The Fewer the Words, the Broader the Interpretation
One of the unavoidable themes of this short poem is its shortness. The construction of “Self-Pity” is actually brief enough to allow it to be sent in its entirely as a message on Twitter. (A Tweet about a tweeter, if you will). This creates a modern day context for examining the poem’s them as a literary statement. Just how much meaning can be invested in a pome consisting of 26 words and 134 characters (with spaces)? Turns out, probably a lot more than most people might suspect.
The Hubris of Man
While the content of the poem seems to suggest a certain primal superiority of the animal kingdom over the petty concerns of mankind, its theme can also be interpreted in a way that negates this perspective while simultaneously confirming it. Who is the speaker to say that animals don’t possess any capacity for self-pity? How would we actually prove such a contention?
Prose v. Poetry
Lawrence may actually be better known for his prose than his poetry. The author of a number of short stories and novels may well have been stimulated to a point of self-pity at the thought that his poetry was not was held in the same esteem or perhaps that he himself felt his ambitions in verse paled against his success in prose. Even his longer novel are at some level experimentations with language and the conveyance of meaning, but the level of abstract meaning and ambiguity in poetry could never be accepted in even a short story.
A Rail Against Passivity
Considering his prodigious output over such a short amount of time, it is difficult to imagine Lawrence ever giving into the self-destruction consequences of feeling sorry for himself. The poem thus suggests very strongly that he is using the animal kingdom to underline the message that humans simply do not have enough time on earth to waste by being passive. Like the animals, they must expend every last drop of energy pursuing that which keeps them alive.
