Ge 206166050 1

Angelina Ge

Professor Bristow

English 10C

March 12, 2025

Beauty at a Bloody Price: An Alliance Through Fraught Deniability

W.B. Yeats’ “Easter, 1916” delvesivers into a twisting journey of mortal denial as

Yeatsthe poetic speaker emphasizes the importance of accepting irony where victory or “beauty”

desires the need of death as a catalyst through the acceptance of both realistic personal

preservation and idealistic national duty, not one or the other. There is increasing clarity from

vague metaphors to direct references of death that suggests the growing awareness of the burden

of death. However, contrastingly, the awareness of death is accompanied by a new fondness of

idealistic hope because the speaker realizes that beauty is not something that is easily given, but

something that must be attained, making it “terrible” because of the desperate efforts to obtain it.

Throughout the poem, the narrator grapples with opposing idealism and realism, struggling to

find a balance between the two because of his desire for an idealistic future but hesitant for the

grim sacrifices that must be made. However, beauty can arise not from what was already lovely,

but through bloody consequences and chaotic destruction, creating a paradoxical relationship that

emphasizes how justice is created through injustice.

Yeats causes tension between forces of reality and idealism to reflect the oppositional

terrible beauty of the rebellion through nurturing yet ironic metaphors that disguise grisly deaths

and soften the true narrative to justify the rebellion. The speaker proclaims that it is the people’s

duty “to murmur name upon name” of those who have sacrificed their lives at the front lines,

similar to how a mother “names her child / when sleep at last has come” (Lines 61-63). Against
 Ge 206166050 2

the backdrop of the grim revolution, Yeats utilizes words such as “murmur” to create an

ambience that would lull the reader into a sleepy trance. The word “murmur” has double ‘r’

tones when slurred together, encouraging slumber which is reinforced by the maternal metaphor.

Yeats compares the sacrificed lives of rebel soldiers with a mother putting a child to sleep,

creating a strong contrast of grisly and soft contexts. The mother watches the sleeping child with

love as the child is asleep “at last” (Line 63). “At last” signals a long-fought and weary battle,

but with great sacrifice, the soldiers or child can now sleep peacefully with the mother or public

watching over and remembering the dead. The metaphor accurately reflects a “terrible beauty”

with the imagery of motherly love filled with protection, juxtaposed with a sobering reality of

dead bodies and a mourning public. Therefore, the speaker initially suggests that the dead should

not be remembered through their physical ruin, but the value of their humanity. They are

remembered with the same love as a mother loves her child because the memory of the dead, no

matter how terrible, should not be stained with blood but beauty. The speaker attempts to view

death idealistically to justify the bloody consequences of the rebellion through a metaphor whose

comparison omits realism and only presents a softened narrative.

However, the next rhetorical question suggests a sudden loss of hope and dominating

rationality as the speaker poses a sobering reality, by denying the idealistic dream and

emphasizing self-preservation because death is an ultimate end. Once again, the speaker

compares death to sleep, wondering if death was all “but nightfall?” (Line 65). However, with

more thought, the speaker concludes “no, no, not night but death” (Line 66). The rhetorical

question ponders an easy death, wondering if death is painless and peaceful by comparing it to

nightfall. By posing this musing as a question, the speaker hints at an inkling of hope that death

is not terrible. The speaker phrases the question in a way that already formulates an answer by
 Ge 206166050 3

asking “what is it but nightfall,” as if he were stating the obvious. However, the correction after

suggests that the speaker does not hold onto fruitless hope because he recognizes sobering reality

and denies the romanticization of death. He quickly realizes the terrible reality through the

repetition of “no” that suggests an ultimate rejection of the idea of a serene death. Furthermore,

there are parallels between the question and its response, with both suggesting the obvious

through the word “but.” By stating “not night but death,” the speaker concludes the nature of

death in a definitive statement. The contrast between a rhetorical question and definitive answer

is further highlighted through the alliteration of the tone “n” throughout the answer. In the

definitive answer, “no, no” is a spondee, slowing down the poem's rhythm, reflecting the

speaker’s switch from idealism to realism. “Not night” further emphasizes the “n” tone to convey

urgency to confront the terrible present and to exit an idealistic denial. Unlike the first metaphor

with maternal connotations, the second metaphor is grounded more in rational reality by denying

the comparison of death with night. So far, death is considered as an ultimate end, while night is

the end of a day, but is also the beginning of a new cycle. After denying the pain of death, the

speaker comes to a growing consciousness of the cost of sacrifice. Even so, the speaker still

denies death as a beginning and insists that there is no renewal after one passes, and thus denies

the possibility of a paradox or a terrible beauty that suggests life through death.

The speaker grows in realistic consciousness as he questions the necessity of sacrifice

and the validity behind how terrible beauty could be, displaying humanity’s lenience to favor

rational personal preservation over national duty and overall timidity to sacrifice for a greater

good. The speaker comes to a sudden epiphany and realizes it is not about whether death is

peaceful, but whether death should be the solution, asking “was it needless death after all?” (Line

67). “After all” is a trochee where “after” is stressed but “all” is unstressed and once placed at
 Ge 206166050 4

the end of the question, the unstressed syllable lightens the heaviness of the tone, synonymous to

hope. While the speaker is continuously battling a sobering reality, he still holds hope because

his question was not definitive, but one with nuance and complexity through his choice of using

“after all.” “After all” holds both hope and resignation due to the subtle shift in rhythm and

ultimately softens the weight of said question because of the introduced uncertainty. It truly is

terrible because the hint of faith indicates beauty or independence could have been achieved

without saddening sacrifice. The speaker continuously denies reconciliation between sacrifice

and victory, even though one cannot live without the other, because life ultimately is not terrible

nor beautiful, but a balanced dance between the two.

Moreover, the speaker continues to reject idealism after the contemplations of alternate

realities that would bring beauty for beauty’s sake, but eventually emphasizing that there is no

point in musing in what has not happened because the present will not change, expressing the

dominant rationality once again. Dreaming changes nothing to the speaker, despite the hope it

may provide, but the speaker only stresses that the dead are now dead. He ponders that “England

may keep faith” but concludes that at the end of the day, the soldiers “dreamed and are dead”

(Lines 68 and 71). Once again, the speaker ties hope into his musings through a question with

anticipation because of the word “may.” “May” indicates the speaker desires to fancy his

emotive side and grapple with reality. However, the speaker quickly changes his thought again

because by giving into his fantasies, he is devaluing the efforts of those already dead, which he

reiterates through his answer. The speaker acknowledges that the soldiers “dreamed,”

introducing a wave of pessimism. He suggests that dreaming is fruitless because the soldiers who

were dreamers of an independent nation are now dead. “Dreamed” is also written in the past

tense, while “are dead” is in the present tense to emphasize that it was because they dreamed that
 Ge 206166050 5

they died. There is also a sense of finality in that line because of alliteration in the “d” sound in

“dreamed” and “dead” that encourages the reader to find common ground between the two

concepts. Thus, being a dreamer is dangerous because their expectations are not set in realism

and are often found in precarious situations.

The last speculation the speaker makes again derives from his rationality but, instead of

affirming his rationality, he leans into his emotions despite recognizing the “terrible” and

eventually, embraces the “beauty” at the very end. Even so, the question is full of uncertainty

and critical rationality from the speaker. The speaker wonders, “and what if excess of love /

Bewildered them till they died?” (Lines 72-73). For the last rhetorical question, the speaker asks

the longest question length, spanning two lines without any break or device to separate the

words. The rush of words represents the culmination of confusing and clashing emotions that

eventually reach an enlightening epiphany. The rushed words are further supported by the usage

of the word “and” at the beginning as if the speaker added the last question at the last minute

with an additional “and.” Once again, the speaker returns to hypotheticals as he says “what if” to

consider the possibility of what could have been. However, the tone of the question suggests that

the speaker is critical, his rationality peeking out again, because he is questioning the actions of

those already dead. He specifically mentions that the rebels had an “excess of love,” critiquing

that the rebels were driven not through logic but emotion, subtly hinting that acting more

rationally might have contributed to potential survival. He continues to critique their deaths to

their emotive responses through the word “bewildered,” insinuating that their passion clouded

their rational judgement into bewilderment. The growing criticism reveals growing acceptance of

rational personal preservation, displaying the speaker’s tunnel vision to only view the “terrible”
 Ge 206166050 6

or the sacrifices rather than an optimistic future because he doesn’t believe death can be justified

through rebellion.

While the speaker is critical of the revolutionaries’ efforts and judgments, the speaker lets

go of his rational pride and acknowledges the balance between rationality and emotion by ending

with a declaration of a free nation rather than its grisly consequences through the immortalization

of soldiers and repetitive key words. After a critical question, the speaker names the fallen

soldiers, named “MacDonagh and MacBride / And Connolly and Pearse” (Lines 75-76). By

directly naming soldiers, Yeats adds a depth of reality and specificity into his poem, not

previously seen because Yeats characterized his poem through metaphors and optimistic hope.

With every name comes striking clarity because of the ritualistic remembrance through repetitive

memory. The specific names of real soldiers immortalize their legacy and signal to the reader

that the dead live on, therefore finding some peace in their sacrifice and that their sacrifice will

not be in vain. Therefore, the speaker begins to think about the collective consciousness rather

than the merits of his thoughts and decisions, coming to terms with the hope of a nation rather

than the efforts of a mere individual.

Finally, the speaker comes to terms with the tragedy towards Irish independence by

accepting nationalism as a valid state of mind, thinking broader than before rather than through

an individualistic point of view. The speaker shifts his focus from his musings to the greater

good by stating that now “wherever green is worn, / Are changed, changed utterly” (Lines 78-

79). The color green represents a budding nation and life itself, as the speaker shifts his focus

away from the consequences and necessity of death, to the celebration of life because physicality

ultimately is not the indicator of life. The speaker finally views Easter Rising in terms of a

collective consciousness rather than the sacrifices of an individual, choosing to look forward to a
 Ge 206166050 7

hopeful future rather than dwelling on what has already happened. Additionally, “changed,

changed” is an iamb, with the first “changed” unstressed but the second stressed to signal a tone

of urgency and clarity within the speaker. The addition of the word “utterly” at the end suggests

a sense of vulnerability as the speaker lays himself bare in emotional epiphany, a complete

change from the once rational and critical tone found in the beginning. Life is a paradox where

expectations often fall flat, producing rhetorical questions rooted in denial. Even so, the speaker

finally accepts life’s ambiguity and ironic mechanisms not through an individual lens, but

through the consciousness of a nation, looking at the world wholly rather than singularly.

Reality is terrible, idealism is beautiful. Together, they create a “terrible beauty.” As the

poem continues, a surprising paradox emerges as increasing clarity in reality leads to the

emotional realization of the hope of a new nation. By the end of the poem, the dead are not truly

dead because their legacies, no matter how terrible the cost, contributed to the foundation of a

beautiful nation colored in vibrant green. While the speaker becomes incredibly aware of the

burden of death due to the abandonment of figurative language, it only helps, not hinders, his

understanding of the emotional weight of the rebellion. Victory was once an illusion, an illusion

to cover up the grisly deaths and sacrifices of many, but it just so happens that death is the real

illusion. There is certain victory to be found within death because death is not equal to an end.

The living keep the dead alive and thus, the cycle continues onwards, showing that idealism lies

not in the past justifications but in the future. Death is still saddening, but there is shining hope

that it leads to a brighter future because there is no victory without loss. It is the ultimate epitome

of a terrible beauty.
 Ge 206166050 8

Worked Cited

Yeats, William Butler. “‘Easter, 1916.’” The Collected Poems of W. B. Yeats, Scribner

Paper Fiction, 1989, https://www.poetryfoundation.org/articles/70114/william-butler-

yeats-easter-1916.