The Suicide's Argument by Samuel Taylor Coleridge (Poem, Summary, & Analysis)

 

The Suicide's Argument

by Samuel Taylor Coleridge

(Poem, Summary, & Analysis) 

The Suicide's Argument

 

Ere the birth of my life, if I wished it or no

No question was asked me--it could not be so!

If the life was the question, a thing sent to try

And to live on be YES; what can NO be? to die.

 

Nature's Answer

 

Is't returned, as 'twas sent? Is't no worse for the wear?

Think first, what you ARE! Call to mind what you WERE!

I gave you innocence, I gave you hope,

Gave health, and genius, and an ample scope,

Return you me guilt, lethargy, despair?

Make out the invent'ry; inspect, compare!

Then die—if die you dare

 

Summary:

The poem presents a philosophical and emotional dialogue about life and suicide. The speaker, contemplating suicide, rationalizes the decision to end their life. However, a counter-voice emerges, representing divine wisdom or conscience, which challenges this notion. This voice argues that life is a gift from God and belongs to Him, not the individual. Taking one’s life would be akin to defying the Creator’s will and dismissing the sanctity of existence.

The central theme revolves around the conflict between despair and moral responsibility, emphasizing the sacredness of life and the importance of enduring hardships. Coleridge uses vivid imagery and a conversational tone to explore the moral, spiritual, and philosophical dimensions of suicide, urging readers to see life as a trust from God, meant to be preserved until its natural end.

 

Analysis:

 

1. Ere the birth of my life, if I wished it or no,

The speaker reflects on the lack of agency over their existence. They suggest that they had no control or choice over being born. This line introduces the existential dilemma: the speaker didn’t ask to be alive, yet they must endure life’s struggles.

 

2. It had no control over my birth, nor will have o'er my death;

The speaker continues to highlight their lack of control over both the beginning and end of life. They suggest that since they had no power over their birth, they might take control over their death as a compensatory act of agency.

 

3. If the God who gave me life gave it me as a pain,

Here, the speaker accuses God of bestowing life as a form of suffering. It reflects their despair and the belief that life’s hardships outweigh its joys.

 

4. He who gave it may take it away at his will; but its not mine to give or take.

A counter-voice, possibly representing divine wisdom or conscience, interjects. It argues that life is God’s creation and, therefore, only God has the right to end it. This line emphasizes life’s sacredness and the speaker’s moral responsibility.

 

5. But to pray for death is ungrateful, and a sin.

This line reinforces the moral argument. To wish for death, according to this counter-voice, shows ingratitude for the gift of life and disrespects the Creator’s intent.

 

6. Thou art thyself the cause of thy grief, and its cure rests in thee.

The voice suggests that the speaker’s despair arises from their perspective or actions, implying they have the power to change their circumstances or attitude rather than seeking death as an escape.

 

7. Learn patience, and life may yet bring thee peace.

A hopeful note closes the argument. The voice advises patience and endurance, suggesting that life’s hardships can lead to eventual peace or resolution.

 

Analysis of Themes and Literary Devices:

Conflict of Voices: The poem is structured as a dialogue between the speaker (in despair) and the voice of reason or divine authority. This duality captures the inner turmoil of someone contemplating suicide.

Moral Responsibility: The counter-voice emphasizes the sanctity of life and the moral obligation to endure life’s trials rather than taking one’s own life.

Existential Questions: The poem grapples with profound questions about the purpose of life, suffering, and free will.

Imagery and Tone: Coleridge uses a somber tone and vivid imagery of life as a painful burden to evoke empathy for the speaker’s despair. The counter-voice’s tone, however, is firm and rational, reinforcing the moral argument.

 

Coleridge blends existential philosophy with moral and spiritual discourse, addressing the sensitive topic of suicide with depth and compassion.

 

Life as a Divine Gift

The poem stresses the sacredness of life, portraying it as a gift from God. The counter-voice argues that since life is God-given, it’s not the individual’s right to end it prematurely. This reflects Coleridge’s Christian worldview, which sees human life as part of a larger divine plan.

 

The Struggle Between Free Will and Divine Will

The speaker feels trapped by the lack of control over their birth and perceives death as the only way to reclaim agency. However, the counter-voice argues that true agency lies in accepting and enduring life, aligning oneself with divine will rather than defying it.

 

Despair and Redemption

The poem captures the speaker’s intense despair, but it also offers redemption through patience and hope. This aligns with Coleridge’s broader Romantic ideals, which often portray suffering as a transformative experience leading to spiritual growth or enlightenment.

 

Suicide as a Philosophical Debate

Coleridge does not dismiss the speaker’s despair outright but engages with it thoughtfully, presenting the moral and spiritual arguments against suicide. This shows his sensitivity to the complexity of human suffering.

 

Philosophical Insights

Theodicy and Human Suffering

The poem indirectly addresses the question: If God is benevolent, why does He allow suffering? The counter-voice suggests that suffering has a purpose, even if it’s not immediately apparent, and endurance might lead to eventual peace or understanding.

Existential Responsibility

The counter-voice challenges the speaker to take responsibility for their life’s meaning and outcomes. This echoes existentialist ideas (developed much later), where individuals are tasked with finding meaning even in the face of suffering.

Interplay of Emotion and Reason

The poem portrays a tension between the speaker’s emotional despair and the counter-voice’s rational arguments. This reflects Coleridge’s own struggles with emotional turmoil and his attempts to reconcile faith with personal suffering.

 

Literary Devices and Techniques

Dialogic Structure

The use of two distinct voices creates a debate-like structure, allowing Coleridge to explore both the emotional and moral dimensions of the issue. This technique engages the reader in the argument, encouraging them to reflect on their own beliefs.

Juxtaposition

Coleridge contrasts despair with hope, free will with divine will, and human frailty with spiritual strength. These juxtapositions highlight the complexity of the issue and the balance between despair and faith.

Tone and Voice

The speaker’s tone is personal, anguished, and accusatory, drawing the reader into their emotional state. The counter-voice, by contrast, is calm, rational, and authoritative, lending weight to its moral arguments.

Religious Allusions

The counter-voice’s arguments draw on Christian theology, particularly the belief in life as a divine trust and the sinfulness of suicide. These allusions ground the poem in a moral and spiritual framework.

Economy of Language

Despite its brevity, the poem packs profound philosophical and emotional content, leaving space for the reader to reflect and engage with its ideas.

 

Relevance and Legacy

Timeless Themes

The poem’s exploration of despair, agency, and morality remains relevant in contemporary discussions about mental health and the ethics of euthanasia or suicide.

Romantic Context

As a Romantic poet, Coleridge often grappled with themes of inner conflict, nature, and spirituality. The Suicide’s Argument fits within this tradition by delving into the emotional and philosophical struggles of the human condition.

Empathy and Compassion

Coleridge’s approach to the sensitive topic of suicide is compassionate yet firm. He acknowledges the speaker’s despair while advocating for patience and faith, showing an understanding of both human weakness and moral responsibility.