A simple statement like this one is actually reflected quite well in Seth's poem. The reality that underscores both the frog and the nightingale is one of confidence. The frog lacks talent, but not confidence. The nightingale lacks confidence, but not talent. In this combination, the frog is able to assert his own role as "sage" and coach and "guide" the nightingale. For her part, the nightingale lacks the confidence to ask some critical questions such as the motivation present behind the frog's "kindness" and why she could not simply provide her own tuition. Essentially, the nightingale's dependence on the frog comes from a lack of confidence in being able to stand on her own two feet. In this vacuum caused by a lack of confidence, the frog swoops in and is able to destroy his competition. At the same time, the nightingale lacks the ability to be able to sing for herself and her own confident notion of self. She sings for others, and her confidence, her affirmation, lies in others' validation. This is a dangerous position for her, as demonstrated by what the frog does to her. Seth's poem is able to speak to how confidence is needed in order to be able stand in the position of controlling one's own interest and sense of self in the face of competition and audience appreciation factors.