and the steps in the process that send modern
readers looking for footnotes were readily grasped
by seventeenth-century Americans living in rural
farming communities. The tools and skills center
on the process of transforming wool into a gar-
ment, a process Taylor’s contemporaries under-
stood very well. It is also an activity that was
common, meaning it was both ordinary and hum-
ble. The poet looks no farther than what he
already knows as a part of everyday life, and in
this activity he finds spiritual insight.
Similarly, David relies on imagery of sheep-
herding, which his contemporaries understood
well, as it was part of their everyday life and
community. David’s peers would have automati-
cally grasped the relationship between a shep-
herd and his flock. And understanding this as
well as anyone would have been David himself,
who worked for years in his youth as a shepherd.
He thus knew the lowliness, the dirtiness, the
humility, the servitude, the solitude, the lack of
status, and the hard physical work of being in
charge of a flock. He also knew all about the
helplessness of the sheep and their behavior,
both individually and collectively. He knew
about the importance of the flock to the survival
of the individual sheep and about the shepherd’s
crucial role in overseeing his flock. Psalm 23
refers to the shepherd leading him to the best
green pastures and the best still water. He also
describes the comfort that the shepherd’s tools—
the rod and the staff—bring to the sheep. Order
and leadership are what they need. Both poets
use a set of ordinary images to relate theological
truths and to express their desire to be under the
authority of God. Taylor wants to be the spin-
ning wheel and the loom in God’s hands, used
for his will; David wants to be the lowly sheep in
total submission to the trustworthy shepherd.
Another similarity is that both poets refer to
being peaceful in their thoughts of dying. Their
faith and close relationships to God effectively
neutralize fear of death. Taylor’s speaker looks
forward to wearing his garment of salvation
before the Lord as he enters the kingdom of
heaven for all eternity. Further, he understands
that he did not create the salvation that gets him
there, so he is not only peaceful about the after-
life but also grateful to God. David states that he
is unafraid of evil as he walks through the valley
of the shadow of death. He does not fear evil or
death because the Lord is with him; God as the
shepherd does not leave his flock because he
knows that they are helpless on their own. Tak-
ing on the identity of a sheep, David realizes that
where he is going and what he is facing are far
less important than the fact that his shepherd has
not left him. In both poems, then, the poets use
their particular metaphors to address the univer-
sal and often frightening topic of death, and in
both cases their peace about it springs from their
faith.
While these two poems both reflect the great
faiths of their writers, and do so with similar
approaches, the poems are very different in
terms of theme and application. ‘‘Huswifery’’ is
about submission to God’s will and making a
conscious decision to be steered and used by
him. The result is God’s glory. Psalm 23 cer-
tainly carries a theme of submission to God’s
authority, but that theme is not the center of
the poem as in ‘‘Huswifery.’’ David describes
being a sheep in need of a leader, but the poem
is really about the contentment that experience
brings. Taylor’s poem would speak to a person
seeking guidance in life or pursuing a desire to
glorify God, whereas David’s poem would speak
to anyone in a time of trouble, whether it be
death, tragedy, confrontation with enemies, or
anxiety. Although the poems are tied together by
a common faith, their purposes are different.
Another important point to keep in mind when
reading both poems is that neither was written
for publication. David’s psalms were his per-
sonal way of expressing himselfforhimself and
his God. Taylor did not want his poems pub-
lished, and it was not until the twentieth century
that ‘‘Huswifery’’ became available to the public.
Reading these two poems and realizing how dif-
ferent the poets and their purposes were, while
still being able to see the parallels and the faith
these two men shared, is revealing. At heart,
these two men from very different times and
positions shared the same desire to know God
better and see his hand in the activities and
struggles of their everyday lives.
Source:Jennifer Bussey, Critical Essay on ‘‘Huswifery,’’
inPoetry for Students, Gale, Cengage Learning, 2010.Clark Griffith
In the following excerpt, Griffith explores Tay-
lor’s allegorical portrayals of the relationship
between God and humans in his poems, including
‘‘Huswifery.’’... So perceptive a reader as Austin Warren
praises the originality of ‘‘Huswifery’’ and holds
that its elaboration of one key figure is typical of
the poetry of conceits which we identify with the
metaphysical manner. But I find it necessary to
demur on both counts. Actually, I suspect, the
Huswifery