Consider a pencil. It is designed to write on paper— to express the thoughts and ideas of its wielder. What would become of the pencil without paper? Certainly, the pencil would have other uses, but none of them would be meaningful enough to justify its continued manufacture. Thus, the pencil would become obsolete and fade into oblivion. In Langston Hughes’ poem “Dreams,” he elucidates that life without dreams would be a similar existence to a pencil without paper: a life drained of purpose. Hughes posits that dreams are the crux of human life because every person needs something to aspire towards; a life void of dreams would be one void of hope. Yet, Hughes does not explore the value of dreams by lauding their beauty, but rather by lamenting …show more content…
In the first stanza, by stating “for if dreams die,” Hughes makes clear that dreams dying is a hypothetical situation: he says “if dreams die,” not that dreams have already passed on (2). There is incredible optimism in this diction because it illustrates that dreams have not yet vanished and will not disappear as long as we continue to hold onto them. Again, in the second stanza, Hughes proclaims “For when dreams go,” reinforcing that there is still a chance for dreams (6). Though same may argue that “when” implies dreams are destined to vanish at some point and have simply not yet reached their expiration date, “when” is used in the same way that if was in the previous stanza: to refer to a hypothetical situation (6). In this sense, Hughes is saying “should dreams go” or “when someone capitulates and allows their dreams to leave,” not that all dreams fade eventually, so this line still reiterates the assurance of the previous stanza. Although it is valid to argue that “when dreams go” refers to an eventual collapse of hope, this interpretation does not coincide with the optimism in the previous line that urges readers to “Hold fast to dreams” because it is not too late to salvage them