Poetry 2

These poems are smooth and velvety, eloquent and delicate. They both share an equal message, but deliver them through completely different strategies. Marvell's "To His Coy Mistress" emphasizes the idea that life is fragile and life is fleeting by urging his mistress to have sex with him. This may seem like a strange theme, but there's no way the purpose of this was to just lower the inhibitions of a beautiful woman. Instead, Marvell repeatedly emphasizes how short life can be in quotes like "Had we but world enough, and time." Thus, the speaker is basically saying "life is short, so plz have sex with me" to the woman he loves. The same goes for "You, Andrew Marvell." While it has nothing to do with making love, it still pushes the notion of enjoying life while you can. Not through sex, but this time through nature. "And here face down beneath the sun/ And here upon earth's noonward height/ to fell the always coming on/ the always rising of the night." I think this beginning shows the stark contrast between the "always" of earth's beauty and the limited time we each have here on earth. 

Poetry and Mortality

Andrew Marvell's "To His Coy Mistress" is essentially about how fleeting life is and how we must live largely and quickly while we can. More specifically, this is directed at a "lady" for whom the speaker has enough love to last eternity, yet they "cannot make [their] sun stand still" so he insists that they act upon their love. While some might see this poem as a sleazy attempt to lower the inhibitions of a woman the speaker is attracted to, I see it as a skilled expression of the classic carpe diem or "seize the day" (more recently YOLO). The concept is by no means bold or innovative, but Marvell expresses it with beauty, going on at length about how he might act in another, timeless world. He addresses death as peaceful but lacking in these earthly pleasures, "The grave’s a fine and private place, / But none, I think, do there embrace."

Archibald MacLeish's "You, Andrew Marvell" responds in a way to the themes of this poem, but I find it more interesting and profound than it's addressee. It begins with a reference to the sun on which Marvell's poem ended; here it serves again as an indication of time, but not its progress, its current position. MacLeish is not concerned with ignoring death or living to spite it as Marvell seems to be. Instead, he finds beauty in recognizing life is not a quick flash but instead a slow, periodic process of rises and falls. He recounts the ends of countless civilizations, comparing our own lives to them. The best part of this poem is the transcendent bliss suggested by the lines "And here face down beneath the sun / And here upon earth’s noonward height / To feel the always coming on / The always rising of the night." It is not an anxious fear of death, but a peaceful realization of it's imminence whilst enjoying the peak or "noon" of one's life. MacLeish seems to see past the more carnal concern's of Marvell's speaker, interested more in how death is a part of the same process of life, not its end.

Reading Mark Strand's reflection on "You, Andrew Marvell" was an experience of identification. I know the feelings that he talks about and share his consciousness of poetry power and effect. Though I don't have a poem which is my favorite and draws me as close as MacLeish's did for Strand, I do have that general feeling about poetry. I write my own and often do my best work when listening to other poets and riffing on structural, rhythmic, and conceptual aspects of their poetry. I did like both poems, favoring the latter just as Strand. I agree completely about lyric poetry.

Poetry 2

Both of these poems seem to be discussing the fleeting nature of life. Marvell's poem definitely has the message of foregoing "quaint honor" and having sex while you're young. Macleish's poem seems to just convey the thoughts of a man laying "face downward in the sun", contemplating the turning of the Earth and how very small and fleeting he feels in comparison. I am not sure why the poem is titled "You, Andrew Marvell" because there is no overt reference to him that I noticed; although, it could just be that Macleish felt a connection to Marvell's stark awareness of death and wanted to include him in the title, but that's probably not reading enough into it.

From what I gathered through skimming Mark Strand's essay, Strand seemed to have deep respect for both the poets and the authors for expressing an emotion that is so common yet so often indescribable. Nothing he said really blew my mind though.

I definitely relate to these poems, and I think that their beauty lies in that fact that just about everybody can relate to these ideas to some degree. It is a pretty incredible fact that human beings are the only known creature to know that it is doomed to die, and this knowledge can have a major impact on a person's actions, goals, and emotions. Even though no amount of meditation or works of art or even scientific advancements will ultimately change this fate, the reality of death is an idea that continues to fascinate and shape us as a species.

Poetry 2

Poetry 2

Andrew Marvell in his poem is very blunt. He says "we are going to die soon". Basically he is putting Mcleish's poem into laemens terms. Mcleish talks about the "shadow" in place of death. Maybe it was easier to write about because it sounds much less morbid when hidden behind a different wording. I like marvells better personally. Not that I'm some goth that glorifies death or anything I just think it works better in this situation to be blunt like Marvell. I think this because as a self proclaimed lazy person I can say there are very few universal things that can motivate every single person on this earth. One of them is death and what both of these poets are eager to point out is that death is all around us. And so, we should all be aware that each one of these "fleeting moments" could be our last one. Once we realize this we will understand that it is our duty as living, breathing people to live each moment like there will not be another to follow. Or to YOLO as some people might say today. That's why I prefer marvells method hear. It brings death right up to the front of our minds and really let's the message set in and reminds us to really enjoy our time here. But that's just my opinion. 

Poetry 2

I quite like this poetic conversation. The world would be a really beautiful place if all of our conversations had to be in iambic pentameters. Andrew Marvell’s poem had to mean something to Macleish, or else it would have been pretty lame of him to take the time to write this graceful poem in response to another one. Marvell describes his time as fleeting, always noting “at my back I always hear / time’s wingèd chariot hurrying near.” He’s also calling to some mistress, basically asking her to love him like there’s no tomorrow – “tear our pleasures with rough strife / Thorough the iron gates of life.” The poem shifts to ‘if only we had time!’ to “we don’t have time, we are about to die!’ to ‘we’re going to die, we might as well do this.’ Pretty suave, if you ask me.  Archibald Macleish also points out that time is fleeting, but he is much grander in his descriptions, not just focusing on getting a woman. He mentions many beautiful scenes that make me feel like human history is flashing before my eyes. Macleish wants us to realize that we’re eventually going to reach the end with the last two lines of his poem, “To feel how swift how secretly / The shadow of the night comes on.” Time is ticking and it’s inevitable, but we can make the most of it by living up each moment, you know, yolo-ing it out. After reading Mark Strand’s response, I came across an idea that I really like – Macleish’s poem “urges us to read its lines one after another without stopping, yet insisting, it seems to me, on the integrity of each.” The way that we read his poem is just how Marvell wants us to live life. I think the overarching theme here is pretty relatable. You have to live life as if every moment were your last because it may very well be your last.

Poetry Week 2

Well, he we are in week 2 of poetry, and I have to admit: I have never honestly enjoyed poetry. I myself am not sure as to why this is; after all, I have come to enjoy all other creative works: novels, movies, video games, and anything else, but the supposed beauty of poems has always managed elude me, no matter the form presented, whether they be sonnets, haiku, or free verse. So, here I am, stuck with the assignment of analyzing the poetic conversation between Archibald Marsh and Andrew Marvell, with Mark Strand acting as an interpreter of sorts. First, Strand seems to have the ability to personally relate to "You, Andrew Marvell" by Archibald Marsh, feeling as though he actually was the "face down beneath the sun," and that "he now felt located" purely because of this poem. While I do agree that it provides a contrast to Andrew Marvell's "To His Coy Mistress," a poem in which the narrator seems concerned about "time's winged chariots hurrying near," implying that he believes there is not enough time in the world for all of his desires to be fulfilled, and it creates a slight conversation between the two poems, both taking clearly conflicting sides, beyond that, I do not personally feel there is much more meaning in either poem. I feel that most poems can be summed up in a few words. For the former, "Time passes continually, but we have plenty of it," and for the latter, "Time is short and restricts us from satisfying out desires." While yes, such descriptions may be crude, when the academic language is stripped away from the interpreted themes we write in class, descriptions such as the ones mentioned are typically what remains.

Is less more? I do not honestly believe so. While I appreciate poems for what they are, rhythmically written pieces with a central theme that allow for multiple, and occasionally wildly varying interpretations, they simply do not appeal to me personally. I like having a vast pool of resources that support my interpretations of a written work as opposed to trying to squeeze meaning out of every single word. While that may restrict the number of interpretations a written piece can contain, I honestly feel it allows for the author's message to come across more cleanly and with less ambiguity.

In the end, am I wrong, misinterpreting the entire concept of poetry as a whole? Perhaps, but from everything I have experienced, from the simple four line poems in third grade to the multiple page poems in my senior year, these are the only conclusions I have been able to reach personally. Perhaps my opinion will change as I grow older, maybe even undergo a sudden epiphany as Strand did, but as I am now, those are my true opinions. Anyway, next week I'll be analyzing two new poems, so I guess I get to have more fun fumbling around trying to find meaning in them.

Poetry Blog 2: Artifacts

Lately I have been trying to educate myself on philosophy. In this process, I have been instructed again and again to start at "the beginning", because philosophy is seen as a sort of conversation, a series of responses to one's forebears.

I do not believe this is the case with the poetry. For while philosophy aspires to understand reality, something assumed to be of essentially one particular nature, poetry seeks to understand the self - a concept that is as much characterized by internal disagreement as individual variation.

The idea of Marvell -> MacLeish -> Strand being a "conversation" is intriguing to me precisely because it simultaneously reminds me of the nature of philosophy, and reminds me of the ways in which philosophy and poetry differ.

The basic structure of the chain, I suppose, is the most "conversational" aspect - Marvell writes a poem, and then (300 years later) MacLeish responds, rather directly. In turn, Strand (from the next century) responds to MacLeish.

But it is the nature of the "conversational" pieces that strikes me as so fundamentally different. Each of the works - even MacLeish's metatemporal parable - are intensely personal. Marvell writes directly to a lover (whether real or imagined it does not matter) with a language that we suspect only he could produce: "by the tide / of Humber" is a reference to a local river in England, not some great crucible of civilization. And yet, Marvell crystallizes this personal understanding into something that is digestible, if only partially, to people centuries later. Not entirely figuratively, Marvell places himself upon the page, becoming an artifact.

This artifact then becomes a part of the world, of some world. This is why the title of "You, Andrew Marvell" is so interesting - it is an address to a non-human entity, using a human name. For the Andrew Marvell referenced is not the poet himself, but the artifact he became. MacLeish absorbed this artifact, and it became a part - apparently a central part - of the material formula which made up his own understanding of time, one markedly different from Marvell's but nonetheless containing it - "to feel how swift how secretly / the shadow of the night comes on..." required that MacLeish "make [the sun] run," however impermanently.

Thus the essence of each poet passes through the next. Strand makes the process more visible, by writing explicitly about it in prose, but nonetheless participates in the process. He admits as much when he says, "It is hard for me to separate my development as a reader of poems from my career as a poet." Indeed, it must be hard, if not impossible, for every poet, whose every poem is the product of every other poem they have read. Even in this essay, Strand digests and reinterprets a poem through the lens of Mark Strand - or rather, all that makes up Mark Strand - and the artifact which he creates through this lens of Strand will in turn be digested and reinterpreted through mine and a million others'. Some may name these components of their work, others will let them remain secretive. All will contribute to the process, building and recreating and changing the past like a great Hegelian conch shell.

Poetry 2

Okay--to be honest, my poetry insightnfulness is not strong, so I really had no idea what these two poems mean when I first read them. After reading Mark Strand's essay, "To His Coy Misstress" and "You, Andrew Marvell" began to make a little more sense (just a little). I was suprised at the sexual undertone "To His Coy Misstress" took. Andrew Marvell's straight-forward speaker directly tries to seduce a woman. His sweet talk and compliments such as "My vegetable love should grow
Vaster than empires and more slow" makes it obvious of the speakers motives. In contrast, Archibald Marvell's poem talks about things ending in a general way such as  "And Lebanon fade out". However, these two poems seem completly different at first, but they both are discussing time ending or running out. I  think Mark Strand is trying to make the most of his poetry career before time runs out for him. When comparing all of these together, the message I interpret from all of this is to do everything you can before time runs out for you.

Poetry 2222

In the comparison of You, Andrew Marvell and To His Coy Mistress we can see that despite being written by two different authors they both share a common theme - time. In 'To Coy his Mistress" Andrew Marvell provides us with two nameless beings and illustrates a man's attempt to seduce a woman into making love to him. As we progress through the poem he describes the death of the two of them and what a shame it would be if their virginity was taken by the worms rather than each other. Here we see the passage of time play a pivotal role in his seduction. In comparison 'You, Andrew Marvell' by Archibald MacLeish uses the passage of time to illustrate a more worldy view from making love. MacLeish describes the disestablishment of empires and the abolition of their glory. Through the use of day and night cues and the coming of 'night' MacLeish describes the end of time. Essentially what both poems talk about is how we must make the most out of our lives because, as MacLeish says, we never know, "How swift.. the shadow of the night comes on." So make the most of it. Id like to finish with the words from a leading transcendentalist and poet I admire - "Life is what you make it. So Let us make it right."

Poetry 1

The World is Too Much with Us

In this poem the speaker accuses the world of losing its intrinsic nature and connection with all things meaningful and sentimental - as presented through lines like "Getting and spending, we lay waste our powers." He talks of how when the nature is in full force with all its beauty the world simply ignores it and continues with their idolatries. William Wordsworth presents us with this poem in order to bring about his idea of the fleeting nature of societies sentimental nature and its replacement with materialism. 

Im Nobody! Who are you? 

Throughout this poem by Emily Dickinson, she exclaims that, "I am nobody." And asks the reader "Who are you?... Are you nobody too?" This poem is interesting because it explains Dickinson's view on people and it opens a window into her viewpoints. What we can see from this poem and historically through looking at her biography is that Dickens was not famous during her lifetime; in fact, despite writing a good 1,800 poems she published fewer than ten. That being said when we cross analyze the two - her lifestyle and her inner thinkings through her poetry - we can see that her under the radar life was actual her own lifestyle choice which is very interesting. 

Allusions Noahs Ark

Noah was a good man who lived in the midst of unbelievers/extremely ungodly. God saw the evil and told Noah to build a great 'ark' for the animals (two of each; male and female) and his family. Anyone who would see him build the ark and believe could come aboard and be saved from the flood, but no one did. It took many years to build and they had plenty of time to believe. They were warned, but only mocked and so they perished in the flood. It rained for 40 days and 40 nights. When it was over God put the rainbow in the sky and told Noah this was a symbol of His promise never to destroy the whole earth with a flood again. Noah and his family came out of the ark onto dry ground and worshiped God immediately. This story is important because i love animals and have a dog a bird and two cats and thanks god for letting animals be alive. 

Poetry #2

I think the ideas that Andrew Marvell was addressing in "To his Coy Mistress" are aesthetically pleasing and convincing in their nature, but nonetheless amusing when looked at as a whole. Visions of a 17th century Marvin Gaye singing, "Let's get it on" cross my mind, yet Marvell addresses a more than just erotic urges. He addresses the beauty and limited time we have on this planet while expressing his love for his mistress. Throughout the poem the fast paced rhyme scheme and the vivid diction used, specifically in the later lines of the poem, communicate the passion of Marvel. Phrases like "tear our pleasures with rough strife," or "every pore with instant fire," are prime examples.

The poem You, Andrew Marvell isn't targeting the same message as To His Coy Mistress, but still accomplishes its own message of the world's beauty which is similar in nature to that of the Marvell poem. I could definitely relate to what Strand was describing when he was talking about his experience with this foreign and mysterious poem. Then when he began describing the linear and yet cyclical attitudes that the poem adapts, I was amazed at how the poem flowed the way it did. In You, Andrew Marvell, I definitely noticed a contrast between light and dark throughout the poem which I think moved this poem along more so than the To his Coy Mistress which I think was motivated by passion.

Time Poetry

In "To His Coy Mistress" by Andrew Marvell, it is apparent that time is of essence. However, while the author does not talk about savoring time, it focuses more on how we must do things now in the moment, because will run out of time. Marvell also imagines what it would be like if it were different--if time wasn't a factor. This creates emphasis on the fact that time will not stop for anything. Marvell chooses to talk about how we should do everything now, in this moment, because tomorrow it may be too late. While he contemplates that even "though we cannot make our sun stand still," we have power to "make [the sun] run," by taking advantage of the time we have. In MacLeish's "You, Andrew Marvell," he describes the time passing as if he's watching it happen right before his eyes. It appears that he is removed from the poem altogether, looking down from the heavens upon life moving forward as time does not stand still. The sun rises and sets each day, stopping for no one (also a point made in Marvell's poem). He creates imagery describing "the sails above the shadowy hulls" are fading as the sun goes down, "slowly disappear[ing]" from view. Mark Strand's essay, reflecting upon the matter of time passing, perfectly describes the way in which these two poems capture the feeling of "internaliz[ing] the huge impersonality of time, and how it makes the visual record of ascending night into a private matter instead of simply a geographic one." He clearly depicts his view on the poems and what it means as time is passing--what that has to do with our humanity.

The power of poetry and experience of life go hand in hand when it comes to these poems. The view of mortality through the depiction of the passing of time puts our lives into perspective--we can see that we must live in the moment, and not waste time focusing on things that don't matter because ain't nobody got time for that. I can definitely relate to these poems. I often think about how time isn't going to stop for me, or for anyone around me. This thought, while harsh, is one that we all must keep in mind so that we don't lose any vital time in our lives. We must keep pressing through the time crunches--that's the only way we'll keep our heads surfaced. 

Poetry 1

The two poems I chose were "The Quiet Life" by Alexander Pope and "Im Nobody, who are you?" by Emily Dickinson. Both poems focus on the importance of living outside the pains and conflicts that come with fame and culture. Pope states that he is "content to breathe his nature air." Which basically says that he has no intention of being caught up in the fast paced lifestyle of our culture but he is happier to live in isolation. Dickinson is similar in those feelings. She says that it is important to keep to yourself or else you will engulfed in other distractions. She says it is much more important to be a nobody than somebody consumed in distractions. Both agree it is better to not leave a major impact on the world and to live in isolation.

Poetry 2

At this point I have read both the poems but have not yet read the essay about them. I would definitely call this a poetic conversation. At first I didn’t know what was going on until I looked at the titles and authors and realized that “To His Coy Mistress” was written by Andrew Marvell, and the poem by Archibald Macleish is called “You, Andrew Marvell”. Upon rereading I found this to be sort of confrontational. Marvell talks about how he and his mistress have no time to waste and need to make love while she is still young. For example, he says, “while the youthful hue sits on the skin like morning dew…let us sport us while we may.” Macleish kind of mocks Marvell by also talking about the quick passage of time, but he does so in a dark, ominous, almost creepy way (I went through and circled all the dark, negatively connotated words and there were about 22, including ‘night’, ‘creep’, ‘silent’, ‘loom’, etc), sort of like he’s telling Marvell he’s a nutjob. Me being a person who avoids poetry at all costs, I found this really interesting and powerful, because I didn’t know poetry was used for reasons like this. It does give poetry a whole feeling of power. The poets basically talk about how life is so short and the end comes so quickly. While sometimes I agree and feel like I was 5 years old yesterday, sometimes I also feel like I’ve been alive forever.

I’ve now read the essay by Mark Strand. This guy can dig deeper into poetry than I’d ever dream. However, I felt comforted because at the beginning he says, “When I read it for the first time, I knew little about poetry. I didn’t know who Andrew Marvell was, nor did I know where half of the places were that MacLeish mentions,” and I was like hey, me too. He talks about how “You, Andrew Marvell” makes time a “private matter instead of simply a geographic one” and that’s “probably why it appealed to [him] as a teenager.” I think all teenagers could relate to this feeling of privacy and self. It seems that he and I both caught on to the theme in the poem of awareness of mortality, but he points out that “Beginning with ‘and’ and ending inconclusively with an ellipsis, the poem as a whole hints at this suspended circularity.” Upon going back I agreed, though at first I thought the ellipsis was just to create an ominous ending. Something that I didn’t catch onto that he did was that “what it suggests is not just the simple diurnal round of night and day, but the more tragic rise and fall of civilizations.” With all this new information from Strand’s essay I came to realize that this poem goes much, much deeper than just a poetic conversation with Andrew Marvell.

Poetry Blog #2

I really enjoyed the two poems used for this blog, especially in the context of recent events. While the first poem may seem trivial because it focuses primarily on the importance of the relationship between the speaker and presumably his mistress, the second definitely reinforces the core message of the first: carpe diem. Carpe diem is a Latin phrase that should have meaning for everyone. It basically means that one must live every day as if they were living their last day on earth. Mark Strand notes this in his approach to poetry, "[Words] importance, at least for me, their only reader, was exhausted by the time they were written." By the time the author was able to get his words onto the page, their meaning was fleeting and they now lacked significance. MacLeish's poem enlightened me that the meaning of carpe diem cannot solely be applied to one particular day, it must be applied over a lifetime, "But at my back I always hear/ Time’s winged chariot hurrying near." However, despite the archaic language and traditional format of "To His Coy Mistress," I was still able to glean the importance of living life now instead of waiting for better things to come like the mistress hoped to maintain her "long-preserved virginity." Yet, this virginity is not solely sexual, it is a virginity from experiencing life. Likewise, I believe that the messages contained in the two poems may be lost in the flurry of everyday life but poetry, as discussed by Strand, must be written in the moment or the feeling may otherwise be lost. For myself, I hope to embrace this notion of life and during this brief period of my life, I am fairly certain that I am starting to ignore things that are unimportant and focusing my attention on things that make me happy instead of pleasing others. 

"To His Coy Mistress" by Andrew Marvell

http://www.bonzasheila.com/poetrylyrics/tohiscoymistress.html

God Aides and Abets Grand Larceny

So our boy Moses is out in the fields tending the flocks of his father-in-law when he leads the heard toward Horeb, ye old mountain o'god. Then an angel/God sets a bush before him aflame and he is quite taken aback to see that the bush is not consumed by the flames that surround it. He tries to get a better view of how this could possibly be happening and the Lord God speaks out to him. Like a good Shinto priest God has Moses remove his sandals and bow before the presence of the holiest of the holy. He then commands Moses to go unto Egypt and relieve the people of Israel from the oppression in which they live there. Moses is doubtful that the Pharaoh of Egypt will listen to lowly old him, but God assures him it's gonna work out. God proceeds to hint at his mega evil master plan to wrath the shit out of Egypt until the Israelites can leave. And if this weren't bad enough, bush-talking God goes on to explain how he will force the Egyptians to hand over their valuables to the Hebes before they split. The funny thing about all of Exodus is that historically, yes the Jews did work in Egypt on the Pyramids, but there's not much evidence supporting they were enslaved or even oppressed in any way worse than the average Egyptian. When you take this into account this whole story is just God really wanting to settle some old vendetta with Horus. God explains to Moses that there is a fantastic rich place waiting for them once they exit Egypt, and all they have to do is massacre all the Cannanites: What a deal! (Even OG Zionists had to kill off indigenous people to have their state)

Braithwaite vs. Darwish

Both "OGUN" and "Identity card" display pain and hard work pressed into rock or wood and some satisfaction being released. In OGUN the old man is consumed with anger and poverty and finds his solace in woodwork. Towards the beginning of the poem the wood is portrayed as white and pure, forming masterful creations under his hands, but as the poem progresses it is revealed to be "eaten by pox, ravaged by rat", yet he always was able to work with it and become intimate with it, "explore it's knotted hurts" and feel its pain as well as his own. He poured his anger into the wood, creating a physical representation of it.

In the same way, Mahmoud poured his hard work and his frustration into mining, and expressed that he got garments and food for his children "from the rocks". He feels an intimacy with the rocks in a similar way that Braithwaite feels an intimacy with the wood.

Poetry 1

The two poems I chose were "I am Nobody! Who are you?" by Emily Dickinson and "The Powwow at the End of the World" by Sherman Alexie. "I am Nobody! Who are you?" was short but powerfiul poem. The length of the poem itself creates an image of unimportantance. The speaker in the poem seems to like being a so called "Nobody", but once she realizes there is someone else like her, it feels like she wants to beome a "Sombody", or maybe she already becomes one since she is no longer alone. "The Powwow at the End of the World" takes on a different issue, the enivronment. The speaker in this poem is very angry about the destruction of his homeland and does not want to forgive anyone about it. He knows that he should forgive, everyone tells him to, but the harm done to his homeland can only be forgiven if that harm is undone, and judging by the "Grand Coulee Dam"'s importance, it doesn't look like it will be returning to its orginal state. I think these two poems share a connection because both of the speakers feel like they have no affect on an outcome. In Dickinson's poems, the speaker obviously thinks of herself with little importance--the title says it all, and in Alexie's poem the speaker is less-obvious, but the way he says "on the reservation where I stand alone" conveys a sense of lonleyness and little self-worth. The two poems are very intersting and caught my attention with the length of "I am Nobody! Who are you?" and the parrallel sentence structure in "The Powwow at the Eng of the World".

Poetry

The two poems I chose were "The Quiet Life" by Alexander Pope and "Im Nobody, who are you?" by Emily Dickinson. Both of these poems focus on the importance of living outside the pains and conflicts that come with fame and culture. Pope says he is just "content to breathe his nature air." This is saying that he has no intention of being caught up in the fast turmoil of our culture but is happier just to live in quiet isolation with complete anonymity. Dickinson is similar in that she says "dont tell! They'd advertise- you know." She is saying that it is important to remain anonymous or else you will be swept up in a fury of outside distractions. She says it is much more important to be a nobody than somebody lost in that turmoil. Both would agree it is better to "steal from the world, not a stone" because neither wishes to leave any major impact on the world around them, just live out their lives in isolation and without conflict from the outside.

Poetry and Identity

Alexander Pope's "The Quiet Life" is an exploration of the ways in which a secluded, idyllic life can make one happiest. This life is happy because everything a man needs is provided, and he wants for nothing more. "Content to breath his native air / In his own ground" shows that although one wouldn't venture forth or acquire new lands, it would be best simply because one is content. The animals and fields can supply "milk", "bread", and "attire", so one would never need to leave. Pope clearly sees this uncomplicated lifestyle as ideal because there is no need for conflict, no will which cannot be satisfied. It may be "quiet", but Pope feels that the loud surrounding world is the source of any discomfort. He begs "Thus let me live, unseen, unknown" so that he can never know the pain of conflict. If he can "Steal from the world, and not a stone / Tell where [he] lie", then no one must suffer the pain of having lost him.

Emily Dickinson's "I'm Nobody! Who are you?" explore similar sentiments of solitude. She desires a life much like Pope's "quiet" one. "Don't tell! they'd advertise--you know!" Like Pope, she wants to remain unknown to the world so that no conflict and pain can come to her. She happily exclaims, "I'm Nobody!" as if it were a name, as if her very anonymity defines her. Identity for Dickinson (or the speaker) is something hard to come by. "How dreary--to be--Somebody!" That name can describe everyone, therefore they are indistinguishable from each other, but Nobody is wholly original. Only in this sanctuary of "Nobody" can the speaker truly be herself.

She and Pope both seem to view public life as completely vulgar, almost beneath them. They try to escape the world not just in search of a wholesome life, but because they feel there is something horrifying about the sorts of relationships one encounters in public life.

Poem Blog

For this blog, I chose to analyze themes of identity and culture present in William Wordsworth's poem "TheWorld Is Too Much with Us." Wordsworth and his worlds are often associated with Romanticism, the artistic, literary, and intellectual movement that originated in Europe toward the end of the 18th century and continued to remain a prominent alternative to Enlightenment ideals and beliefs well into the 19th century until about 1850. Romanticism grew out of many European intellectuals' disapproval of trends in urban development and industrialization brought on by the Industrial Revolution as well as their contempt of Enlightenment principles in rationalizing nature through scientific means. Emphasizing artistic originality through the expression of one's own feelings, Romanticists also often placed great importance in the preservation of nature, as Wordsworth clearly demonstrates in his poem "The World Is Too Much with Us." In the poem, Wordsworth criticizes contemporary society for its superficial focus on materialism and technological/scientific development at the expense of its connection to nature, with which it has shared a close bond for millennia. There are many instances within the poem in which Wordsworth's central message becomes clear; however, I believe the following three lines are most effective in communicating this theme: 1) "The world is too much with us; late and soon," 2) "Little we see in Nature that is ours," and 3) "We have given our hearts away, a sordid boon!" In these quotations, the speaker , who may be Wordsworth himself, laments the fact that humanity is losing its bond to nature as a result of its increasing dependency on machines and technology produced during the Industrial Age. As I mentioned before, the views of nature expressed within this poem are characteristic of Romanticism, an identity/culture that spawned the later origination of the Transcendentalist Movement. The cultural legacy of Romanticism lives on even today in the modern Environmentalist Movement.

I also chose to analyze "The Powwow at the End of the Word" by Sherman Alexie as my second poem for this blog. I selected this poem for its striking resemblance to "The World Is Too Much with Us," that, in terms of its underlying themes concerning nature. Like "the World Is Too Much with Us," Alexie's "The Powwow at the End of the World" admonishes humankind for its current sordid relationship to nature. However, the way in which the two poems criticize humanity's current relationship to nature is inherently different. While Wordsworth focuses on people's abandonment of nature for technology, Alexie concentrates on criticizing people's mistreatment of nature such as (in the context of the poem) through the construction of dams that may benefit people in the short run, but may ultimately prove detrimental to people in the long run by harming the surrounding environment. The two poems may be different in focus, yet their implications remain the same" Society is gradually destroying the environment that is has depended on since the advent of civilization.

"The Quiet Life" and "I'm Nobody! Who are you?"

“The Quiet Life” by Alexander Pope describes a man truly content with his place in the world. It describes how this man is “content to breathe his native air,” suggesting that he has succeeded in fulfilling all of his aspirations. The poem goes on to state to suggest that he is supplied his needs through “herds with milk… flocks with attire… trees in summer yield[ing] shade.” This quote establishes that the man’s needs are met through his career (presumed to be farming).  The last stanza of the poem includes a request that is subsequently explained through his own intentions: “Thus let me live, unseen, unknown…” “Steal from the world, and not a stone.” These quotes indicate that he wishes to leave as little of an impact on the world at large as he possibly can. He is concerned only with living out his aspirations, and in return for this isolation, he has no intention to negatively affect the world around him. 

The next poem I chose was “I’m Nobody! Who are you?” by Emily Dickinson. It’s a short, simple poem, and the entire reason I chose it was to juxtapose it with the previously selected poem. Initially, it appears that the narrator is actually satisfied being a “nobody,” even stating that it is dreary “to be – Somebody!” but the lines before contradict this statement. “Are you – Nobody – too?”  the author asks inquisitively, “Then there’s a pair of us!” The exclamation mark appears to convey a sense of excitement, which the narrator wants to share this status. However, by sharing this status, it invalidates the concept of being “nobody,” as now you are a part of a group involving another, turning both into something of note. The narrator clearly realizes it, stating, “Don’t tell! They’d advertise – you know!” This shows that the narrator is very much aware of his or her new status as no longer truly being a “nobody” in the world now that there is someone that shares that status.

Of course, the interesting contrast between these poems is that while “The Quite Life” has a man seeking solitude, content with how he has etched out his life, “I’m Nobody! Who are you?” has a narrator seeking a group to belong in, seemingly nervous about his or her role in the world. It is not hard to imagine that the narrator of the latter may very well eventually take up the same position as the narrator of the former as he or she etches out her own role in life. I suppose the overall idea one can draw between these two poems is that knowing one’s own place in the world, how they belong, leads to a confident contentedness with his or her own life.