Crapsey’s confusion is mirrored in the odd choices of sentence structure in this quatrain that, while they do not quite read naturally, are still discernable enough to understand. The plot itself becomes a bit uncertain as well in regard to whose “hands” the narrator remembers as being similar to the “hands” she currently has—perhaps a less-aged version of herself or an older family member. This concept boosts the representation of the narrator’s confusion and solidifies it as the poem’s main theme.
Amaze Adelaide CrapseyI knowNot these my handsAnd yet I think there wasA woman like me once had handsLike these.
Summary
‘Amaze‘ by Adelaide Crapsey presents a short remembrance of the poet’s past.
‘Amaze’ by Adelaide Crapsey being a cinquain does not go into the details. The poetic persona muses on her hands. She thinks these are not hers at all. There is a resemblance to another woman’s hand when she tries to look at hers. She is a bit confused about the fact. At last, the poet leaves her confusion to the readers like a puzzle. It can either be a reference to her mother or she hints at someone else. It’s a question open to various interpretations.
Structure and Form
‘Amaze’ by Adelaide Crapsey consists of five lines. The first line has two syllables, the second line has four syllables, the next line has six syllables, and the last line has two syllables. The stress falls on the second syllable of each foot. Hence the poem is in iambic meter. The first and the fifth lines of the poem are in iambic monometer. The second line having four syllables naturally becomes an iambic dimeter line. The third line is in iambic tetrameter. The rising rhythm represents curiosity in the poet’s mind.
The second and fourth lines rhyme together and they have the same word at the end. Likewise, the third and fifth lines contain an imperfect rhyme. The “z” sound at the end of the respective lines only rhymes together. The exception is only with the first line which has a different sound at its end.
Literary Devices
In ‘Amaze’ by Adelaide Crapsey, the poet uses an enjambment. The poem is in a single sentence only divided into five lines. Hence it is a perfect example of this literary device. The “hand” seems to be a metaphor for “identity”. Here the poet might be referring to her physical appearance or her biological identity. In the fourth line, there is a simile. The same literary device is present in the last line too. After reading the poem, it seems that the “hands” can also be a symbolic reference to writing. The hand is the organ for writing; hence it might be treated as metonymy in the poem.
Amaze Analysis
Lines 1-2
I know
Not these my hands
This statement, at its core, is a simple declaration of life’s changes, but there is a deeper meaning represented that can be uncovered through a closer inspection. Specifically, the phrasing reads in a confusing manner. The narrator does not say “I do not know my hands,” which would be the clearest way to give this information. Rather, she has chosen to use phrasing that is more formal, through the structure of “know [n]ot,” and she is making use of the unnecessary pronoun, “these.” Strictly speaking, “I know not my hands” would be sufficient, but the word choice forces that unneeded “these” into the equation. This can speak of the confusion the narrator feels as she looks at her “hands” that have aged, whether through a loss of mental capacity or just a shock of noting that her life has rushed past.
It is important to note, however, that while the wording is confusing, it is never so confusing as to be impossible to understand. The awkwardness remains at a superficial level, which could indicate clarity of thought beneath her uncertainty about the aging process. This idea would give a hint as to what is causing the narrator’s confusion since it would remove mental incapacity as a possible culprit. To keep the coherency intact underneath the odd wording would require a sharp mind, and this notion leaves all of the confusion at the doorstep of the narrator’s shock in regard to the aging process.
Basically, the narrator wants the reader to know that she is confused—but she wants the reader to understand why. This presentation of atypically formed sentences that are still coherent mimics that prospect perfectly. The structure is confusing, but the meaning is still intact.
The addition of “these,” as well, is providing an extra bit of direction toward the “hands” to build emphasis on the physical features that have caused the narrator such distress. They are the core representation of her aging, making the added emphasis a strengthening method for the poem’s meaning.
Line 3-5
And yet I think there was
A woman like me once had hands
Like these.
The confusion of the first two lines continues with oddly constructed pairings of ideas. For instance, there is no grammatical necessity to say “And” before “yet.” Grammatically, “Yet I think” would be sufficient, but again, the narrator utilizes that unneeded word to stress a sense of confusion. The uncertainty continues in that, whereas in the first two lines, the narrator uses “know” as the verb connected to her ideas, the word choice for the third line turns to “think,” which lacks the certainty of “know.”
It seems then that as Amaze progresses, the narrator becomes less sure, which could indicate that the passage of time causes her greater confusion. This would be the case if her mental capacity were being lost through some illness, but also in general as her life continues to rush toward its end. The closer that end becomes, the more she is being separated from the known life she has lived and moved toward something she has never embraced. That would push her further into growing uncertainty, and that idea is reflected through the shift to “think” instead of “know.”
Another grammatical bit of confusion afforded in these lines is that there is no subject before “had hands.” The reader can infer that the narrator is referring to the “woman like” her, but there is no need “who” to link that description of the person to the “hands” themselves. Once more, the wording makes sense, but it lacks the structure to make it as clear and crisp as it could be.
As a further strength of forsaking this simple word, the confusion in regard to who this person is elevated as well. By not saying “who,” essentially, the narrator is revealing how unimportant that “who” is to the story, particularly when added to the fact that the narrator never expressly states the identity of the person in the poem. Instead, the reader is only told that although the narrator “know[s] [n]ot” her “hands,” she does see the similarity between them and the “hands” she saw “once” on this “woman like” her.
So who is this “woman” whose importance is, based on the sentence structure, so lacking to the poem’s tale? The reader can easily decide the narrator means her earlier self, indicating she is recalling a more youthful appearance of her “hands.” Another explanation, however, could be that she is remembering the “hands” of a mother or grandmother who had grown wrinkled and aged through time, which would boost the level of confusion the narrator feels over her own “hands.” There was a time, basically, that someone else was the aged person, and to realize she has become that person could be a deeply meaningful and introspective moment. That introspection is the key idea at work, which is why removing the “who” concept is genius. “Who” does not matter—only that the narrator has changed.
Overall, the aging process has created in this narrator’s own “hands” something that does not reflect who she believes herself to be. This can be seen as a statement of how humans withstand aging and even regard it with fear and hesitation. The passage of time can feel so fleeting that realizing how much of it has passed can be jarring enough to create confusion, and the nostalgia of what life used to be can cause these moments of self-realization to be sad and painful.
In fact, within this poem, the attitude toward the process seems to be resistant—since she declares she “know[s] not” her “hands”—and surreal enough to cause her uncertainty to increase into the realm of “think[ing]” rather than “know[ing].” Those feelings of uncertainty are expressed in her word choices, and they are the primary theme of the poem.
About Adelaide Crapsey
Adelaide Crapsey was born in 1878 and died in 1914, both events occurring in the state of New York. She is noted as “the inventor of the cinquain.” Additionally, she struggled with tuberculosis, and her thoughts on death—potentially sparked from her sickness—can be found within her poems.
Similar Poetry
‘Amaze’ by Adelaide Crapsey celebrates the contribution of female writers in the field of literature. This poem also raises the question of gender identity. Whatsoever, here is a list of the poems which are closely associated with the theme and subject matter of this poem by Crapsey.
- ‘Power‘ by Adrienne Rich – praises the courage and perseverance of Marie Curie.
- ‘Barbie Doll‘ by Marge Piercy – was inspired by the traditional girl’s toy, the Barbie Doll. It explores themes of feminism and expectations.
- ‘The Laughter of Stafford Girls’ High‘ by Carol Ann Duffy – celebrates women’s voices and their freedom.
There are several poems like ‘Amaze‘ which are easy to comprehend and analyze. You can read about 10 of the Best and Easiest Poems to Analyze here.
