"Promises like Piecrust" by Christina Rossetti tells a narrative between the speaker and her loved one regarding the other's romantic attraction towards the speaker. The poem's title is taken from the expression "Promises are like a pie crust, they are made to be broken", comparing the difficulty of keeping a promise to the fragility of a pie crust, a thing that breaks easily. The title essentially captures the recurring theme throughout this poem by Rossetti, namely that promises, and perhaps people, are fragile and fleeting. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Rossetti structures the poem argumentatively, acting as an appeal to the poem's recipient. The constant meter of seven syllables reflects the speaker's stable emotional and mental state when presenting his argument against his beloved, portraying the speaker as reasonable and free from emotion. The alternating rhyme (ABAB/CDCD) suggests a lack of reciprocity between the two parties, as neither is able to satisfy the other in terms of desires in the relationship. It suggests a sense of wavering in the speaker, who is perhaps not as sure as he seems. The paradoxical opening line of the first verse of "Promise me no promises" and the following line "So will I not promise you;" suggests that the speaker desires a non-committal relationship between the two parties, with the speaker somehow finding security in the lack of security due to the absence of mutual promises. The phrase "Let us both keep our liberties" implies a strong need for independence on the part of the speaker who does not want to be tied to the beloved, which is something of an oddity in the Victorian era where marriage for a woman was a entrance door. towards financial security, so the speaker could also be read as a liberation from her patriarchal bonds. Alternatively it could also be read as the speaker freeing the beloved from possible commitments to him, suggesting a feeling of unworthiness or inferiority, which is supported by the phrase "free to come and free to go", with the repetition of the word free highlighting further the need of those who speak of freedom from attachment, or of freedom in general. The antithesis of "false" and "true" is colored by the prefix "never", the negation that represents the inability of either party to be able to emotionally influence the other if the beloved pays attention to the speaker's previous request in the first two lines. Furthermore, the "dice" is symbolic of chance, therefore the risk that must be taken to achieve any outcome in their relationship, with the word "not thrown" showing that the speaker is not willing to take that risk. The last two lines of the stanza begin to develop the theme of the unknowable past of both the speaker and his beloved, as the phrase "why can't I know your past" suggests that the beloved may be hiding past secrets from the speaker. A common method of Rossetti would be the use of rhetorical questions, which he uses to shroud his poems with a sense of intrigue and mystery, an example of which would be in his poem "Winter: My Secret". Using a rhetorical question in the final line (“And what can you know about me?”) would achieve a similar effect, prompting readers to speculate on answers not freely given. On the other hand, it could also be read as the speaker taunting the beloved, implying that he is unable to fully understand the speaker. The second stanza is a further development of the past tense of both the speaker and the beloved. In the first line an accusatory tone is imposed against the beloved, especially if one were to read the phrase "so warm"how sarcastic. There is a hint of jealousy in the speaker in the line "warmer towards another", implicitly stating that the beloved was more attentive and loving in a past relationship, so his jealous disposition perhaps stemming from a lack of clarity about the faithfulness of the his beloved. However, the use of the word "may" adds a degree of speculation regarding the speaker's account of her beloved, it could perhaps be indicative of some form of paranoia, perhaps arising from a sense of insecurity on the speaker's part. Rossetti seems to further intensify the speculative aspect in the stanza with the rhetorical question of "Who will show us if it was / So truly in ancient times", indicating that the speaker herself is uncertain of how past relationships have played out. Structurally, the first and third lines of the stanza are almost identical with the same rhythm and caesura position, forming a mutual bond between the speaker and the beloved. Furthermore. the antithesis of "you" and "I", as well as "hot" and "cold", can be inferred as the inherent and irreconcilable differences between the two, or their current emotional disposition towards each other. Given the context, "sunshine" can be taken as a metaphor for a speaker's past relationship, while "I feel the sun" could be read as the speaker being more passionate in the past than his "coolness" in the present. In addition to this, the repetition of “once upon a time” is representative of the speaker's clear fixation on the past, indicative that the speaker is unable to move forward and is perhaps in a state of emotional limbo, therefore unable to engage appropriately in a situation. new relationship. A juxtaposition between past and present adds credibility to the speaker's argument that the two parties should not be involved in a relationship with each other, since implicitly their past relationships have both ended even though they were apparently (according to the speaker) warmer and more loving. At that time. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that if they were to enter into a relationship with each other in their current situation, it would be doomed to end in failure. The verse ends with fading images, suggesting the unattainability of their relationship or the unpredictability of the future should they commit to one. Critic Jens Kiefer provides some interesting insights into the use of metaphorical imagery in the stanza, stating: "His strategy of representing the past as something that can only be reconstructed in the form of allusions therefore seems suspiciously like an attempt to divert attention from its reality". reason for refusing to enter into a romantic relationship: fear." Alternatively, the use of allusion could represent the speaker holding on too tightly to the past, being unable to describe it in its entirety for fear of bringing up old memories. The final stanza reintroduces the concept of promises and personal freedom, acting as a continuation of the theme of the first stanza. An antithesis of "you" and "I" echoes the previous stanza, involving a parallel structure. While previously the antithesis was used to describe their emotional states in their past relationships, here it serves as a warning from the speaker about the dangers if they were to "promise" each other, which is euphemistic for the consequences of mutual emotional commitment . The commitment is in fact heavily slanted negatively by the speaker, claiming that the beloved "might weep for lost freedom", with the alliteration seeming to emphasize his point, while the use of the word "yet" could refer to his past relationship, where he actually expressed negativity towards her previous commitment. The speaker also considers herself incapable of commitment, likening a relationship to a "chain," as.