Edna St. Vincent Millay, born in 1892, was raised to be an independent thinker and lover of the literary arts. A prevalent poet and writer, she is most known for the poetry collection The Ballad of the Harp-Weaver (1922), which won the Pulitzer Prize in 1923, the poem “Renascence” (1912), and the play The King’s Henchman (1927), which was considered one of America’s first great operas. Millay’s poem “Spring,” published in 1921, portrays her quick wit and her penchant for deviating from the norm. Instead of romanticizing the season of spring, Millay portrays it as an “idiot, babbling” and shows readers a new perspective on the clichéd aspects of the season.

Line by Line Summary and Analysis

Edna St. Vincent Millay’s poem “Spring” rejects the typical, romantic depictions of the often-idealized season. Not only does Millay use cutting imagery and diction, she also wrote the poem in free verse, meaning that her poem has no fixed rhyme scheme or meter. Although the majority of Millay’s work uses traditional verse, this poem’s formal looseness underscores the argument that spring is silly, meaningless, or overrated.

Line one begins with the speaker asking a pertinent question: “To what purpose, April, do you return again?” This line introduces readers to the main argument of the poem—that spring lacks purpose—and to the speaker’s feelings of contempt for and confusion over spring. The speaker breaks further from the poetic norms of meter and rhyme with the next line.

Line two claims, “Beauty is not enough.” This relatively short line is in trimeter, consisting of three metrical feet. The trimeter deviates the poem’s first line, which uses a hexameter, a meter form typically seen in Latin or Greek epic poetry. The change of meter jolts readers into discomfort, and pushes readers to view spring from a new perspective. For the speaker, spring is lacking depth and meaning, no matter how beautiful it may be.

Lines three and four further show the speaker’s contempt and efforts to de-romanticize spring: “You can no longer quiet me with the redness / Of little leaves opening stickily.” The combination of “redness” and “stickily” perhaps invoke grotesque imagery instead of pleasant imagery for readers.

In line five, the speaker shows confidence in her opinion: “I know what I know.” This line may also denote the speaker’s focus on only her own knowledge and physical understanding of spring, which are outlined in lines six and seven.

Lines six and seven serve to show negative physical experiences mixed with typically positive descriptors of spring. The speaker first mentions the sun “hot on my neck,” which points to the warmth of spring and the discomfort of heat simultaneously. Next, the speaker mentions the “spikes,” or petals, of the crocus flower. The description highlights the speaker’s penchant for viewing the elements of spring as baleful instead of beautiful.

In line eight, the speaker does concede that “The smell of the earth is good,” showing a shift in tone from negativity to an admittance of potential goodness.

In line nine, the speaker claims that “It is apparent there is no death” after observing the liveliness of spring, such as the good-smelling earth, sunshine, and crocus flowers. However, the trope that spring is a season of renewal is subtly turned down here. The word “apparent” shows doubt, and highlights how the speaker questions the goodness, life, and renewal of spring. Spring appears to be full of life, but the speaker sees that it is merely a facade, barely covering up the ever-present fact of death.

In line ten , the speaker...