Ah, Are You Digging on My Grave

Fiction | Poem | Adult | Published in 1913

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Download PDF

Summary

Background

Poem Analysis

Themes

Symbols & Motifs

Literary Devices

Themes

The Fleeting Nature of Human Relationships

The dominant theme that runs throughout the poem is that all human relationships are ephemeral: The finality of death severs even the most passionate connections.

The poem’s structure reinforces this theme by featuring a different type of relationship in each stanza: romance (Stanza 1), family ties (Stanza 2), a rivalry (Stanza 3), and an owner/pet dynamic (Stanzas 4-6). While these relationships appear to be very different in terms of type and degree of intimacy, they are shown to mirror each other. After death brings the speaker’s connections to an abrupt end, the still-living treated even the memory of the deceased flippantly. The speaker’s beloved in the first stanza replaces her, marrying another woman for being “One of the brightest wealth has bred” (Line 4) and justifying his transfer of affections by reasoning that it is impossible to betray someone who is no longer living. The speaker’s family—her “nearest dearest kin” (Line 8)—are likewise eager to move on from her death, neglecting her gravesite because they believe that tending to the grave and leaving fresh flowers there as commemoration is a waste of their time and effort, since “No tendance of her mound can loose / Her spirit from Death’s gin” (Lines 11-12). Indifference similarly overtakes relationships once defined by hate: The speaker’s former “enemy” (Line 14) now thinks the speaker “no more worth her hate” (Line 17)—death has vanquished her rival.

The second half of the poem offers the false hope that at least one bond has remained sturdy in death through the loyalty of the dead speaker’s dog. The speaker is eager to believe this, asking rapturously, “What feeling do we ever find / To equal among human kind / A dog’s fidelity!” (Lines 28-30). But even this tie proves illusory, as the dog soon confesses to having come to the grave only “To bury a bone” (Line 32) and that he “quite forgot” (Line 35) that the grave was the speaker’s “resting place” (Line 36). This final ironic twist in the closing lines of the poem suggests that there is no respite for the speaker. She truly has been forgotten by everyone she ever cared about; even her closest and most loving relationships have proven to be shallower and more fleeting than she suspected.

The Banality of Death

After her death, concerns for the speaker have also been swiftly replaced by more banal and worldly concerns in the minds of those she once cared deeply about. Her beloved has married another woman, attracted by “wealth” (Line 4) and shrugging off the memory of his former lover: “‘It cannot hurt her now,’ he said / ‘That I should not be true’” (Lines 5-6). This attitude aligns with normal life—bereaved people often go on to other relationships. However, because the poem’s point of view makes us empathize with the dead speaker, the beloved’s words here seem callous. Furthermore, the reference to the “wealth” (Line 4) of the beloved’s new bride suggests that he has forgone sentimentality for the material comforts and prestige his new alliance can bring to him. The speaker’s family avoids keeping up her gravesite because they believe it is a waste of time (“What good will planting flowers produce?” [Line 10]), since no amount of tending will bring the speaker back to life. Their attitude suggests that they simply do not see the act of tending the grave as a marker of love and devotion. They consider planting flowers beautification for no one’s enjoyment, assuming that there is no audience for their efforts. Finally, the speaker’s former “enemy” (Line 14) became indifferent to her the very moment “she heard you had passed the Gate” (Line 15), suggesting that passionate rivalries only matter to the living, and that discarding hatred was easy upon the speaker’s death. In short, all of these human connections have moved on, absorbed in their own day-to-day affairs and treating bereavement as something humdrum and of no lasting importance to them.

Even the dog confesses that he is at the speaker’s grave only “To bury a bone” (Line 32), in case he “should be hungry near this spot / When passing on my daily trot” (Lines 33-34)—the most mundane of errands. The deeply prosaic nature of the dog’s concerns underscores how little he cares for his former owner: He is simply hiding a snack, focused on his immediate physical needs. The fact that this behavior is totally in keeping with the dog’s animal nature—a living creature must be more concerned with daily sustenance than with sentiment—makes it clear that moving on from grief is the normal course of events. The speaker should not be surprised—possibly, she herself behaved in exactly this way when someone she loved died.

The Fragility of Memory

The neglect of the speaker’s grave suggests that memory—like human affection—is worryingly fragile. The speaker is eager to guess the identity of the person digging near her grave because she is desperately seeking proof that she has not been forgotten by those she loved. What she discovers instead, stanza by stanza, is that her memory is being swiftly obliterated and that no one is making an effort to keep it alive. There are ways in which her loved ones could prove their enduring affection and honor their memories of her: Her beloved could remain true to her memory by “planting rue” (Line 2)—a symbol of regret and sorrow—and perhaps refuse to marry someone else, her family could tend to her grave with care instead of complaining about what a waste of time it would be, and her dog could keep watch by her grave as a sign of his deep fidelity. But all of these requests are unreasonable and unrealistic—it is psychologically healthy to recover from grief, and ongoing mourning that prevents the bereaved from resuming normal life is now classified as a mental disorder. Of course our speaker is hurt that none of her loved ones have stopped their lives to clings to her memory—but the poem makes it clear that this is something only an unnaturally undead ghost would demand. The pervasiveness of deliberate neglect and forgetting in the poem suggests that memories fade quickly, and that past ties have no chance of maintaining the intensity of feeling living bonds inspire.