The speaker in John Donne's "The Funeral" appears to have been thinking about the problem of death. He writes that "whoever comes to cover him" after his death should not disturb "that thin garland of hair" which adorns his arm; he attests that the mystical bracelet, a prize given to him by a beloved lover, will "keep [his] limbs...from dissolution" (lines 1, 3, 8). She reinforces the romantic powers of her lover's memory with Christian imagery, anointing the crown with religious strength and importance. However, the idealized comparison inspires obvious skepticism in any sincere reading of the poem. After all, does the speaker really think that a tangle of hair can function as an "outer soul" and keep him alive after death (5)? In the second verse, this doubt even creeps into the narrator's logic as he tries to explain how the band works. However, the bracelet's uncertain meaning and power only push him into greater religious bravado. The speaker's use of classical, religious diction to describe his belief in the garland suggests his extreme faith in Love, while also contradicting his supposed power. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay In the first stanza, the speaker relies on the subtle use of religious terms with Christian meaning to attribute power to his bracelet. The band is described as "The mystery, the sign you must not touch" (4). The use of the definite article highlights the fact that the "mystery" is given a specific importance that goes beyond its general meaning. “The Mystery” does not imply that the crown is simply an enigma; it also suggests that it embodies a religious truth that is beyond humanity's ability to comprehend, and is even associated with the sacred rites and sacraments of the Christian church. A greater allusion to Christian theology occurs when the speaker says that the crown "crowns [his] arm" (3). However, perhaps the choice of wording is a play on words in the context of the larger scene - an outdated definition of to crown means to hold a coroner's inquest - more likely it refers to Jesus' crown of thorns, a symbol of his martyrdom and his faith. For the speaker, his crown validates his position as "love's martyr" (19). But in this case, the strange loss of the object gives it a misplaced importance: the garland of hair is not a crown of thorns; the speaker's martyrdom is certainly not equal to that of Jesus. Indeed, although the narrator's spiritual rhetoric instills power in the bracelet, it also clouds his faith in love with flaws and contradictions. The speaker writes that the crown is his "outward soul, / Viceroy to that, which then departed to heaven, / Will leave this control, / And keep these members, its provinces, from dissolution" (5- 8). The concept of "external soul" is itself paradoxical. “External” exploits not only the obvious meaning of lying outside the speaker's body, but also the fact that it is inherently physical or external, not spiritual or profound. This contradicts the very idea of ​​soul, which is the spiritual, immaterial, eternal essence of man. The inconsistency indicates a flaw in the speaker's idolatry: a physical, superficial soul cannot protect him from his physical fate. The metaphor of the soul of a "viceroy" also presents a contrast with Christianity. A viceroy is literally a viceroy, but more generally someone who rules by authority and in the name of a supreme figure. The obvious implication is that the bracelet will command the speaker's "provinces" instead of the inner soul ascending to heaven. But the peculiar choice of the "viceroy" immediately recalls thecomparison with the Christian conception of God as king. If the "outer soul" of the bracelet is simply the viceroy, then the faith it represents is intrinsically inferior to that of the speaker's true soul, the figurative king: God. Ironically, the speaker's religious terminology is an autonomous criticism of his faith in the garland. In the second stanza of the poem, the speaker attempts to explain the sovereignty of the crown, but ends up questioning the meaning and power he has so confidently given it. He writes, “If the nerve thread that my brain drops / Through every part” is also the thing that “Can bind those parts and make me one of all,” then the hair from his lover's head, “gives a better brain / It can do better" (9-14). The anadiplosis of "parts" and "better" indicates the extent to which the speaker attempts to proceed rationally, creating syllogisms to justify the relationships between various sentences. However, the logic in his thoughts is fanciful at best and soon after the speaker utters his explanation, he stammers, "except that she meant that I / By this I should know my pain, / As the prisoners are shackled , when they are condemned to die” (14-16). The line loses its fairly regular iambic meter just before “except,” requiring the observance of a virtual beat to support it represents a major faltering in the speech of who speaks; it is a gasp, a moment of realization. His reasoning, however wonderfully passionate and romantic, is hardly something to stake one's life on. The meaning of his crown may have been completely misunderstood; his tragic mortality, not his eternal life. His fate, like the crown, is ambiguous at best. Although the speaker's subtle religious diction in the first stanza only hinted at the differences between his belief in the bracelet and the real Christianity, the final stanza exposes even more evidence of their disparity. He writes, “bury [the crown] with me, / For since I am the martyr of Love, it might fuel idolatry, / If these relics came into the hands of others” (17-20). At one level, the speaker presents himself as a martyr, someone who dies valiantly for a greater purpose, for Love. Indeed, he even suggests that he is a saint of Love by saying that his possessions and body parts are relics. But in a distorted way the narrator also acts for the Christian faith he is mocking; when he asks that the crown be buried with him, he denies the possibility that his relics "breed idolatry" - the immoderate attachment to a semblance of divinity, which is a sin in Christianity. He also criticizes himself for placing so much importance on the bracelet, saying that "it was humility" - meekness and low status - to "allow oneself [the crown] all that a soul can do" (21-22). But the narrator's rhetoric of religious sacrifice belies the sexual implications of the speaker's relationship with his lover. The conversion of new believers is described as "breeding," which implies that the believers' faith is a kind of sexual offspring. A play on words also degrades the nature of contact between worshiper and idol, the verb form of "come" suggesting that their relationship will be more obscene than spiritual. Finally, there is the ambiguity between editions of the last line; "That since you would save none of me, I will bury some of you" is sometimes written with "have" in place of "save", implying that it is the mistress's decision not to mate with the speaker, rather than her inability to do so. act like a soul, which makes him question his power (24). Considering this new sexual aspect of the faith of. 2006, 1278-1279.