Pines thrust at the stars. The dawn was a floating
Of mists till we reached to the slopes above timber, and won
To snow like fire in the sunlight. The peak was upthrust
Like a fist in a frozen ocean of rock that swirled
Into valleys the moon could be rolled in. Remotely unfurling
Eastward the alien prairie glittered."
By the Finger's lengthening shadow. At last through the fanged
And blinding seracs I slid to the milky wrangling
Falls at the glacier's snout, through the rocks piled huge
On the humped moraine, and into the spectral larches,
Alone. By the glooming lake I sank and chilled
My mouth but I could not rest and stumbled still
To the valley, losing my way in the ragged marsh.
I'll mention in passing that, as a Christian, I'm opposed to suicide/ assisted suicide on principle but this isn't an argument except to fellow persons of faith. I have other reasons for being against these things which are not faith-based. The first of these deals directly with the Bobby/David situation: neither of these young men are doctors. Obviously David is badly hurt- probably permanently. But they don't know that for sure and what if his paralysis was temporary, or could be reversed? David would have plunged to his death for absolutely no reason. Secondly, David is scared, stressed, and hurt; he's in no condition to make decisions about life or death. By interviewing people who have survived suicide attempts, it's been determined that most regretted their decision the moment they tried it, and over 90% never attempt to kill themselves again. You can read an article about it here. Statistically speaking, it's likely that as David was falling to his death, he was thinking thinking that this was a really bad idea.
One can argue, of course, that David's decision was not impulsive as shown by his killing of the crippled robin. This is true but again, he doesn't know that he is permanently injured. Also, this incident demonstrates that David has a very limited and arrogant view of life. He decides that the bird would be better off dead if it can't fly. This is his decision- no one asks the bird. Well, okay, it's a bird, but this is his view of human life as well: unless the person is perfectly functional, their life is worthless.
I find myself disliking David from the point of his killing of the bird on through the end of the poem. It's tragic of course that he falls and is gravely injured but at the same time, his insistence that his life will be unbearable if he's confined to a wheelchair leaves me cold. I have a young niece who was born with severe spina bifida; she will never walk. She has hardships and physical struggles that most of us will never have to face, but she loves life and enriches the lives of all around her. So when David is saying that the thought of life in a wheelchair is unendurable, I feel sympathy for his anguish but I also feel like telling him to man up. In addition, it's extremely selfish of him to emotionally blackmail Bobby into helping him commit suicide. It's obvious that Bobby has no desire to do so; he prevaricates and even lies to David to try to get out of it. In the end, he gives in because he's used to doing what his friend says, he feels guilty for being the reason David lost his footing, and also Bobby can't resist his pleas which end with the reasoning, "I'd do it for you." So he pushes David over the edge, killing his friend, which is a trauma and guilt he'll have to live with for the rest of his life. This last statement of David's holds no weight with me. Imagine it being used as an argument for any other kind of wrongdoing: "Rob that bank for me... I'd do it for you." Ridiculous. Besides, does anyone really want a friend who's eager to help them shuffle off this mortal coil when they're in pain or despair rather than trying to uphold and strengthen them?
Last year a teenage girl in the U.S. was convicted of involuntary manslaughter for her role in the suicide of her boyfriend. The young man, who had mental health issues, committed suicide by poisoning himself with carbon monoxide. While he was doing it, his "girlfriend" was texting him, egging him on and encouraging him to go through with it when he seemed to be hesitating. Wrong? Evil? Yet in the Netherlands- where euthanasia is legal- in 2015, a 34 year old woman with chronic depression and a personality disorder decided that she wanted to end it all and her application was granted. She was euthanized- quite legally- leaving behind a three year old daughter. So what makes one case heinous and the other acceptable? I'm consistent on this: both are wrong.
Also, note that the reasons for granting assisted suicide in the Netherlands quickly moved from extreme physical suffering, to mental anguish, to pretty much any kind of discomfort or disability at all- including old age. Where does it end? Is it truly compassionate to tell people that they shouldn't have to face pain of any kind, that they should always have the option of ending it all if they decide that they don't want to suffer or be unhappy? I can't accept that. It's not that I don't have sympathy for those who are suffering, either from physical or mental- or spiritual- anguish. It's that I believe that their lives have worth, meaning, and purpose even in the midst of that suffering.
To conclude, David is a poem which combines beautiful imagery of the Rockies with a dark tale of tragedy and terrible choices. I don't agree with the ones made for the reasons stated above, but David does provide an opportunity to think about what you believe on this issue and why.