Winston Churchill said that “the truth is indisputable.” This statement interprets "truth" as an absolute concept, in which there is only one truth, and everything else is by definition non-truth. Tennyson's In Memoriam and Thackeray's "Going to see a Man Hanged" are certainly diverse in their genres; Tennyson's words are a profound ode to a lost friend, while Thackeray's article is a satirical and disgusting account of a public event. Yet both of their acts of writing seek a truth, not the absolute definition specified by Churchill. Thackeray's truth relies on presenting an accurate account of an event; it's literally about telling the truth about what he sees before him, translating the sight into words with little creative interpretation. Tennyson differs from this. His writing is not based on what he sees, but on the grief he feels, and his truth lies in his ability to express it aptly when there seem to be no suitable words to shape his emotions. Yet another writer may express the same grief differently, or may even react differently to publicly seeing a man hanged. Therefore, perhaps the truth can only be incontestable to the one who expresses it. It is a truth that is unique to them, but which perhaps does not exist as a universal and absolute truth. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”?Get an Original EssayBy creating a poem that echoes grief, Tennyson is simultaneously liberated and restrained through the use of words in In Memorium. They exist as a means of confession, but he also struggles to find the words that will allow him to truly express the extent of his grief. TS Eliot commented that In Memoriam was "the diary of a man confessing". And it is extremely interesting to consider this ode as a “diary”. This positions the readership as almost voyeuristic, as if we are viewing a private account. This notion is reinforced by partially religious language; Tennyson must “confess” as if to a priest, as if by admitting his emotion he was also admitting a sin. This may be a slight awareness of the social conditions of Victorian England, where it was arguably considered less masculine to express one's weakness through one's feelings. Yet this idea of ​​a “journal” is also limited. Instead of studying what is written, it is almost more important to consider what was not written, what Tennyson did not admit. He has such a hard time defining his grief through words that it becomes less of a “confession” of how he really feels, and more of an exploration of his unanswered agony. Tennyson describes how words currently seem powerless to him: “A use in measured language lies/The sad mechanical exercise. » This truly expresses Tennyson's frustration; words and writing are no longer enough for him. Language has the capacity to create entire worlds from mere imagination, but it is now “measured.” This perhaps suggests that words, in reality, have a preconceived mold and that only a certain emotion can be expressed through each of them. For example, the word “sad” cannot reach the depth of the damage caused by Tennyson. However, this idea of ​​“[measurement]” could also arguably be a momentary relief. As a word is limited in its expression of emotion, a complete lack of control is not possible and it presents much-needed limits to grief that may not have existed before. In Tennyson's struggle to use wordsas a means of expression, there is also a subsequent questioning: once Tennyson has transformed these meaningful words into a poem, can the reader then understand the full extent of his pain? If so, this presents a separation of understanding between author and reader. And it is a motif that repeats throughout the form of the poem. Tennyson experiences "mechanical exercise" through a monotonous life without his beloved friend, but he is also mechanical in his repeated tetrameter quatrains. Tennyson uses the same rhythm and structure throughout, simply using different words. So he repeats the same patterns of grief until he hopes they will represent something different. In Memorium therefore undoubtedly refuses to exist as a “confession”; there are simply no words capable of justifying this label. His odes remain simply “just words” (Tennyson, p. 102). In comparison, Thackeray's "Going to See a Hanged Man" uses the act of writing to record, not explore, emotion. Words are used to organize reactions, not to explore their emotional meaning. Yet even this simple act of writing can be interpreted, and Thackeray interrupts the narrative to insert something similar to a warning. It claims truth, in its definition of being an accurate account of events: At least, such was the effect which the gallows first produced on the writer, who tries to record all his feelings as he goes along. as they occurred, and not to exaggerate. them at all… (Thackeray, p. 151) It can be said that the most important and remarkable literary technique is the change of narrative person. The story is written in the first person, but Thackeray here shifts the narrative perspective to the third person. It almost sounds like a witness in court, swearing on a Bible that he will only tell the truth, exaggerating the importance of the fact that he is recording the truth. In almost direct antipathy to Tennyson's exploration of each individual emotion, Thackeray focuses more on identifying each of them and the order in which they are experienced. This perhaps suggests that there is a specific way to react to such an event, and Thackeray attempts to imitate this emotional process. However, this process of accurately representing the order of reaction can only be an attempt. He claims to write "all his feelings as they happened", but the act of writing, despite the tension, will always be close to the events and the feelings are retrospective. The short time between experiencing these emotions and recording them already treats them as a memory, perhaps suggesting that any act of writing cannot be entirely the "truth" of what happened or what 'one person lived. Furthermore, Thackeray makes a subtle, but important, distinction between his genre and poems such as In Memorium. The narrator states that he will not exaggerate his feelings, perhaps suggesting that other genres exaggerate them, to fanciful effect. This separates its genre from fiction and makes it a more realistic piece, as it once again asserts that its narrative is the truth. In conclusion, Thackeray's narrator seems so focused on the truth of events and their order that he temporarily interrupts the narration. This warning almost suggests the opposite. Not only does Thackeray's claim to the truth suggest that he is lying, it seems superfluous. He claims to translate events onto paper as they occur, but stops to address the readership directly. Therefore, not only does Thackeray's factual truth differ from Tennyson's emotional truth, but it remains a feat that, despite., 1968)