This poem was very interesting. My first take on it was as if it was a consoling poem, saying that everything will be okay, "you" will get a nice chair to sit and relax in after death. Yet the simplicity of my take on the poem was unsettling, and I felt there was much more that I was missing.
As I read it a couple more times I started to think there was a dark, possibly evil, tempting tone. Like the poem was trying to get me or whoever to do something we weren't supposed to.
I began to research about other people's views on the poem... I came across multiple different perspectives, but the two most common were death and heaven.
While both thought similarly about "wandering" through life, the chair and the friends with their smiles were completely different. The darker version took the chairs as the "home" of the rich and wealthy - they forced their way to wealth and "bought" the chairs to sit and relax on their pedestals. The friends smiled, welcoming the newcomer, but they weren't really friends; there was no sincerity about them, and they were just engrossed in themselves as the newcomer supposedly is.
On the other hand, the view about heaven thought it was more of the relaxing part after death. Everyone got chairs because man was created equally; the friends and family were the friends of the newcomer who were already deceased.
I reread the poem multiple times trying to figure out which "take" I thought more suited my interpretation of the poem.
Whether the chair symbolized the wealth and money of the selfish and wealthy, or the nice relaxing seat of the old and tired.
I decided the poem was a combination of the two. That it took a positive outlook on life; positive in how people were selfish in the way they tried to saw themselves before others: survival of the fittest.
Towards the end of the poem I decided I was unsure about whether I liked it. The poem definitely got me to think about life.
I thought about my life.. How it's possible that the chair could be both the selfish's home but also the place where old friends connect... I almost found the poem to be a lesson on perspectives. But maybe it wasn't the poem that "taught," but the research to discover what the poem was about.
Friday, March 22, 2013
Tuesday, March 12, 2013
A Poison Tree
I really enjoyed this poem - and connected to it on a personal level (which I think most people can in some way or another.)
The poem begins by sharing two personal stories of "wrath." One was with a friend, the other with a foe. When the speaker was angry with his friend, he communicated his feelings to his friend and his "wrath did end." On the other hand, when he was mad at his foe, he didn't say anything and in his silence, his "wrath did grow." We begin to see what the poison Blake was talking about.
The second stanza Blake discusses fears. Fear and anger go hand in hand, and fear can make people do crazy things they otherwise wouldn't do. He then talks about smiles, implying the idea he is happy about this growing wrath inside of him... He ends the stanza with the word "wiles." I didn't know what it meant, so naturally I looked it up. It means a trick or way to deceive someone. Is the narrator going to play a trick on the foe?
The third stanza the speaker talks about his wrath growing and growing. It had now become that dangerous poison. The speaker then says it "bore an apple bright" - I naturally thought of a tree, because apples grow on trees. The metaphor has been completed. The poison tree was the wrath growing inside the narrator. The foe sees the apple and desires it - obviously because it looks so tasteful. He knows it's the narrator's too..
The fourth stanza the foe steals the apple when he thinks no one is looking, unaware of the poison it contains. The narrator awakes to see the "foe outstretched beneath the tree." He won. The narrator conquered his foe.. But in the end, did he really win?
I think Blake wrote this poem because he has seen what wrath can do to a person - it can drive them mad. My take on this was to be a warning to anyone and everyone to communicate; let others know when you feel angry with them instead of letting your feeling slowly fester until one day they burst. Don't let wrath be the poison tree that cuts you down.
The poem begins by sharing two personal stories of "wrath." One was with a friend, the other with a foe. When the speaker was angry with his friend, he communicated his feelings to his friend and his "wrath did end." On the other hand, when he was mad at his foe, he didn't say anything and in his silence, his "wrath did grow." We begin to see what the poison Blake was talking about.
The second stanza Blake discusses fears. Fear and anger go hand in hand, and fear can make people do crazy things they otherwise wouldn't do. He then talks about smiles, implying the idea he is happy about this growing wrath inside of him... He ends the stanza with the word "wiles." I didn't know what it meant, so naturally I looked it up. It means a trick or way to deceive someone. Is the narrator going to play a trick on the foe?
The third stanza the speaker talks about his wrath growing and growing. It had now become that dangerous poison. The speaker then says it "bore an apple bright" - I naturally thought of a tree, because apples grow on trees. The metaphor has been completed. The poison tree was the wrath growing inside the narrator. The foe sees the apple and desires it - obviously because it looks so tasteful. He knows it's the narrator's too..
The fourth stanza the foe steals the apple when he thinks no one is looking, unaware of the poison it contains. The narrator awakes to see the "foe outstretched beneath the tree." He won. The narrator conquered his foe.. But in the end, did he really win?
I think Blake wrote this poem because he has seen what wrath can do to a person - it can drive them mad. My take on this was to be a warning to anyone and everyone to communicate; let others know when you feel angry with them instead of letting your feeling slowly fester until one day they burst. Don't let wrath be the poison tree that cuts you down.
Thursday, March 7, 2013
Beginning Again
This poem intrigues me from the very beginning. As people grow older, we learn and become more experienced; I know personally looking back on my past I would have done some things differently if I had known what I know now.
The first line of the poem "If I could stop talking, completely cease talking for a year, I might begin to get well." I immediately thought this was going to be a poem all about why a person should heal themselves through not talking. But he goes on to compare not talking with brain surgery - I'm assuming he was using brain surgery as a metaphor; not talking for 365 days would enable him to "renew" himself and therefore "begin again."
The second and third stanza he brings the big question to surface. "Why," should we begin again. I began to think about why a person would want to begin again. I know I've learned lessons through the mistakes I have made, and through that I have become the person I am today; I wouldn't want to start all that over, but I haven't had as tough a time as others.
Maybe he means beginning again by starting over, coming clean and refusing to let the judgmental voices inside our head (sometimes formulated only because we have heard good or bad things - not because we've had that experience ourself.)
The fourth, and last, stanza in the poem brings forth a name, instead of the vague "he's" mentioned throughout the poem: Li Po. Of course I didn't know the name, so I had to research it. Li Po was a famous poet who many, now consider, to be one of the top Tang poets if all time. He lived secluded on a mountain a couple times throughout his life; Li Po was also banned from different cities because people found a way to claim his poems were vulgar or malicious.
Maybe Wright wanted Li Po to get the recognition he deserved instead of being banished, and by beginning again he would be able to?
Overall, the poem made me think really hard about starting over. I've thought that to begin again is the coward way to deal with difficult situations, but I think it all depends on the perspective and the situation.
Which brings me to the question, would you ever want to begin again? And why? What encourages the idea of starting over?
The first line of the poem "If I could stop talking, completely cease talking for a year, I might begin to get well." I immediately thought this was going to be a poem all about why a person should heal themselves through not talking. But he goes on to compare not talking with brain surgery - I'm assuming he was using brain surgery as a metaphor; not talking for 365 days would enable him to "renew" himself and therefore "begin again."
The second and third stanza he brings the big question to surface. "Why," should we begin again. I began to think about why a person would want to begin again. I know I've learned lessons through the mistakes I have made, and through that I have become the person I am today; I wouldn't want to start all that over, but I haven't had as tough a time as others.
Maybe he means beginning again by starting over, coming clean and refusing to let the judgmental voices inside our head (sometimes formulated only because we have heard good or bad things - not because we've had that experience ourself.)
The fourth, and last, stanza in the poem brings forth a name, instead of the vague "he's" mentioned throughout the poem: Li Po. Of course I didn't know the name, so I had to research it. Li Po was a famous poet who many, now consider, to be one of the top Tang poets if all time. He lived secluded on a mountain a couple times throughout his life; Li Po was also banned from different cities because people found a way to claim his poems were vulgar or malicious.
Maybe Wright wanted Li Po to get the recognition he deserved instead of being banished, and by beginning again he would be able to?
Overall, the poem made me think really hard about starting over. I've thought that to begin again is the coward way to deal with difficult situations, but I think it all depends on the perspective and the situation.
Which brings me to the question, would you ever want to begin again? And why? What encourages the idea of starting over?
Sunday, March 3, 2013
Lost Brother
I really liked the poem Lost Brother by Stanley Moss. Even though on the surface it's talking about two trees, the deeper hidden meaning is very real, raw and something many people struggle with daily.
I thought of the author as a younger brother tree who had been separated from his brother long ago, and was now remembering his older brother's life: "when I heard he was cut down.."
When the tree talks about his mother, I thought of Mother Nature. Every living organism has a purpose on Earth, whatever it may be, and if it tries to be something it's not, it's ruining itself. Life is short to be upset about the small things!
The poem talks about how the tree survived "impossible locations, at elevations over ten thousand feet in extreme weather." It persevered - everyone has their ups and downs, it's part of life. He had friends, and little "creatures old and young he sheltered" needed him to protect them against the brittle cold.
Towards the end I think Moss is trying to make a statement about how precious our environment is. If we keep tearing down animal habitats sooner or later there will be no more animals left.
My interpretation of the poem is to remind people how important they are to society - even when they feel there is nothing left, someone or something still needs them, like the "black-tailed jackrabbits and horned lizards." It's also hinting at how we judge ourselves against everyone we know. How can we be the best we're supposed to be if we are constantly trying to be someone else? People, animals, plants, and microorganisms were put on the face of the earth for a reason. To disrupt the animals kingdom by destroying habitats, food, and our source of oxygen will turn around and hurt us in the long run. We as a society, need to preserve the beautiful earth for as long as we possibly can, for what would we do if it all just disappeared?
I thought of the author as a younger brother tree who had been separated from his brother long ago, and was now remembering his older brother's life: "when I heard he was cut down.."
When the tree talks about his mother, I thought of Mother Nature. Every living organism has a purpose on Earth, whatever it may be, and if it tries to be something it's not, it's ruining itself. Life is short to be upset about the small things!
The poem talks about how the tree survived "impossible locations, at elevations over ten thousand feet in extreme weather." It persevered - everyone has their ups and downs, it's part of life. He had friends, and little "creatures old and young he sheltered" needed him to protect them against the brittle cold.
Towards the end I think Moss is trying to make a statement about how precious our environment is. If we keep tearing down animal habitats sooner or later there will be no more animals left.
My interpretation of the poem is to remind people how important they are to society - even when they feel there is nothing left, someone or something still needs them, like the "black-tailed jackrabbits and horned lizards." It's also hinting at how we judge ourselves against everyone we know. How can we be the best we're supposed to be if we are constantly trying to be someone else? People, animals, plants, and microorganisms were put on the face of the earth for a reason. To disrupt the animals kingdom by destroying habitats, food, and our source of oxygen will turn around and hurt us in the long run. We as a society, need to preserve the beautiful earth for as long as we possibly can, for what would we do if it all just disappeared?
Evening Concert, Saint-Chapelle
Evening Concert, Saint-Chapelle by John Updike was a very beautiful poem. The words flowed flawlessly off the tongue and created vivid imagery in the brain: "glow became a milk," "cased in thin but solid sheets of lead."
I thought Updike chose words that evoked an emotional kind of feeling - music moves people, it calms the anxious, pumps up the nervous, and even soothes the broken. I think he was trying to (in some way) move the audience like music moves him. I researched about his childhood and he had a condition called psoriasis, a disease with scaly patches covering the body.
In the poem he referred to the violin and playing music as though he was a part of it: "we rustled into place," "our beating hearts," and "our violins." Updike took solace in music because of his insecurities about his disease; now he is sharing the beauty of it with us.
My favorite quote in the poem was "listening eye." I connected with this because I am a very visual person, but when I am listening to music, I listen with my eyes. I paint pictures of the music in my head to emphasize the beauty of the music for me.
After reading the poem, I researched Seine (a long river near Paris), how Vivaldi or Brahms sounded. Vivaldi is more powerful, in your face, and Brahms is a shorter, almost staccato kind of rhythm.
I really liked the poem and connected with it, even though I'm more of a visual person rather than a listener.
I thought Updike chose words that evoked an emotional kind of feeling - music moves people, it calms the anxious, pumps up the nervous, and even soothes the broken. I think he was trying to (in some way) move the audience like music moves him. I researched about his childhood and he had a condition called psoriasis, a disease with scaly patches covering the body.
In the poem he referred to the violin and playing music as though he was a part of it: "we rustled into place," "our beating hearts," and "our violins." Updike took solace in music because of his insecurities about his disease; now he is sharing the beauty of it with us.
My favorite quote in the poem was "listening eye." I connected with this because I am a very visual person, but when I am listening to music, I listen with my eyes. I paint pictures of the music in my head to emphasize the beauty of the music for me.
After reading the poem, I researched Seine (a long river near Paris), how Vivaldi or Brahms sounded. Vivaldi is more powerful, in your face, and Brahms is a shorter, almost staccato kind of rhythm.
I really liked the poem and connected with it, even though I'm more of a visual person rather than a listener.
Wednesday, February 13, 2013
Wallflowers
The cute, fun little poem "Wallflowers" by Donna Verreyer appears to be about words. She uses personification to make the words have humanistic qualities to ensure a connection with the audience. Many readers can sympathize with the lonely, "tired," "poor" words that "no one speaks."
In the beginning of the poem she talks about how she "heard a word I'd never heard before" automatically bringing the audience in - I know I've heard words I had no idea what they meant! Yet instead of perhaps ignoring the word, or looking at the definition but soon forgetting, she "let it know it was loved" with her pen.
She continues on to introduce the idea that people can own words by saying them three times. I never thought about a word being mine and this made me think about if I own any words.
In the third stanza Vorreyer compares the words to "hollow-eyed orphans in Dickensian bedrooms." The change in tone draws my attention and I think about how maybe the poem is a metaphor for homeless, orphan items, or even people! She continues to explain how the unknown words "wait patiently, shy shadows at the high school dance." This draws my attention to the title - Wallflowers. A wallflower is (by dictionary.com definition) "a person who, because of shyness, unpopularity, or lack of a partner, remains at the side at a party or dance." These words are wallflowers by definition - they "wait bitterly" for someone to discover them, to turn them from the unknown into the known.
At the end of the poem the author does what she says she wants to do and gives the two words, gegenshein and zoanthropy, a home. She "helps" the two words by putting them out into the world; some people who read her poem will be curious to figure out what gegenshein and zoanthropy mean and now if not more, at least one person knows about the two forgotten words.
My interpretation of the poem was a light way to express real, raw feelings about being useful versus being useless. I really like the poem and I think it resonates deeply with audiences who read it because they can relate to how the words "feel".
In the beginning of the poem she talks about how she "heard a word I'd never heard before" automatically bringing the audience in - I know I've heard words I had no idea what they meant! Yet instead of perhaps ignoring the word, or looking at the definition but soon forgetting, she "let it know it was loved" with her pen.
She continues on to introduce the idea that people can own words by saying them three times. I never thought about a word being mine and this made me think about if I own any words.
In the third stanza Vorreyer compares the words to "hollow-eyed orphans in Dickensian bedrooms." The change in tone draws my attention and I think about how maybe the poem is a metaphor for homeless, orphan items, or even people! She continues to explain how the unknown words "wait patiently, shy shadows at the high school dance." This draws my attention to the title - Wallflowers. A wallflower is (by dictionary.com definition) "a person who, because of shyness, unpopularity, or lack of a partner, remains at the side at a party or dance." These words are wallflowers by definition - they "wait bitterly" for someone to discover them, to turn them from the unknown into the known.
At the end of the poem the author does what she says she wants to do and gives the two words, gegenshein and zoanthropy, a home. She "helps" the two words by putting them out into the world; some people who read her poem will be curious to figure out what gegenshein and zoanthropy mean and now if not more, at least one person knows about the two forgotten words.
My interpretation of the poem was a light way to express real, raw feelings about being useful versus being useless. I really like the poem and I think it resonates deeply with audiences who read it because they can relate to how the words "feel".
Sunday, February 10, 2013
Mr Fear
Throughout the entire poem Mr Fear by Lawrence Raab, "fear" is personified as being a living, breathing human. By giving "fear" human like qualities, Raab is able to let the audience view fear in a different way.
The tone in the poem is an almost tired, "fed up with" voice of fear, perhaps living in fear. "Mr. Fear, we say in our dreams, what do you have for me tonight?" Raab seems to be so used to fear that he is blatantly asking, "what are you going to scare me with tonight?"
Later in the poem, Mr. Fear is thought to either smile or feel sorry about pulling the fears out of his "black sack of troubles." By giving the option of the audience deciding whether or not they think fear is evil at its core, Raab is adding to the idea of Mr. Fear being a human. The indecision and possibility of a good guy steered in the wrong way is the core of all human's mistakes.
Contradicting the beginning of the poem when Raab seems almost bored of fear, he pleads that fear "Make it small, please. Let it fit in my pocket, let it fall through the hole in my pocket," showing that no matter how fearful he can tell himself he is, fear still has an underlying power that can not be defeated. This "power" that fear holds - even to a fearless person - shows the audience how real fear is. Fear is a part of everyone's life, and Raab uses the pleading as a way to comfort those scared souls to show them that it's normal to be fearful.
Towards the end of the poem, Raab hints at his views of fear being evil. "Fear, let me have a small brown bat and a purse of cricket" implies youth and innocence. The idea that fear is preying on the young and the weak implies he is no "good guy steered wrong," but a guy who enjoys to bring unhappiness and despair into people's lives.
I think Raab is trying to take a stance against fear, but he "can't" do it by himself - he needs the support of loved ones. I like the poem because it is saying, in its own way, that it's okay to be scared, but if you have the support you need to believe - not let something as small and common as fear stand in your way.
The tone in the poem is an almost tired, "fed up with" voice of fear, perhaps living in fear. "Mr. Fear, we say in our dreams, what do you have for me tonight?" Raab seems to be so used to fear that he is blatantly asking, "what are you going to scare me with tonight?"
Later in the poem, Mr. Fear is thought to either smile or feel sorry about pulling the fears out of his "black sack of troubles." By giving the option of the audience deciding whether or not they think fear is evil at its core, Raab is adding to the idea of Mr. Fear being a human. The indecision and possibility of a good guy steered in the wrong way is the core of all human's mistakes.
Contradicting the beginning of the poem when Raab seems almost bored of fear, he pleads that fear "Make it small, please. Let it fit in my pocket, let it fall through the hole in my pocket," showing that no matter how fearful he can tell himself he is, fear still has an underlying power that can not be defeated. This "power" that fear holds - even to a fearless person - shows the audience how real fear is. Fear is a part of everyone's life, and Raab uses the pleading as a way to comfort those scared souls to show them that it's normal to be fearful.
Towards the end of the poem, Raab hints at his views of fear being evil. "Fear, let me have a small brown bat and a purse of cricket" implies youth and innocence. The idea that fear is preying on the young and the weak implies he is no "good guy steered wrong," but a guy who enjoys to bring unhappiness and despair into people's lives.
I think Raab is trying to take a stance against fear, but he "can't" do it by himself - he needs the support of loved ones. I like the poem because it is saying, in its own way, that it's okay to be scared, but if you have the support you need to believe - not let something as small and common as fear stand in your way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)