"They in their cruel traps, and we in ours,
Survey each other’s rage, and pass the hours
Commiserating each the other’s woe"
The title of this poem is self-explanatory and, more to the point, accurate. The speaker is a visitor to a zoo, surveying the landscape of caged animals and moving to contemplation. These are the opening lines and they situate right from the start that this will be a poem that is not relegated to simply a study of the animals. The use of “they” and “we” initiates thematic imagery that will continue throughout the verse drawing parallels between the zoo animals inside the cages and human beings outside. This first observational parallel obliquely engages the literary device of personification by suggesting that the animals caged inside the zoo express sympathy with another about their troubles in the same way as humans.
"That lion with his lordly, untamed heart
Has in some man his human counterpart"
The parallel between animals and humans is further delineated by the speaker’s comment that man could offer little more exchange with the animals than a larger cage. This comparison establishes a direct connection between the concept of animals and humans being creatures sharing a similar destiny. The comparison is then more closely scrutinized by narrowing down the focus to a particular animal. The choice of a lion is perhaps the most appropriate one to compare to humanity. The lion’s metaphorical nickname of “king of the beasts” becomes a subtle commentary on man’s conception of his own species as the king of the world. It is a less-than-perfect allegorical connection, however, and leaves the man rather than the beast in a position of want. The quote intimates that it is the lion as a species that possesses a heart that cannot be fully tamed. By contrast, the implication is that such a wild spirit be found only within certain individual representatives of human beings as a species.
"Who is most wretched, these caged ones, or we,
Caught in a vastness beyond our sight to see?"
The poem concludes with the rhetorical suggestion that the animals enslaved behind bars in the zoo may not have things worse than humans as would normally be suspected. The premise for this suggestion is that while the animals in the zoo are literally caged, at least they can apprehend it. Human beings, on the other hand, are apt to confuse the literal lack of bars with the belief that their freedom is not constrained. The zoo animal may not be able to escape its imprisonment, in other words, but it gains the advantage of humanity by at least recognizing the truth that they are not free. In this way, the poem ultimately becomes almost an exercise in existential awareness. The speaker’s trip to the zoo results in contemplative awareness of the absurdity of assuming any life is free from limitations. It is this awareness and recognition of the limitations of freedom that gives one the power to deal with existential dread and anxiety.
