You are viewing a free preview of this lesson.
Subscribe to unlock all 18 lessons in this course and every other course on LearningBro.
A Poison Tree is the shortest, tightest and most psychologically exact poem in the entire Conflict cluster. In sixteen short lines Blake dramatises how an unspoken grievance rots into premeditated murder. For Edexcel purposes it is gold: simple surface, deep allegorical engine, quotations you can hold in your head forever, and a perfect partner to any poem about suppressed or disguised feeling.
William Blake (1757–1827) was an engraver, printer and radical Protestant poet living in revolution-era London. A Poison Tree appears in Songs of Experience (1794), the darker sister-volume to Songs of Innocence (1789). Together the two volumes dramatise "the two contrary states of the human soul." Innocence shows the world as children and believers see it — trusting, pastoral, kind. Experience shows the same world after oppression, hypocrisy and repression have done their work.
Blake was writing in an England of rising industrial cruelty, state-church moralism and political repression following the French Revolution. He believed institutional Christianity taught people to suppress their natural emotions, and that suppression produced evil. A Poison Tree dramatises exactly that argument without ever mentioning religion directly. You do not need the biography to understand the poem — but if you drop one context sentence it should be about Blake's belief that hidden feelings corrupt.
The poem was originally titled "Christian Forbearance." That alternate title is worth knowing: it tells you Blake saw the speaker's behaviour as a perversion of Christian virtue.
I was angry with my friend: I told my wrath, my wrath did end. I was angry with my foe: I told it not, my wrath did grow.
And I waterd it in fears, Night & morning with my tears; And I sunned it with smiles, And with soft deceitful wiles.
And it grew both day and night, Till it bore an apple bright; And my foe beheld it shine, And he knew that it was mine.
And into my garden stole When the night had veild the pole; In the morning glad I see, My foe outstretchd beneath the tree.
Sixteen lines. Four quatrains. Rhymed AABB. That tight container is itself a meaning-bearing feature — we will return to it.
The poem is a first-person monologue. The "I" is unreliable and unsettling. In the first stanza he sounds like a moral commentator ("I told my wrath, my wrath did end") — almost offering a self-help maxim. But as the stanzas progress, the voice becomes that of a premeditating killer: watering, sunning, deceiving and finally rejoicing over a corpse.
The shift is crucial. Blake never lets us out of the speaker's head, so we are implicated in his logic. There is no narrator to say "this is wrong." The final word, "tree," falls with triumph, not horror, and that is what makes the poem chilling.
Notice too that the speaker's emotional life is entirely binary: friend vs foe, spoken vs hidden, day vs night, tears vs smiles. That binary mind is part of what Blake is criticising. A person who sorts others into pure friends and pure foes will always find reasons to kill.
| Feature | Detail | Effect |
|---|---|---|
| Stanzas | 4 quatrains | Contained, controlled — like the wrath itself |
| Rhyme | AABB couplets | Nursery-rhyme simplicity masks moral horror |
| Metre | Loose trochaic tetrameter | Incantatory, chant-like, almost a spell |
| Line length | Mostly 7 syllables | Compressed, epigrammatic |
The AABB couplets are essential. Blake borrows the form of moral verse for children — think of the simple rhymes of Songs of Innocence — and uses it to deliver a story of murder. The form is the hypocrisy: a sweet-sounding surface hiding deadly content, just like the speaker's smiles.
Structurally the poem has a clean three-part arc:
flowchart LR
A[Stanza 1: Cause - contrast of spoken vs hidden anger] --> B[Stanzas 2-3: Growth - wrath nurtured into a tree]
B --> C[Stanza 4: Consequence - foe dead in the garden]
Stanza 1 states the moral law. Stanzas 2–3 break it. Stanza 4 shows the result. Blake does not moralise the ending because he trusts the form to do the work: a gleeful "glad I see" over a dead body speaks for itself.
The central conceit is that suppressed anger is a plant that can be cultivated. Each stage of gardening maps onto a stage of psychological nurture.
| Gardening act | Emotional act |
|---|---|
| "waterd it in fears" | Feeding the grudge with anxiety |
| "Night & morning with my tears" | Self-pity sustaining the grievance |
| "sunned it with smiles" | Pretending to forgive |
| "soft deceitful wiles" | Actively scheming |
The verbs are all purposeful — watered, sunned, grew, bore. This is not accidental festering; it is cultivation. Blake wants you to see that hidden anger requires work to maintain. It does not simply happen to the speaker.
The final two stanzas reactivate one of the most famous stories in Western culture: the Garden of Eden. A forbidden tree, a tempting apple, a trespasser drawn into the garden, a catastrophe in the morning — Blake is writing the Fall. But he inverts it. Here, the "Adam" is the foe, and the "God" who grows the tree is a human speaker. There is no serpent because the speaker is the serpent.
This inversion is devastating theology: Blake is arguing that human repression has replaced divine providence as the force that cultivates evil. The apple "bright" — lit up by the speaker's performed smiles — is irresistible precisely because it looks like the fruit of reconciliation.
Both poems feature a speaker whose socially-unacceptable feeling — Blake's murderous rage, Rossetti's sexual shame and jealousy — is only released because of how society forbids direct expression. Both use tightly-regular rhyme (Blake's AABB, Rossetti's ABCB ballad) to contain a voice that could otherwise explode. The key contrast is that Blake's speaker acts on the feeling and kills, while Rossetti's speaker remains unheard and uses the poem itself as her only act of revenge — she cultivates her "fair-haired son" the way Blake cultivates his tree.
Both are short, defiant first-person voices reacting to a perceived enemy. But Casey's speaker is open — she uses rhetorical questions to accuse openly — whereas Blake's speaker hides. The contrast in method reveals Blake's thesis: openness heals, concealment kills.
Subscribe to continue reading
Get full access to this lesson and all 18 lessons in this course.