A REFUSAL TO MOURN THE DEATH, BY FIRE, OF A CHILD IN LONDON

Dylan Thomas’s “A Refusal to Mourn” was first published in “The New

Republic” in 1945. It was published soon after the end of the Second
World War. The poem is an emphatic refusal to mourn the dead. Here,
the dead being represented by the child. The loss of a child is the
greatest tragedy; and symbolic of life lost without having blossomed.
Thomas simply refuses to mourn for it would relegate the child itself to
the action of mourning. This refusal to mourn is rather a celebration of
every innocent life lost.

The poet points to the ambiguous nature of death as it marks the

destruction of life, but paves way for newer life. Bird, beast and flower
alike are common and universal to this truth. Death fathers all-it has a
towering, commanding and dominating effect over all. It is a kind of all-
consuming darkness, that has a humbling-effect, for, in the face of death
all are equal. All distinctions of high/low, rich/poor are erased in the face
of it, humbling the person with the highest earthly paradigm of virtue.
The phrase ‘bird beast and flowers’ may also denote the return to the
nature or the basic elements of life-a universal phenomenon that marks
the end of earthly individuality. And more significantly, it speaks volumes
with the power of silence as truth descends in gradually. The poet also
asserts that ambiguity is inherent in the concept of death itself that is a
return to nature and “Tells with silence the last light breaking.”

The three major sense perceptions are acquainted with this universal
phenomenon, as echoed by the words ‘tells’,’ silence’ and ‘light
breaking’. ‘Light’ that is a symbol of creation, unites life with death here.
And as a response to the kinetic cosmic energy, the hour seems static
(still).The image of water evokes ideas of baptism and birth; and the holy
water echoes death. Therefore,’ water’ here is a symbol for the twin-
sided aspects of life. Just as the Temple of Jerusalem ( in the Mount of
Zion) was replaced by the synagogue, the similar idea of change is
reiterated here with the words ’Zion’, ’synagogue’.etc. How death paves
the way for inevitable change. By these symbols the poet also echoes
the death of institutions and religions, to give way to new ones. The
image of ‘corn’ alludes to the parables. The phrase ‘ear of corn’ refers to
the listening to these parables that preached these stories of inevitability.
The poet asks himself once again as to why he should pray for the
shadow of a sound. The memory of the person in question is only the
shadow of a sound, remembrance of a once-existing reality. The action
of mourning is compared to the ‘sowing a salt seed’. The hope of
breeding something sterile or stagnant, for the death cannot come to life
with mourning.

The poet parodies the Valley of the Shadow of Death by the phrase
‘valley of sackcloth” deteriorating the action of mourning as a ritual by
itself that relegates the sacredness of the funeral and dead one in
question. Instead of the funeral shroud, the poet utilizes the word
‘sackcloth’ to belittle the situation caused by the human ritualistic
mourning of the dead.
With generalizations over death , he will not tarnish the individuality and
majesty of the child. The ‘burning’ or the passionate emotions associated
with death of the child were too profound to be expressed. They were
significant as compared to the mundane war. Mankind did not represent
her, rather she represented mankind .She proceeded with a ‘grave’ truth.
The word ‘grave has two meanings here-that of being ‘serious’ and
‘pertaining to the grave’. He makes a reference to the ‘stations’ of the
cross, the several sufferings of Jesus Christ. He will not understate this
‘death’ with generalizations on the transient nature of innocence and
youth. The poet utilizes the statement “I shall not murder”-a reminder of
the Ten Commandments. It is indicative of how religion (also) does not
advocate the mourning of the child.

The poet addresses the dead as “London’s daughter”. This is further

enforced by the term”first dead”, as in ‘First Lady’. The long friends refer
to the worms in the grave, says David Daiches. “One dies but once,”
says Daiches , “and through that death becomes reunited with the
timeless unity of things”. Sunderman asserts that the disintegrated body
turns into particles of dust that are ageless since they take part in the
timeless cycle of nature. These particles get ingrained in the veins of
Mother Earth. The water of Thames is depicted as still and ‘unmourning’.
The river that is otherwise kinetic (‘riding Thames’) is seen to be static.
After the first death, there is no other. Therefore, the action of mourning
is useless, for there is no further averting of the situation just because
there is no death again.