Explained: "Had You Wept" Poem by Thomas Hardy

In his "Had You Wept" poem, English writer and poet Thomas Hardy tries to understand a painful dynamic between a man (possibly him) and his girlfriend or wife after something went wrong in the relationship and the woman, instead of shedding tears during an earlier argument, just remained calm and silent.

According to Hardy's protagonist, one would expect a woman to cry when under duress, but more importantly (and kinda slightly malevolently), use her tears as a weapon to get what she wants from the man.

Our protagonist opines that since tears are highly powerful and effective weapons in a woman's emotional arsenal, people or society expect most of them to use them to get what they want. But in his case, his wife or girlfriend does not cry, does not give vent to her feelings; she just feels too much, according to the protagonist and hence, "gained no balm" for her "undying sorrow".

The Had You Wept poem carries a very important and revealing line, which could be said to be Thomas Hardy's assumption or observation of women during his time.

He says in the poem: "The deep, strong woman is the weakest, the weak one is strong."

What does he mean by this line?

Does he mean to say that it was a common perception in the English society at that time that a woman who had a lot of depth, who was emotionally sensitive but not malicious in intent, one who could feel a range of emotions deeply and was internally very strong, will not weep or cry and use her tears to manipulate others and as such, if she cannot manipulate others, she could be considered weak. Because maybe people are expected to become shrewd and even conniving to thrive in society, and those who don't suffer because others try to take advantage of their nature. These "deep, strong" women, they don't try to use their emotions to manipulate others and hence are seen as weak? Conversely, Hardy's version of a "weak" woman is the one who cries easily and uses her tears as a weapon. In this way, since she tries to wield her tears as a power, she is considered strong in society.

After reading " Had You Wept" by Thomas Hardy, I had a burning question. Towards the end of the poem, the protagonist has come to believe that had she wept, things wouldn't have remained that tough between them, that some or a great amount of pain would have been greatly reduced. My question is this: But had she wept, would he be willing to believe that she wasn't using her tears as a weapon? How would he have seen her then? The weak one who is strong?

I want to believe that the writer who can understand his beloved's suffering in their relationship to this extent will most likely recognise her as the "deep, strong woman" and not a "weak" one. He can deduce that her not crying means the pain she feels is so great that it won't bring tears. At least not immediately during the argument or heated exchange.

Hardy also uses the term "gifts" for "tears". Via the protagonist, he asks the woman if she was not given these tears as gifts by God or a higher power, or if she just denied them.

The protagonist in Thomas Hardy's "Had You Wept" feels that, owing to the woman being possibly a stoic, who does not shed a single tear, the "dark undying pain" remains in their relationship.

In his opinion, had she cried, then maybe the couple would have resolved quickly. But her not crying means the damage is far too deep to be lessened by shedding tears.