Larkin produced ‘An Arundel Tomb’ following a holiday with Monica Jones, visiting the monument of the Earl of Arundel clasping hands with his wife in Chichester Cathedral. The piece focuses on how time has changed this monument. Initially, Larkin establishes the statue as he sees it, describing how the earl and his wife lay. He then explores how the meaning of this couple has vanished as visitors view the monument superficially. Ultimately, the poem concludes that the couple is solely remembered for this gesture which is interpreted as a symbol of eternal love. Larkin adopts a very naturalistic voice, yet the ABBCAC rhyme scheme imposes a structure on his thoughts to counteract this simple tone.
Firstly, Larkin establishes a description of the statue in a casual and dispassionate tone through which he explores the passage of time and its effect on the monument. Larkin expresses that the faces of the statue have been ‘blurred’. This suggests that the impact of time has removed the identity of the couple as they can no longer be seen as they were as their faces have been eroded. When we read that they ‘lie in stone’, it recalls the image from ‘Talking in Bed’, a couple lying together in increasingly stony silence. This lack of identity can further be seen when Larkin expresses that their ‘habits are vaguely shown’. This limits the reader in picturing the couple and suggests viewers know little of how the couple lived as the effigy provides little information about their lives. Larkin’s use of enjambment traces the movement of what he sees, as the words ‘shown as jointed armour’ spreads over two lines, suggesting he has only just noticed the ‘jointed armour’. The effigy is further established through the indication of the time period of its creation with ‘plainness of the pre-baroque’. This is mirrored in the plain, end-stopped lines of the stanza’s structure and shows the immense passage of time, preventing us from properly understanding the monument as it was created so long ago. Further, as the effigy is ‘pre-baroque’, it allows the reader to picture the monument as undecorated and minimalistic which characterises the ‘pre-baroque’. The iambic tetrameter is broken through the speaker’s piqued interest in the couple holding hands. This is evident when Larkin writes that his disengagement was broken by a ‘sharp tender shock’ as he views ‘his hand (…) holding her hand’. This juxtaposition between a ‘shock’ and the clasping of a ‘hand’ shows how moved he is by this gesture and its symbolism of abiding love. The stress placed on ‘his’ and ‘her’ shows the unification of the couple in the verse. In addition, the poets ‘shock’ could be interpreted as his pleasant surprise of this romantic gesture.
Secondly, Larkin indicates the historical changes which time has brought. The rhythm re-establishes as the earl and countess recover from the anachronistic modern response and
Larkin regains detachment following interest at the couple holding hands. The alliteration that the couple did not expect to ‘lie so long’, suggests that the monument has gained more meaning than initially intended through time. Further, Larkin indicates the sculptor unintentionally created the apparent transcendence achieved, as the vivid human touch was merely ‘sculptor’s … grace’. This suggests that the beauty of the monument was only to focus the viewers mind on what was important to medieval eyes which was prolonging the Latin names and that the clasped hands are a deception of their faithfulness. Additionally, Larkin suggests the passage of time through indicating that what accompanies the tomb is ‘Latin names’. This implies how archaic this tomb is as Latin is no longer spoken, so modern viewers can only comprehend the expression of the couple, which they interpret as love and faithfulness. This link to the medieval past is similar to ‘Love Songs in Age’ in which the sheet music provides the speaker with memories of pre-marital life. The rhythm then slows down as the speaker begins to question what the couple would have thought about the modern viewers of their monument. Larkin suggests the passage of time by indicating a change in admirers of the monument. Initially, we hear that ‘old tenantry’ admired their earl and countess through the monument. We learn that they have been ‘succeed[ed]’ as the generations have changed. This suggests that originally the admirers were acquainted with the couple, however, modern viewers admire the monument unaware of the couple’s identity. In addition, we learn how those ‘succeeding’ ‘look not read’ the monument suggesting that the hopes of the couple in being remembered for who they were have vanished as what remains of them is just the beauty of their posture as modern viewers are unable to ‘read’ the monument’s ‘Latin names’.
Finally, Larkin presents the idea that time has removed the identity of the earl and his wife and how the couple no longer belongs in present time. A smooth, soporific tone now leads the poem, contrasting to the jagged verse lines, accompanied by a shift in attitude, for example, the soft alliteration that ‘birdcalls strewed the same’. Enjambment guides the reader through the fourth stanza to the fifth conveying the relentless flow of time. The poet describes the endurance of the monument suggesting the passage of time. For instance, we learn the couple are ‘linked, through lengths and breadths of time’. This indicates that while the world around them is changing, the couple endures in protective stance with clasped hands. Larkin conveys the passage of seasons to suggest how time has passed, for example, ‘snow fell’ and ‘light each summer thronged the glass’. This imagery creates an appearance of purity and cleansing, additionally establishing the spiritual cleansing effect of visiting the monument. Larkin then highlights the vast quantities of people that have passed since the monument was created by stating that the cemetery is now ‘bone-riddled’. This compound adjective, typical of Larkin, suggests the passage of time since the monument was created as the ground is now filled with the ‘bone[s]’ of those who have passed since the couple has died. Larkin further indicates how the viewers of the monument have changed with ‘endless altered people came’. This could be interpreted that generations of people viewing the monument have passed. Alternatively, it could imply that those who view the monument are emotionally ‘altered’ through the gesture of eternal love. Furthermore, we learn that the past becomes irrelevant as the couple now exists in an unfamiliar age ‘unarmorial age’ suggesting that the couple would feel out of place in an age that doesn’t understand. Larkin urges the reader to comprehend what we interpret of the effigy is not what was initially intended. For instance, he expresses only an ‘attitude’ and ‘untruth’ remain of the couple. This suggests that what we see of them now is deceptive as they did not intend to be remembered as such a powerful symbol of love. The poet conveys how their tomb now defines the couple as their true identity has disappeared through time. For example, the effigy is suggested to be their ‘final blazon’. This archaic vocabulary suggests a formalised public image and refers to the description of elements on a heraldic device, therefore suggesting this was a staged exit from the world and not a symbol of eternal love. Ultimately the poet questions the romantic notion of what will remain of us after our death, with ambivalence. The last and arguably most significant line of the poem questions ‘what survives of us is love’. This line could be viewed as suggesting that love can conquer all, including death. But this is only an ‘almost instinct’ which is ‘almost true’, suggesting it is not: it is just what we would like to believe