Never Again Would Birds’ Song Be The Same

He would declare and could himself believe

That the birds there in all the garden round
From having heard the daylong voice of Eve
Had added to their own an oversound,
Her tone of meaning but without the words.
Admittedly an eloquence so soft
Could only have had an influence on birds
When call or laughter carried it aloft
Be that as may be, she was in their song.
Moreover her voice upon their voices crossed
Had now persisted in the woods so long
That probably it never would be lost.
Never again would birds’ song be the same.
And to do that to birds was why she came.

Technical notes:

Iambic Pentameter – almost perfect except for below

Line 2 – stressed bird syllable
Line 7 – birds as the 11th syllable in the line. The “an”... why was that included?
Line 10 – Moreover, possible to be read as “moreo’er”, because voice hits hard as a stressed
syllable

Four uses of the word birds, first two ruffling the feathers of the iambic pentameter, upsetting the
perfection of the meter. Second two more nestled in at the end of the poem. At the conclusion of the
argument.

Uncertainty and equivocation in words like “Admittedly” and “Moreover”

No images, no nouns at all in the first line. Not a “nature poem”, putting the discourse at the
beginning of the poem, giving it pride of place, making sure that it is the context, the second thing
we read after the title.

Compound words: “daylong” and “oversound”

“the daylong voice of Eve” - ironic jab at his wife? ‘she talks all day long?’

“round” putting Adam and Eve in the centre of the garden, drawing the garden (nature) as a circle
which surrounds these two humans.

“tone of meaning but without the words.” - meaning, apparently, communicated without words –
“meaning” rather than emotion or intent or colour. That whatever has managed to imprint on the
birds’ voices has some meaning. Frost later equivocates on this a little bit, I think. Calling it an
“eloquence so soft”, possibly meaning a sound that is hardly eloquent (that is containing meaning)
at all.

“call or laughter” passionate, positive communication. Crying isn’t mentioned.

Some possible readings:

A love poem –– a sonnet – tender language – references to perpetuity, a lover’s trope – “declare and
could himself believe”: ‘I love you’ (although this may say more about the reader than the poem) –
male and female pronouns – specific names mentioned literally as little as possible, allowing the
reader to imagine the principal players of other love stories (perhaps even their own) to substitute
Adam and Eve in the narrative – again perhaps an overly contemporary reading but this reader’s
mind cannot help but make a connection to the common phenomenon of hearing a song with a lover
and announcing that song would never be the same.

A poem about (wo)man’s influence on nature –– the most literal reading possible, albeit taking
Adam and Eve as archetypal representatives of the entire human race – not an environmental
impact, not tools or machinery or farmwork; the influence of her voice – her “call and laughter” will
influence the world forever, and that is what her purpose in the world is.

A poem that looks critically at the biblical tale –– Eve, and her influence, talked about in an
admiring light – we know her other influence – we know that we’re soon to leave the garden –
should solace be taken in the fact that our influence in paradise will remain despite our banishment
– where is the shame that is so often associated with Eve, the original sin and the fall? – where is
the apple? – the story told in past tense, is it being relayed to us after the fall? – is that tragedy, like
in Greek drama, something that we are aware of but the players are not?