/lit/ - Literature

>>12982785
Tough one. They both approach it from very different perspectives and thus with very different goals. For Blake, in contrast to his piece's complementary poem "The Lamb", the tiger is a symbol of the cruelty and ruthlessness of the world, the vicious wrath and danger of it. He's using his poem to pose to the reader the question, how could the same god who created all of the beauty of this world be the same one to have created all of its atrocities and horrors? Nael sees things much differently. For him, the tiger is just as much a symbol of destruction and wrath as Blake, but unlike the latter, Nael views the beast and all of its deadly fury as a force of not just annihilation, but also liberation. The tiger, for Nael, is an avatar of wild, untameable, striped vengeance, the inherent raw power of nature over the stifling trifling restrictive mechanisms of civilization, and the inevitability of our return to a state of nature, entropy, either through the eventual death of our individual selves, the collapse of our civilizations, the burning out of our sun, the heatdeath of our universe, etc. I like them both for very different reasons.