This second poem leaves no doubt of the horrifying prospect that God himself is the antagonist: that he has turned against his own Daughter Zion.
She in consequence considers the horrifying prospect of cannibalising her own infants (2:20, repeated at 4:10).
It recounts God's anger being unleashed on her;
one commentator identifies within just the first eight verses
as many as 27 terms of anger about the Lord's destructive force.[34] It concludes in turn with her anger being unleashed towards God.[35]
Bookended, "A to Z", by "the day of the Lord's anger",[36]
this is the nightmare-turned-reality incarnation of the prophet's warning,
Amos 5:18–20;
it is the polar opposite of the psalmist's praise,
Ps. 118:24–27.
The poem has some striking similarities with the psalmist's lament,
Ps. 89:38–45.[37] And the physical reactions and reasonings of passers-by at vv.15–17
here at the destruction of Solomon's Temple seem a dire fulfilment
of God's warning to him immediately after its inauguration,
1 Kings 9:8–9.
Observe the "pitiless"/"without pity" thread in vv.2, 17 and 21 (also 3:43).[38] Observe, too, the even more savage "devour" thread in vv.2, 5 (twice) 8 and 16.[39] There is a final, vile twist at v.20.
Women are cannibalising their children because the Lord has devoured his people.[40]
In the Hebrew text, over 80% of this poem's verses,
1–11 and 15–21, start with verbs.[41] And additionally, within those verses,
many of their internal couplets are similarly verb-fronted.
In English this can be seen strikingly in
Young's Literal Translation
from the late nineteenth century.[42] This bombarding effect is counter
to the English-language "subject then verb" convention.
That sustained, pounding drive is conveyed here
by using a verb-fronted, list-like structure for the first few verses,
with the subject being relegated to less prominent placement.
For example the first three verses may be read as:
Alas! Angered, my Lord:
—beclouded…
—flung down…
—blanked from his mind…
—blitzed to the earth…
—razed in fury…
My Lord has:
—devoured…
—cut off…
—retracted…
—blazed…
Amassed, these verbs and their qualifiers are uniquely fierce.[43]
The first poem had been in two "voices", approximately 50–50:
a witness-reporter and Daughter Zion herself.
This second poem is mostly voiced by the reporter,
until at 18–19 the reporter can be seen to implore the city
to voice her complaint, which she accordingly does to close the poem.
Yet in the midst of their initially objective reportage,
the reporter switches to an engaged present-tense at v.10,[44] breaking down and speaking subjectively of their own personal response
in a soliloquy, 11–17, that interrupts their graphic portrayal of the violence
and seeks, however vainly, to comfort Jerusalem.[45] And the likely trigger for the observer's change of stance in v.11?
Here is where the tortured, lingering deaths of infants and children,
the innocents, are witnessed, with their own mothers agonisingly helpless.[46] "Who could heal you?" (v.13). The only possible healer is God,
but God is the very one ravaging her in the first place.[47]