Introduction to 'The Collar'
Welcome to your study guide for George Herbert’s 'The Collar'. This poem is a brilliant example of Metaphysical poetry because it takes a complex, abstract emotion—the feeling of wanting to quit your responsibilities—and turns it into a dramatic, physical argument.
In this poem, the speaker is having a bit of a "spiritual meltdown." He is tired of the restrictions of his religious life and wants to be free. However, the way the poem ends might surprise you. Whether you are aiming for an A* or just trying to get your head around the old-fashioned language, these notes will help you navigate Herbert's chaotic but beautiful world.
The Meaning of the Title
In Metaphysical poetry, titles often have double or triple meanings. This is called ambiguity or wordplay. For 'The Collar', consider these three interpretations:
1. The Clerical Collar: George Herbert was a priest. The "collar" represents his job and his duty to God. It is a symbol of restraint.
2. Choler: This is an old word for "anger" or "impatience." The poem is essentially a temper tantrum.
3. The Caller: By the end of the poem, we realize someone is "calling" the speaker. The "Collar" becomes the "Caller" (God).
Structure and Form (AO2)
If you look at the poem on the page, it looks messy. The lines are all different lengths, and the rhyme scheme seems random at first. This is a deliberate choice by Herbert to use form to mirror content.
The Chaos: The irregular rhythm and erratic rhymes represent the speaker's rebellious state of mind. He is "breaking free" from the rules of poetry, just as he wants to break free from the rules of the Church.
The Resolution: Look at the very end of the poem. The lines suddenly become steady and calm. This shows that the speaker has moved from chaos to order once he submits to God.
Key Takeaway: The poem’s structure is "unstructured" on purpose to show the speaker’s anger, but it snaps back into place when he stops shouting.
Key Themes and Imagery
1. Rebellion vs. Submission
The speaker starts by shouting, "I struck the board, and cry'd, No more." He is literally hitting the table in frustration. He feels like he has wasted his life being "good" while others are out enjoying the world. He uses active verbs like "leave," "abandon," and "tie" to show his desire for control.
2. Harvest and Fruit Imagery
The speaker complains that his life is a "cold dispute" and that he has no "harvest" or "fruit." He uses metaphors of nature to show his spiritual dryness:
- He mentions "wine" and "corn," which are symbols of life and pleasure (and also have religious links to the Eucharist).
- He feels he only has "thorns" (suffering) and no "flower" (joy).
3. The Cage and the Rope
The speaker describes his religious laws as "cages" and "ropes of sands." This is a great Metaphysical conceit (an elaborate metaphor). A rope made of sand is actually very weak, suggesting that the only thing keeping the speaker "trapped" is his own conscience, not God’s force.
The Ending: A Moment of Change
The poem builds up and up in a giant crescendo of shouting until the speaker is "raving" (his own word!). Then, suddenly, he hears a voice:
"Methoughts I heard one calling, Child! / And I reply'd, My Lord."
This is the volta (turning point). All the anger vanishes instantly. By calling him "Child," God reminds the speaker of his relationship—not as a slave to a master, but as a child to a father. The response "My Lord" shows total, humble submission.
Context: Metaphysical and Historical (AO3)
George Herbert (1593–1633): Herbert was a high-flying academic and politician who gave it all up to become a humble priest in a small village. This poem likely reflects his own internal struggles with that choice. He wasn't always "perfectly holy"; he felt the pull of the secular world just like anyone else.
Metaphysical Style: Like John Donne (see chapters on "The Flea" or "Batter My Heart"), Herbert uses wit and intellectual arguments. However, while Donne often argues with women or himself, Herbert almost always argues with God. He uses a conversational tone that makes the poem feel very modern and personal.
Different Interpretations (AO5)
When writing your essay, you can score high marks by showing there is more than one way to see the poem:
Interpretation A: A Victory for Faith
Many readers see the ending as beautiful. The speaker finds peace and realizes that his "rebellion" was just a misunderstanding of God’s love. The quick submission shows the power of divine grace.
Interpretation B: A Loss of Freedom
Some modern readers might see the ending as a bit sad. The speaker spends 32 lines fighting for his independence, only to give it all up at a single word. Is he being "silenced" or "saved"?
Interpretation C: The Psychological "Fit"
You could argue the poem is a psychological study of a person having a breakdown. The "voice" he hears might not be an external God, but his own internal sense of duty finally winning over his desire for pleasure.
Quick Review: Common Mistakes to Avoid
1. Thinking the speaker is actually free: The speaker talks about being free, but he never actually leaves. The whole poem happens inside his head or in a private room.
2. Ignoring the title: Always mention the pun on "Collar/Choler/Caller." It’s an easy way to show the examiner you understand Metaphysical "wit."
3. Missing the tone shift: Don't treat the whole poem as a prayer. Most of it is a complaint. It only becomes a prayer in the last two lines.
Study Tip: Memory Aid
To remember the structure of 'The Collar', think of a Soda Bottle.
- The Shaking: The speaker’s anger builds up pressure (the messy rhymes and lines).
- The Explosion: He raves and shouts "No more!"
- The Cap: God says "Child," and the pressure is instantly gone. The liquid is still, and the poem ends calmly.
Note: For more on Herbert's view of the relationship between humanity and God, you might want to look at "The Pulley" or "Love III," which also explore the theme of spiritual struggle and divine invitation.