Poetry · Chapter
Chapter XXIII explained
The speaker uses an extended metaphor of a cloudy day to argue that our perception of absence (of the sun, of Good, of God) is itself proof of presence.
What happens
The speaker uses an extended metaphor of a cloudy day to argue that our perception of absence (of the sun, of Good, of God) is itself proof of presence. The very thought of evil or absence derives from and affirms the existence of Good and presence, suggesting that what we call evil is merely the withdrawn cause of Good.
Themes in this chapter
Epistemological Uncertainty
The poem explores how sensory perception (cloudy day) leads to false conclusions about reality, yet the very error reveals a deeper truth about presence and absence.
Flesh and Spirit
The contrast between apparent absence (evil, darkness) and underlying presence (Good, light) mirrors the tension between material perception and spiritual reality.
Characters to notice
Key passages
“Even as upon a low and cloud-domed day, When clouds are one cloud till the horizon, Our thinking senses deem the sun away And say '’tis sunless' and 'there is no sun'; And yet the very day they wrong truth by Is of the unseen sun’s effluent essence, The very words do give themselves the lie, The very thought of absence comes from presence”
Just as on an overcast day we mistakenly think the sun is gone, though the daylight itself proves the sun's hidden presence, so our claim of absence actually confirms presence.
The speaker uses the metaphor of a cloudy day to illustrate how apparent absence (of Good or God) is actually evidence of hidden presence.
“Even so deem we through Good of what is evil. He speaks of light that speaks of absent light, And absent god, becoming present devil, Is still the absent god by essence’ right.”
In the same way, we understand evil only through Good. To speak of absent light is still to speak of light, and an absent God who appears as a devil remains essentially God.
The speaker argues that evil is merely the absence or withdrawal of Good, not an independent force, and that the concept of evil depends on the prior existence of Good.
“The withdrawn cause by being withdrawn doth get (Being thereby cause still) the denied effect.”
The cause, by withdrawing itself, still produces the effect that is denied—its absence becomes the cause of the effect we attribute to something else.
The paradox that a cause can produce an effect (evil) simply by being absent, thus remaining the true cause even in denial.