The one poem that really struck me this week was “The Wife’s Lament.” In the introduction to the poem, it states that there are two interpretations of this poem in terms of the husband’s feelings towards his wife. Some suggest that he turned against his wife; others think they were separated without choice and both pine for each other’s affections. The poem leaves a lot to the reader’s interpretation because it leaves out details and only discusses the wife’s feelings; however, after reading, I felt strongly that the husband left his wife on his own free will.
In the second paragraph, the wife states that the husband’s kinfolk set out to separate her husband from her but really why would they want to cause the husband unhappiness if he was a part of their kinsman. This sounds to me like the wife is trying to make up excuses as to why her husband left her high and dry. I actually laughed when I read this (and I’m sure it’s not supposed to be funny) at the fact that this long ago women were still standing up for their men who so clearly don’t want to be with them and don’t care enough to discuss this or offer an explanation.
In the next paragraph the wife talks about how her and her husband had a bond that could only be broken by death, but was stolen from them because he was forced to leave her. All this says to me is that your husband promised you forever and obviously lied, and now you are left suffering and in denial.
In the last paragraph, it seems for a split second that the wife is considering the possibility that the husband left her on his own account when she says “Whether my friend has all the world’s joys at his bidding…” She acknowledges this for a second but it fades so quickly as she states “he suffers great anguish.” Obviously for her own sanity this woman needs to think that her husband is missing her dreadfully and has the same feelings and emotions as she does. I may be cynical, but I do not think this is the case.
