People’s views on Eros, the Greek god of love are often similar to their own feelings towards love. As a result, the people who are angered by even the thought of love tend to have mixed feelings regarding Eros. In fact, both Anne Stevenson and Robert Bridges address Euros in their thought-provoking poems with confusion and mixed-feelings in their tone. In fact, the only real difference in the two poems is the writers’ assumptions about love.
Anne Stevenson structures her poem in a way that continues sympathy into criticism for the way in which Eros is treated. The poet cleverly uses an imaginary conversation between the speaker and the god Eros so that the reader of the poem can directly see the thoughts of Eros. One can see Eros express…show more content… This inquiry is a crucial part to the poem because it sets the tone for the entire literary work. By inquiring “why hast thou nothing in thy face?” the reader knows right away that Bridges is curious. Bridges seems to have difficulty identifying Eros’s seemingly difficult characteristics, and even calls Eros out as being the “tyrant of the human heart.” While the human heart is supposed to be fragile, a “tyrant” symbolizes apathy and indifference towards emotions. However, after this criticism, Bridges calls him “an image of eternal Truth.” This can be seen as a great sign of respect for Eros, because the word “truth” is used in a positive light. In the second stanza, Bridges a tone of confusion and bewilderment by stating that “shadows neither love nor guile, But Shameless will and power immense.” By doing this, the poet uses the metaphor of shadows to illustrate that shadows do not guide him, but they also do not love him. This is significant because it leads bridges to end his poem in the same way in which he began it—by answering the question of “why hast thou nothing in thy face?” by lucidly stating that “none who e’er long’d for thy embrace, hath cared to look upon thy