Better Look Twice: Eliot’s Hippo in a Poetic Parade

by Skylar Hamel

    T. S. Eliot’s “The Hippopotamus” is a difficult poem to decipher. One critic, Andrew John Miller, points out that “two of the most widely cited commentators on Eliot--Grover Smith and Hugh Kenner--long ago came up with interpretations of the poem that are diametrically opposed, a circumstance that suggests that the significance of the poem is somewhat less than self-evident” (242). Miller continues his article with an interpretation that is starkly different than the one presented in this essay. Part of the reason “The Hippopotamus” defies obvious interpretations is the dual nature of many of its descriptions of the True Church. It turns on a stunning reversal that calls into question the stanzas that the reader has already read and interpreted. This necessity for reassessment lends itself well to the subject of the poem. In “The Hippopotamus,” Eliot encourages a reevaluation of the poem itself and the institution of the Church; he expresses doubt in the doctrine without expressing doubt in Christianity, particularly through the poem’s interactions with the progression of literary history.

The poem begins with two epigraphs that, when first encountered, appear to support the institution of the church. They are “drawn from times so remote in the history of the church as to be almost out of mind” and “come from that period, historically known as the Apostolic Age, when the foundations of the church were still to be laid. . . To remind us in some striking way of the labor which was done by the earliest churchmen” (Worthington 10). The first, printed in Latin, translates to: “And likewise let all the deacons be reverenced, as commanded by Jesus Christ; and let the bishop be reverenced, as Jesus Christ, the son of the Father; also let the presbyters be reverenced, as the council of God and the assembly of the apostles. Without these there can be no church; of these things I persuade you as I can” (qtd. in Worthington 10). The effect of the quoted epistle and the Age from which it comes is to remind us of the hierarchy of the church and its claims on being the current voice of God and his living will. This epigraph is followed by a second, “And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans” (Eliot 41) which is a quote of the first half of Col 4.16 of the King James Version of the Bible. The epistle in that quote is a letter from Paul used to combat the threat of heresy in his time (Worthington 10). Eliot connects the theme of strengthening the church through its structures and rigid adherence to its laws through both Biblical quotation and Christian history.

The Biblical references of Eliot begin with the poem's title. Although the Bible lacks any direct representative of "hippopotamus," in the book of Job there is a reference to a "behemoth" that "eateth grass as an ox" (King James Bible, Job 40.15). The hippopotamus is likely the animal in question. The early descriptions of the hippo in the poem--"broad-backed," "rest on his belly in the mud," and "seems firm to us" (Eliot 41)--echo the biblical passage of the behemoth: “Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly. / He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together” (Job 40.16-17) and "He lies under the lotus trees, / In a covert of reeds and marsh" (New King James Bible, Job 40.21). Job uses the behemoth in the Bible as a representation of one of the God’s glories, but as one still subject to mastery. “He is the first of the ways of God; / Only He who made him can bring near His sword” (Job 40.15) where the initial he is the behemoth, and the second is God, who is the only one capable of dominating the large animal.

An initial reading, after the epigraphs and the recognition of the behemoth, seems to glorify the True Church through repeated comparisons to the misfortunes of the hippo. The behemoth is fallible, “merely flesh and blood” (Eliot 41) while “The True Church can never fail / For it is based upon a rock” (Eliot 41). The hippopotamus works but fails to achieve; the True Church succeeds without trying. This interpretation begins to unravel near the end of the poem. First, the hippopotamus unexpectedly joins the choir of angels and is cleansed by the blood of Jesus. Then, the True Church is left on earth, “wrapt in the old miasmal mist” (Eliot 42). The destinations of the two subjects contrast with their earlier fortunes.

The ending of the poem forces a re-evaluation of the poem’s beginning, and casts a darker view on the True Church. Beginning again at the start of the poem, the epigraphs can present a different view of the church. The antiquated nature of the first quotes connects with the “old” mist of the final stanza. The views are outdated, and are an obstacle between man and God. The first epigraph shows the construction of the church, but the Church no longer connects to God. Eliot, for his second epigraph, intentionally expurgated the Biblical verse. It reads, in its entirety: “And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea” (King James Bible, Col 4.16). The original verse does not end with the spread of the word of God, but invites the response of those to whom Paul is preaching. Given the stagnant state of the True Church by the poem’s conclusion, Eliot’s use of these quotes indicates that the hierarchy of the church is not accepting response nor progressing. It also signals one of the problems of church doctrine for the religious man: the selective editing of quotes to fit the message of the institution.

    The third stanza starts with the hippo’s failures: “[his] feeble steps may err / in compassing material ends” (Eliot 41). It continues by comparing the hippo with the True Church: “While the True Church need never stir / to gather in its dividends” (Eliot 41). The primary reading suggests that the True Church does not fail like the hippo because its ends are not “material,” but are instead spiritual. However, a closer examination reveals a critique of the Church. The description of the hippo could mean either he is sinning by attempting material gain, or that he is unsuccessful in his attempts. The True Church, on the other hand, doesn’t need to work to gain. Unlike the hippo, it does not have to “stir” to achieve its ends. While “dividends” can have a non-monetary significance, it often refers to the share of money any one group receives. This line criticizes the Church’s material gains, through donations, investments, and--at the time of the creation of the Protestant movement--even through the sale of the divine in the form of indulgences.

The next stanza has a similar structure, starting with the hippo’s failures and following with a comparison to the Church:

The ‘potamus can never reach

The mango on the mango-tree;

But fruits of pomegranate and peach

Refresh the Church from over sea. (Eliot 41)

The futility of the hippo’s life is contrasted with the ease of the Church‘s existence. The Churce is nourished by things that the hippo cannot acquire. Both stanzas three and four employ imagery that indicates a lack of movement by the Church. It “need never stir” and is refreshed by fruit that travels, as opposed to traveling to get the fruit as the hippo tries to do. As stated in the book of Matthew, “Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.” Some critics have contended that the “mango” represents the hippo’s search for spiritual truth (Meyer 242). The pomegranate has a clear Biblical heritage, being used in clothing and other references. It also symbolizes the resurrection of Christ and the judgment of God (St. John of the Cross 164). The peach, on the other hand, lacks a direct Biblical meaning --although religious paintings have employed it as a counter to the apple image. The Church is combining the divine—the pomegranate—with the mundane—the peach—for its own gain: refreshment.

The image of feeding appears again two stanzas later. The hippo must divide his day into sleeping and hunting, but “God works in a mysterious way-- / The Church can sleep and eat at once” (Eliot 42). At first glance, the Church appears to be capable of great things; it can do what the hippo cannot. The statement “represents the achievement of a perfect balance between leisure and necessity” (Miller 247). However, the Church’s actions are unnatural, and confront the reader with the idea that a Church may need to sleep and eat. If the Church is the spiritual or more outwardly religious entity, then its sleep signifies a spiritual dormancy and its fare is a spiritual aspect of others. “God works in a mysterious way” (Eliot 42) suggests that the Church is difficult to understand, but the interjection of God’s mysteries does not imply that the Church’s actions are admirable for being incomprehensible.

In another example of questionable admirability, there is a distinct difference in the sounds associated with the hippo and the True Church. The fifth stanza compares the unusual and unattractive sounds of the hippo “at mating time” (Eliot 41)—reflecting a disgust at sexuality typical to Eliot—with “every week we hear rejoice / The Church, at being one with God” (Eliot 42). The ambiguity in this sentence comes from the questions of perspective. Before the poem’s final revelation, one would read the sentence as: the Church is at one with God, and therefore rejoices. The knowledge that the Church is “wrapt in the old miasmal mist” (Eliot 42) and left on earth while the hippo goes to heaven forces a new interpretation. If, by the poem’s conclusion, the Church cannot be at one with God, then in this line the Church is claiming to be something they are not. The Church rejoices, “at being one with God” (Eliot 42) without actually attaining that unity. In contrast, the hippo’s voice betrays the truth about his “mating time,” preventing him from living the lie of the True Church.

As in the weekly rejoicings of the Church, the hippo’s afterlife includes choral music: “And ‘quiring angels round him sing / The praise of God, in loud hosannas” (Eliot 42). In both cases, there is a separation between the singers and the receivers. In the first, the narrator hears the Church’s rejoicing, while in the second, the hippo hears the angels’ song. The key difference is the response. The speaker responds by going his own way; he goes from being part of a “we” to being an “I” as the hippo rises from the plain. The hippo, on the other hand, joins the angels: “Among the saints he shall be seen / Performing on a harp of gold” (Eliot 42). Unlike the hippo, the narrator acts as an observer, expressing doubt in the Church and unwilling—as of this moment—to join the rejoicing Church choir.

Outside of the dual interpretations of the Church descriptions, the narrator’s doubt is expressed through the source material for the poem. As previously mentioned, the second epigraph hails from the King James Bible, used by members of the Church of England. In her article regarding religious allusions in “The Hippopotamus,” Christine Meyer points out that the hippo’s “pursuit of truth . . . contains four allusions to hymns found in the Unitarian hymnal which Eliot was most likely to have known” (242). The second half of the poem also contains allusions to hymnals, however “they no longer come from the Unitarian hymnal, nor, apparently, do they come from an Anglican one. Surprisingly enough, allusions to the Methodist hymnal seem numerous” (Meyer 244).  The use of multiple Christian sources clouds the significance of “True Church” and suggests that the speaker seeks a denomination but cannot accept any particular one.  Although Eliot quotes different sources, in all of these allusions he maintains the Christianity of his message; the goal of both the True Church and the hippo is unity with God and heavenly reward.

Particularly interesting in the final stanza is Eliot's use of the word kist. Aside from its significance as a participle adjective of kiss, kist as a verb means to put into a kist, which is defined as "the ‘ark’ of bulrushes in which Moses was placed; and to Noah's ark" (“kist,” def. 1b). Eliot combines the hippo as sinner-saved image with the hippo as animal in his God's creation. In keeping with the juxtapositions in the poem, this diction suggests that the True Church must be the opposite of the hippo and therefore represents those left outside the ark in the flood. The institution of the church on earth leads away from the belief that saved Moses, Noah and the animals.

It is important to note that Eliot’s choice of the hippopotamus as the animal persona for the poem does not present the hippo as an easy alternative to the True Church. In the “behemoth” verses, the creature “is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him” (New King James Bible, Job 40.19). “Chief of the ways of God” suggests the creature is strongly connected to his Creator, although it does not state explicitly that he follows the doctrine of any Church. The negative consequences appear in the second half of the verse: God poses a threat to the behemoth. The verses teach that even this faithful giant is no match for his God. This reference is also brought home with the use of kist, as its definitions include “To put into a ‘kist’ or coffin” (“kist”). The combination of the behemoth verses and kist begs the question, “Did God kill the hippopotamus?” If the Bible states that only God can threaten it, and the poem ends with its ascent to heaven and placement in a coffin, the logical conclusion is that it died by God’s hand. The frustrated life of the hippo is imperfect as an alternative to the True Church, though the reward and the appeal are greater.

In "Tradition and the Individual Talent," Eliot argues that the poet does not exist nor excel by himself, but does so in the progression of the history of poetry. It is not the novel or the distinct that makes the poet better; it is his position within the larger scope of the art that proves his talent (Eliot 38). The above interpretations show the effects of Biblical verses on the reading of “The Hippopotamus.” Connections between this work and literary history are likewise enlightening.

In its structure, Eliot’s poem resembles Baudelaire’s “Abel et Cain.” “The pattern of this poem is that of Baudelaire’s ‘Abel et Caïn’: one of continuous contrast, with a sudden reversal in the concluding section” (Garland 28). That pattern is clear in both, although Baudelaire supplements his structure with an actual division into two numbered parts. According to Garland the “basic themes are identical” (28). This statement is true only on the most superficial level of the poems. Both compare the apparently divinely-favored to the unfavored by God, following themes of reversal, rebellious questioning, and doubt. In spite of these similarities, the poems come to distinctly different conclusions. Baudelaire ends his poem with “Tribe of Abel, your shame will come when the sword is shattered by the peasants' stake. / Tribe of Cain, ascend to heaven, and throw God down to earth” (“Abel et Cain”). Baudelaire’s reversal invokes class struggle and a violent upheaval against the religion itself. He does not reference the church as an institution; he would see “God” trapped in the miasmal mists on earth. Eliot does not allude to class struggle. His focus is the “True Church” which he would see thrown down to earth, while the hippo, the Cain of his poem, ascends to heaven in glory and comfort to be united with God.

In substance, Eliot's choice of subjects is reminiscent of the metaphysical poets. The critic Elisabeth Tomlinson writes, “in summary the main interest of these men [the metaphysical poets] was the relation of themselves and others to the spiritual world” (211). Eliot’s poem is a manifestation of attempts to define that relationship, either through the material world of the hippo, or the supposedly spiritual world of the True Church. Like the poets of the seventeenth century, he is connecting two dissimilar objects in an exploration of the spiritual, while simultaneously using very strong biblical allusions. The combination of disparate images serves a greater purpose than simple contrast. Just as Donne’s “The Flea” takes a parasite to represent a suitor’s request of relations outside of wedlock, Eliot contrasts the Church with a large, ungainly animal to reflect a religious body that has grown too big and lost the semblance of grace.

William Blake’s “The Little Black Boy” has a similar ability to enhance the meaning of “The Hippopotamus.” Eliot chooses the hippopotamus or behemoth, an animal native to Africa. Like the black boy of Blake’s work, Eliot’s personage from Africa ascends to heaven more easily than his counterpart, the white child or institutionalized religion, respectively. Although Eliot falls far short of making the plea that Blake made, both can be seen questioning the rules of religious doctrine. Furthermore, viewing the hippopotamus as an African symbol connects to the world that Eliot would have considered primitive. Eliot admired the primitive mind, as outlined by Levy-Bruhl, that saw “objects and their mystical properties form ‘un tout indecomposable’ ‘an integral synthetic whole’” (Spurr 270), which corresponds directly with his admiration of the Metaphysical poets as well. This perspective on the object and its spiritual connection lends itself to Eliot’s choice of Biblical source material; he chose the verses that would allow him to connect a spiritual search with a totem-like animal. Eliot “finds in ‘the life of the savage . . . The operation of a social-religious-artistic complex which we should emulate upon a higher plane’” (qtd. in Spurr 273), making the hippo the perfect vehicle for Eliot’s religious musings.

T. S. Eliot uses “The Hippopotamus” to express his personal doubt in religious institutions. He would eventually decide to join one, and take his leap of faith into the Anglican Church, using his later poetry to probe other religious challenges and mysteries. The reader can interpret this poem as many things: as “the ‘double discourse” between the “pure” spiritual and the “impure” material (Miller 248), as a criticism of “the dead weight” (Worthington 11) of the religious organization, as a critique of “aestheticized Catholicism” (Miller 246) or some other denomination (Meyer 245), as a statement “against hypocrisy and pretense” (Tomlinson 214), as a representation of “the weakness of the natural man, lukewarm in religious zeal” (qtd. in Miller 242), as the search for “a faith to which [a religious man] may give his adherence” (Meyer 245), or as “an amusing satire, not entirely devoid of sting” (Galand 28).  However this poem is interpreted, Eliot succeeds in forcing the reader through the ambiguous, confusing path that led him to his faith. His doubt becomes the reader’s own.

Works Cited

Baudelaire, Charles. "Abel et Cain." Trans. Francis Scarfe. Charles Baudelaire's Fleurs du Mal. Supervert. Web. 18 May 2009.

Blake, William. "The Little Black Boy." The Norton Anthology of English Literature, The Romantic Period. Ed. Stephen Greenblatt. New York: W. W. Norton, 2006. 84. Print.

Donne, John. "The Flea." The Complete English Poems. Ed. A. J. Smith. New York: Penguin Classics, 1977. 58. Print.

Eliot, T. S. ""The Hippopotamus"" Collected Poems, 1909-1962. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1991. 41-42. Print.

--. "Tradition and the Individual Talent." Selected Prose of T.S. Eliot. New York: Harvest Books, 1975. 37-44. Print.

Galand, R. “T. S. Eliot and the Impact of Baudelaire.” Yale French Studies 6 (1950): 27-34. JSTOR. Web. 23 Apr. 2009.

King James Bible. 1987. BibleGateway. Web. 16 May 2009.

        “Kist.”  The Oxford English Dictionary. 2nd ed. Web.

Meyer, Christine. “Some Unnoted Religious Allusions in T. S. Eliot's ‘The Hippopotamus’.” Modern Language Notes 66.4 (1951): 241-245. JSTOR. Web. 23 Apr. 2009.

Miller, Andrew John. “‘Compassing Material Ends’: T. S. Eliot, Christian Pluralism, and the Nation-State.” ELH 67.1 (2000): 229-255. JSTOR. Web. 23 Apr. 2009.

St. John of the Cross. A Spiritual Canticle of the Soul and the Bridegroom Christ. Radford, VA: Wilder, 2008. Google Books. Web. 16 May 2009.

Tomlinson, Elisabeth. “The Metaphysical Tradition in Three Modern Poets.” College English 1.3 (1939): 208-222. JSTOR. Web. 23 Apr. 2009.

Worthington, Jane. “The Epigraphs to the Poetry of T. S. Eliot.” American Literature 21.1 (1949): 1-17. JSTOR. Web. 23 Apr. 2009.