Wisdom Through Adversity

Wisdom Through Adversity

The events described in Elizabeth Bishop’s “The Fish” take place in a matter of minutes, perhaps even seconds. Yet with the seemingly mundane action of catching and releasing a fish, Bishop constructs a complex query into the natures of knowledge and power (McCabe). Bishop uses the speaker’s encounter with the fish to examine the interplay of assumption and truth, to muse on the meaning of victory, and finally to question the methods by which one acquires wisdom. Although the fish provides the starting point for these reflections, the speaker ultimately must choose to delve into a deeper truth alone (Upton).

Having caught the fish, the speaker holds him “half out of water” (Bishop 3), suggesting that something about this creature prevents him from automatically throwing it into the boat. The speaker notes that the fish is not and has not been struggling against him: “In the traditional battle between man and fish [. . .] the old and decrepit fish [. . .] has simply refused to participate” (McNally 192). The fish’s refusal to fight prompts the speaker to study the strange, massive creature that he has captured (McFarland).

The speaker describes the fish as “battered and venerable”

(Bishop 8). The American Heritage Dictionary describes battered as “to be subjected to repeated betting or physical abuse” or “to damage as by heavy wear.” In addition, The American Heritage Dictionary describes venerable as “commanding respect by virtue of age, dignity, character, or position.” Clearly, Bishop’s word choice here perfectly describes the fish. The fish through time and physical abuse does command respect because of its age and character. Yet the fish is described as homely which denies the fish any special beauty. One critic describes homely as “Not attractive or good-looking [. . .] lacking elegance or refinement [. . .] of a simple or unpretentious nature; plain [. . .] characteristic of home or of home life” (McFarland 369). The speaker begins to compare the exterior of the fish to an aspect of the home: wallpaper. Suddenly the simple brown of the fish’s scales become complex and strangely beautiful. What first appears simple and mundane becomes increasingly complicated and fascinating under scrutiny. (Johnson)

Bishop uses highly descriptive words like “speckled” and “infested” to create an even clearer mental picture. The word “terrible” used to describe oxygen and this is ironic because oxygen is usually beneficial, but in the case of the fish, it is detrimental. The use of “terrible” allows the reader to visualize the fish gasping for breaths and fighting against “terrible oxygen” (Bishop 23), permitting the reader to see the fish’s predicament on his level. The word frightening does essentially the same thing in the next phrase, “the frightening gills”. It creates a negative image of something (gills) usually considered favorable. Another simile is used to help the reader picture the fish’s struggle: “coarse white flesh packed in like feathers” (Bishop 27-28). This wording intensifies the reader’s initial view of the fish, and creates a visual, again, on the reader’s level (Front).

The speaker next relates to the fish on a personal basis: “I looked into his eyes [. . .] I admired his sullen face, the mechanism of his jaw.” Through this intense diction, a tone of respect is produced. For a moment, the speaker descends to the fish’s level and the reader then has more respect for the fish’s situation and the speaker’s position regarding the fish. There is a connection made on the part of the speaker (Ferry).

The next line “refers not to it physical appearance but in effect to its ‘character’, its courage (or at least its capacity to endurance) and its wisdom” (McFarland 374). “From his lower lip [. . .] hung five old pieces of line, [. . .] with all their five big hooks” (Bishop 48-51). The fish has achieved victory through suffering. He has struggled for his position, and his badge of success is permanent having “grown firmly in his mouth” (Bishop 55). Nothing the speaker thinks can take away the fish’s past conquests (Gardner). His earlier analysis of the fish’s eyes as “shallower” than his own is now perceived to be incorrect; the fish is in fact sapient and venerable, and the hooks are a “beard of wisdom” (Bishop 65) that his wisdom has come from his suffering is emphasized by the description of his jaw as “aching” (Stevenson). By allowing himself to be caught, the fish has conquered in a way that earlier was incomprehensible to the speaker. In the speaker’s narrow view of power and strength, the speaker saw himself as necessarily superior to the fish dangling from his line. Now, however, he understands the greater