u that I would change with him?The reader expects the answer to be no and followed with an explanation how the poor man is happy as he is and that money doesnt bring happiness. Wrong! The answer, You bet I would! declares a dramatic shift in the poem, which only the most prophetic reader could have anticipated. It throws Bartletts words right into the bin and brings in George Bernard Shaws response Lack of money is the root of all evil (Man and Superman, 1903). Money doesnt bring happiness but it is a great help or as Albert Camus said it It's a kind of spiritual snobbery that makes people think they can be happy without money.The Rich Man isnt a very technical poem. It is written in simple abab form and has little variation in the rhythm. On my opinion, the poet, Franklin P. Adams, has decided with the risk of sounding nave not to hide his thoughts behind complex techniques. But he does have some imagery and parallelism a casual reader could leave unnoticed. The two first stanzas both have a personified abstract thing Fate in the first and Poverty in the second. Fate is personified (in addition to writing it with a capital letter) when the rich man jeers at it. Povertys personification is done by referring to it as her and the fact that it has a pinch. These two personified things assert that the rich man is above all; Not even the mythical Fate or Poverty can get to him.The second and the third stanza are connected by their contrasting imagery. The second stanza starts with a bright image of how the rich man frivols through the livelong day, whereas the third stanza starts with a rather dark image of how the poor mans lamp burns low and dim. The word frivols(5) also contrasts the word slave (10). One could even say that Adams used the word light on the seventh line to contrast the dark and the bright even more. In addition, the rich man has a cinch (=an easy task, referring to his job) but the poor man must slave for livelihood.Th...
