Gerard Manley Hopkins and "God's Grandeur"

The poem "God's Grandeur" sounds very much like it would come from the mind of a clergyman. It contains that unapologetic style that never questions the omnipotence of God. This particular poem is interesting to me, because it has a couple of difference references to something you wouldn't find in the pages of a religious text: actual electricity. Hopkins uses words like "charged" and "foil" to illuminate the instantaneous spark that it accompanied with the onset of voltage. Everything before this point, in relation to God, has used the superiority of nature in discussing His benevolence. For the first time so far in the reading, we come across a poem that uses an extremely modern reference in such a pious subject. How should we approach this? We can assume that it was one of the first attempts toward bridging the gap between progress and religion, but we also don't know if this was really Hopkins' intentions in writing it. Did he really believe that a gap existed? Or did he find the new discovery of electricity to just be another facet of nature?

"It will flame out, like shining form shook foil;
It gathers to a greatness, like the ooze of oil
Crushed..." (774)

These few lines suggest the "gathering" or the undercurrent of electricity. Of course, an undercurrent is never really seen. It is more of something that we can feel, building up inside of a wire, getting warmer with strength. He then compares the instant spark of "foil" with the "ooze of oil," maybe trying to allude to two different ways of viewing God? Or is it really just "viewing or perceiving God?" Could it actually have nothing to do with God? When we think of an undercurrent, it's easy to think of a huge build up, usually of emotion. Then, typically, the undercurrent either has a point of culmination, or has the ability to sustain a certain level of power. How does this relate to God?

You could argue that spiritual encounters happen on a "foil" type of basis, particularly in stories from the Bible. A vision of God appears and disappears in an instant, with no premonition or build-up. So what does it mean to have an "oil" type of encounter, one that ruminates over time? Oil has a gooey consistency, sticking to everything and leaving a trail of its movement. Maybe the reference to the oil is actually a reference to Hopkins' perception of the presence of God. It is ever-present and has the ability to leave marks on the things that it touches.

Despite whether or not the discussion of oil and foil are related to an "encounter" with God (this is just a guess as to what it could mean), it is obvious that the poem seeks to discuss "Nature." The poem describes Nature as an inescapable work of God, even with the onset of Electricity. We would typically think that a clergyman would fight against electricity, claiming that it degrades God's creation. We don't see that with this poem. These short allusions to electricity or progress are not reprimanded, but instead demand that the credit be given to God. The "undercurrent" was always there; humans just had to find a way to channel it.

We also see Hopkins' trying to make the reader understand that nature is not to be neglected:

"Generations have trod, have trod, have trod;
And all is seared with trade; bleared, smeared with toil;
And wears man's smudge and shares man's smell: the soil
Is bare now, nor can foot feel, being shod." (775)

Hopkins suggests that when we don't take care of our environment, we are not taking time to observe God's work. He speaks of it as a crime to neglect that which is given to us gracefully. Overall, the poem seems to ask the reader to look at nature as a compliment to a Creator, to participate in the preservations of that compliment, and to reject human credit for newer innovations.