.

Power in Ozymandias is also seen as short and temporary. For example, the poem is made up of one stanza. This could symbolise that the power Ozymandias had was only temporary and ended after he died. The fact that there was only one stanza, written in the sonnet form, could also imply that there was only one significant piece to his history. However, in London power is presented as ongoing. For example, the use of four stanzas could imply the continuation of power. The idea that there are four stanzas each with four lines suggests that everyone is affected, ‘In every cry of every man’ and ‘every infant’s cry’. The repetition of every emphasises how suffering was universal and impacted everyone who was not seen as wealthy. Both poems present power as controlling. However, it seems to last longer and not just be temporary in London.

Both Ozymandias and London use sibilance. In London sibilance is used in the quote, ‘soldier’s sigh’. The ‘s’ sound emphasises and mimics the sound of signing adding effect by allowing the reader to hear as they are reading. Ozymandias also uses sibilance in the quote, ‘sands stretch far away’. This again can allow the reader to imagine what the sand sounds like as it is being blown in the wind. This makes both poems engaging and adds affect for the reader.

Both poems are written following the neglect of power and could be used to represent warning for the future. For example, in Ozymandias power is destroyed and overcome by nature regaining control. London is written to reflect being a victim under mans influence and trying to remain in control. Both poets are romantic poets which could reflect the messages seen throughout their poems.

In London Blake criticises the government and people in power. The word ‘Mark’ is used as a noun to exaggerate the emotional upset caused by power and inequality. The use of alliteration in the quote ‘Marks of weakness, marks of woe’ exaggerates that it is impacting everybody. He also uses a metaphor, ’mind-forged manacles’, to suggest the idea that people are being held back and restricted. It illudes the idea of chains and being controlled by the government and political parties. Blake also criticizes the church when he says, ‘Every black’ning church appalls’. The use of a metaphor suggests people are losing faith and are critical towards what the church are doing to help people in need. The use of colour imagery suggests the idea that the church is now a bad place and people should be shocked by this. In Ozymandias, the poem highlights how eventually nature takes back control over man. For example, in the quote ‘Round that decay Of that colossal wreck’ the nouns ‘decay’ and ‘wreck’ symbolise the loss of power and that power does not last forever. The poem ends by saying ’The lone level sands stretch far away’. The alliteration of ’lone level’ suggests that even someone so powerful will eventually die and come to an end making everything equal again.

In conclusion, both Shelly and Blake present power throughout there poems to show the damaging and negative affects it can have on a group of people or society.

How Power is presented in Ozymandias and London are very similar but there are some anomalies. For example the way both poems are structured. In London, there are paragraphs. Four in fact. I suggest that this has to do with how power in William Blake’s time was controlled. The space between the paragraphs symbolises the change of power or power is not continuously in one person’s hand. On the other hand ozymandias is one paragraph symbolising continuous power held by one person.

Power is presented quite strongly in both Ozumandias and London. In London, the quote ‘runs in blood down palace walls’ ‘ connotes the powerful rich and the elite using everyday people for their advantages. Such as in war. This also ties into the context of the time when the french revolution was just occurring. The revolution saw a lot of people die on both sides of the wealth spectrum, especially against the rich. In Ozymandias, The quote ‘Ye Mighty and despair!’ shows as power through fear. The adjective ’Despair’ highlights this fear and who power is held tighty compared to London.

London compared to Ozymandias has much stronger imagery. This is shown in the quote ‘But thro’ midnight streets I hear – How the youthful harlots curse’ The adjective youthful suggests that young people don’t have much power of their own. This isn’t helped by the fact that these young women are prostitutes. The descriptions of the prostitutes cursing leaves a strong impression on the reader. In ozymandias however the poem does not mention ordinary people at all. Instead it focuses on the image of ozymandias. Being powerful and all. This might be because of the lack of historical text from ozymandias time about ordinary life. As a result shelley has presented ozymandias based on a statue and its descriptions. This does not accurately help us if this power had ramifications on people or if the people held the actual power.

Ozymandias features frequent short pauses despite its form. For example ‘I met a traveller from an antique land, (PAUSE) Who said – (PAUSE)’. I suspect this has to do with making the rather large paragraph easier to read, However it could suggest the cracks in power that ozymandias has and that he is trying to flaunt his image with this statue. In London we can see that there are 4 lines per stanza and we see the repetition of In three times in the second stanza. I presume this has to do with the continuity of the same politics done by different people. People who want to maintain the status quo for their benefit.

In relation to tone, I think that Ozymandias is more aggressive. This is due to the fact that Ozymandias himself is a tyrant and wants to present himself that way through the statue. Shelley has therefore added imperative verbs such as ‘Cold command’ to emit this aggressive tone. In london Blake parents his poems in a reflective tone. This is due to the fact Blake was observing what he saw in london and the inequality that he witnessed between the powerful and the powerless.