Is this a metaphor or something else?

[suwoo]

I didn't know if there was a term similar to 'personification' but for likening something to an animal? It is not 'dehumanise' as the something has no human characteristics to begin with.

The line in question relates to a troubled conscience hoarding its strength for darkness like a burrowing mole.

Thanks all.

Ok cheers, I just thought it might be more than a metaphor. (but obviously I didn't know what ).

Did you see it in context Acinonyx?

My limited expertise has, alas, been exhausted so I can't say whether it is more than a metaphor.

I just had a look at the poem (another good excuse not to get my own work done).

The poem has really grown on me after studying it for 8 hours or so. I need to print it off imminently, but wish I had something stronger to say that just metaphor IYSWIM.

Right, so you're doing an analysis, yes?

Just a simile, then.

Someone please tell me if I'm deluded here - but isn't a simile a kind of metaphor, i.e. one that actually compares using words such 'like' ?

I agree Acionyx.

No, Acionyx, it's not. They're different figures of speech. The whole point of metaphor is that it's not explicit comparison of terms, which simile is.

suwoo, you could always say in the essay that the line is complex, and although not anthropomorphism, it nevertheless attributes the qualities of a living thing to the conscience.

Personally, I think the point is that the 'conscience' (which you'd think is a higher faculty of the brain) is degraded by comparison to a burrowing mole. You don't normally think of the conscience as animalistic.

I don't think fancy words are the most important thing. I think if you can really work out why the phrase is so complicated for us to analyze, then you'll be saying something more valid about it than just 'its a metaphor'.

I'd also be cautious to specify which bit is the metaphor and which is the simile, because a hasty marker won't immediately understand unless you do, I think.

For info, the lines are:

"Save me from curious conscience, that still lords
Its strength for darkness, burrowing like a mole"

Interestingly, I think conscience is actually anthropomorphised anyway, because of "curious", which I don't think could/should come from the mole, as any attribution of motive to animals tends to be anthropomorphising (the animal) in the first place.

Or would you rather we shut up, suwoo, now you have handed in?

But surely this is not saying the mole is curious?

One hundred percent simile, final answer.

No, it's not saying the mole is curious, it's saying the conscience is curious. You could argue that to attribute emotion such as curiosity to a mental faculty is anthropomorphic. I'd say 'lords its strength' more strongly humanizes the conscience, because 'lords its strength' is a metaphor derived from a human system of granting titles to mark social status. So there's a dramatic contrast between that image, and the following clause, the simile in which the conscience is likened to a humble 'mole', as if it's lordly strength becomes bestial.

I don't think just defining the rhetorical figures really quite does it!

No, it's saying the conscience is curious. Which is anthropomorphising it.

No, it's saying the conscience is curious. Which is anthropomorphising it directly, rather than theriomorphising it by association with the mole.

But conscience can only be a human mental faculty - so how can you anthropormorphise something that is a defining feature of human nature . What would be the non-anthropormorphic alternative? This makes no sense.

Because a mental faculty isn't a human. Opposable thumbs aren't human either, and both could be anthropomorphesized.

Good grief - I'm going to stick to science in future.....

I am making it needlessly complicated, I know. It's just close-reading is so attractive when you should be going over your footnotes instead, you know?

suwoo will have handed it in hours ago, anyway.

No no, LRD, I am overcome with admiration at your readings!

More attractive than revising a paper too

Massively more so than a financial planning course.

If I may just muscle my way back into pedants corner . I did indeed hand it in hours ago (and four days early), and I braved it and said it was anthropormophic. I said it was intriguing and went into a bit of detail as to why. If I remember, I'll come back in four weeks and let you know what I got and if there is a big red line through anthropormorphism .

I think if you used LRD's argument they will give you an honorary doctorate on the spot

Acinonyx, I doubt it - my mate just marked a point her student's essay with 'rambling and vague' and the poor lad had to point out he was quoting ... from her supervisor!!

I'm suspicious I'd fall into the same camp ...