I really enjoyed reading Mill's work. I think it is so interesting how people like this who seem so radical back then are not even radical today. However, in today's standards I am fairly conservative so I would probably be the one pointing the finger saying oh my goodness. What I like about reading this older literature though is that it makes me realize the people who were so radical back then really were not that bad and their ideas were pushed through and made a better world. This makes me want to try and understand radical people today.
Mill really stepped up and represented the people who were not able to stand up for themselves. I really like the line in the beginning of On Liberty when he says "If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind" page 515. He believes this is an important principle because if you do silence that opinion that you are actually robbing mankind. This is true because look at for instance his opinion for women to be equal. He in the large picture would have been one of the only people to have felt that way, but if he had been forced to be silenced then women today may still be forced to be domestic housewives. Being a woman that would not be fun for me!
I also like how he feels about people living for a purpose. He believes it is a waste to just live through life being told how you think and never really finding yourself. It is very important that everyone finds their purpose, because if they do not find their purpose they will never know the impact they could have made in the world.
When he talks about women's rights he even mentions that men really do not want women to be completely obedient. Unless of course they are just total jerks. In fact he points out the fact that men do want to have a connection with their wives. This would have been a bold statement for him to make. Men probably did feel this way, but they would have never admitted it. It is STILL hard to find a guy my age that would admit he wants some deep connection. With guys they only like to admit its all about the physical attraction.
I really liked how Mill spoke up for the people who needed the most representation. He did not fear standing out or being different.
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Saturday, June 21, 2008
William Butler Yeats
The Wild Swans at Coole:
Usually when you think about swans you picture a beautiful creature floating on the water. Swans have a special meaning to me because I went to a boarding school for high school and we had swans on the lake at our school. They were very peaceful animals, very elogant, and when you sat by the lake to watch the swans they were beautiful. We loved the swans at our lake, and the school was very proud of them. Usually any place that you see swans the surroundings are nice. I have not seen to many swans floating around ugly lakes. I do not know, but I suppose swans a fairly expensive animals to obtain.
One thing I know from experience is that while swans are beautiful creatures when you mess with a swan they become very mean and will hiss. Being high school kids many of our pranks involved stealing the swans, chasing the swans, and just doing goofy things to the swans in our lake. The animal that is so beautiful to look at suddenly becomes a fierce animal when messed with!
The reason I point the opposite side of the swans is because this poem like many observations focuses on the beauty of the swans. There is also a mystery to swans which the narrator points out. They prefer to not be near people. Also, the reason this poem reminded me of my boarding school was because Coole was the place where an Irish king had lived, but he decided to move in order to hunt and do other things. Here again this would be a very nice setting in which the swans nested. Possibly swans prefer these nice places because they are left alone and admired for their beauty.
The narrator is also talking about how so many things have changed in his life, but the swans have remained the same. This is exactly how I felt after four years of high school. So many things were changing we were all moving on, but the swans remained there on the lake floating and being admired by a new set of students entering the school. When I think back on swans just like the narrator I think of my high school years and smile. Just like the narrator says "Their hearts have not grown old" line 22.
The last line of the poem confused me a bit. I am not sure if the narrator is saying he is delighted they flew away or that it would deligh him. I do not recall swans flying to begin with. Secondly they seem quite territorial so I believe he is saying it would delight him if they did fly away and grow up, or move on just like he is.
Usually when you think about swans you picture a beautiful creature floating on the water. Swans have a special meaning to me because I went to a boarding school for high school and we had swans on the lake at our school. They were very peaceful animals, very elogant, and when you sat by the lake to watch the swans they were beautiful. We loved the swans at our lake, and the school was very proud of them. Usually any place that you see swans the surroundings are nice. I have not seen to many swans floating around ugly lakes. I do not know, but I suppose swans a fairly expensive animals to obtain.
One thing I know from experience is that while swans are beautiful creatures when you mess with a swan they become very mean and will hiss. Being high school kids many of our pranks involved stealing the swans, chasing the swans, and just doing goofy things to the swans in our lake. The animal that is so beautiful to look at suddenly becomes a fierce animal when messed with!
The reason I point the opposite side of the swans is because this poem like many observations focuses on the beauty of the swans. There is also a mystery to swans which the narrator points out. They prefer to not be near people. Also, the reason this poem reminded me of my boarding school was because Coole was the place where an Irish king had lived, but he decided to move in order to hunt and do other things. Here again this would be a very nice setting in which the swans nested. Possibly swans prefer these nice places because they are left alone and admired for their beauty.
The narrator is also talking about how so many things have changed in his life, but the swans have remained the same. This is exactly how I felt after four years of high school. So many things were changing we were all moving on, but the swans remained there on the lake floating and being admired by a new set of students entering the school. When I think back on swans just like the narrator I think of my high school years and smile. Just like the narrator says "Their hearts have not grown old" line 22.
The last line of the poem confused me a bit. I am not sure if the narrator is saying he is delighted they flew away or that it would deligh him. I do not recall swans flying to begin with. Secondly they seem quite territorial so I believe he is saying it would delight him if they did fly away and grow up, or move on just like he is.
Virginia Woolf
The Lady in the Looking Glass: A Reflection
This is an interesting story because it deals with a lady looking at herself through a looking glass, or mirror. The lady is named as Isabella Tyson, however I believe this is a poem in which Virginia Woolf is talking about herself. The reason I believe this is because "Isabella" is admiring herself in a mirror. I believe this is how Virginia talked about herself through another character.
She first starts out by talking about the inside of the house. She talks about how the furniture is arranged and describes the house as nice. She mentions marble, and italian glass. The house seems to be one of an upper class family and is well furnished. Then she begins to talk about the outside of the house. She talks about the garden outside and about Isabella going out to pick flowers and things. She also mentions Isabella's age to be around 55-60. At the time this poem was written she would have been 47. So even though I believe she is talking about herself she changes up her character some.
Then the narrator really tries to dig down into Isabella's life. She realizes she is rich, and travels, but she feels by looking at her something is missing. Isabella is single also we find out. The narrator watches as the lady receives the mail, as if she is expecting something great, but then she says they were merely letters.
I believe the point Woolf was trying to make here is that just by looking at someone you do not really know who they are. You must dig down beyond the surface to understand a person's true meaning. Because just like Isabella on the surface she is rich, single, well spoken, etc. However, that does not necessarily mean she is happy. I think this is why early on the narrator says "People should not leave looking glasses hanging in their rooms any more than they should leave open cheque books or letters confessing some hideous crime" page 1224.
This is an interesting story because it deals with a lady looking at herself through a looking glass, or mirror. The lady is named as Isabella Tyson, however I believe this is a poem in which Virginia Woolf is talking about herself. The reason I believe this is because "Isabella" is admiring herself in a mirror. I believe this is how Virginia talked about herself through another character.
She first starts out by talking about the inside of the house. She talks about how the furniture is arranged and describes the house as nice. She mentions marble, and italian glass. The house seems to be one of an upper class family and is well furnished. Then she begins to talk about the outside of the house. She talks about the garden outside and about Isabella going out to pick flowers and things. She also mentions Isabella's age to be around 55-60. At the time this poem was written she would have been 47. So even though I believe she is talking about herself she changes up her character some.
Then the narrator really tries to dig down into Isabella's life. She realizes she is rich, and travels, but she feels by looking at her something is missing. Isabella is single also we find out. The narrator watches as the lady receives the mail, as if she is expecting something great, but then she says they were merely letters.
I believe the point Woolf was trying to make here is that just by looking at someone you do not really know who they are. You must dig down beyond the surface to understand a person's true meaning. Because just like Isabella on the surface she is rich, single, well spoken, etc. However, that does not necessarily mean she is happy. I think this is why early on the narrator says "People should not leave looking glasses hanging in their rooms any more than they should leave open cheque books or letters confessing some hideous crime" page 1224.
Thursday, June 19, 2008
T.S. Eliot
The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock:
This poem is about a man who struggles with his self image. He begins the poem by talking about the bad area of town that he hangs out in. He describes cheap hotels, half deserted streets, etc. This is the beginning of us seeing how he feels down on himself. Then he goes on to talk about how he feels when he walks into a room with people. He is very self conscience and worries that they talk about his bald spot, or that they point out that his legs and arms are so skinny. He is so uncomfortable in his own skin that he canot truly enjoy an evening out because he is so worried about what other people think of him. I have been out before and had very similar esperiences. He seems to be torn about whether or not he should go ahead and continue to persue the woman. He knows the people, he knows what they will say, but it is hard for him. It is like he is doing everything he would normally do, but this woman is really messing him up. I have been on dates where I have felt so uncomfortable so I understand exactly where the speaker is coming from. He also compares himself to different figures such as in line 83 he says "I am not prophet" then again in line 111 "No! I am not prince Hamlet, nor was meant to be;" By comparing himself to big figures I feel that he is just re-assuring himself while at the same time putting himself down. He feels like he cannot help it that he was not born great, but then he is like but that is what people want. He says also that the "eternal Footman hold my coat, and snicker/ and in short, I was afraid" 85-86. He feels like everyone is looking at him, talking about him, and picking out his flaws constantly. I believe he is a normal man, however when it comes to dating he gets extremely in secure and becomes a different person. I am sure in a normal setting that he is a great person to be around. He even says that "I have heard mermaids singing, each to each./ I do not think they will sing to me" 124-125. While this is sad, I got a chuckle when I he said I do not think they will sing to me. He is just so down on himself and feels like he is not worthy of anything. I do not really know why, except that he is just not confident in himself. Self confidence is something that some people have a very hard time with, and when a person gets down on there self like that they can be really negative and unpleasant to be around.
This poem is about a man who struggles with his self image. He begins the poem by talking about the bad area of town that he hangs out in. He describes cheap hotels, half deserted streets, etc. This is the beginning of us seeing how he feels down on himself. Then he goes on to talk about how he feels when he walks into a room with people. He is very self conscience and worries that they talk about his bald spot, or that they point out that his legs and arms are so skinny. He is so uncomfortable in his own skin that he canot truly enjoy an evening out because he is so worried about what other people think of him. I have been out before and had very similar esperiences. He seems to be torn about whether or not he should go ahead and continue to persue the woman. He knows the people, he knows what they will say, but it is hard for him. It is like he is doing everything he would normally do, but this woman is really messing him up. I have been on dates where I have felt so uncomfortable so I understand exactly where the speaker is coming from. He also compares himself to different figures such as in line 83 he says "I am not prophet" then again in line 111 "No! I am not prince Hamlet, nor was meant to be;" By comparing himself to big figures I feel that he is just re-assuring himself while at the same time putting himself down. He feels like he cannot help it that he was not born great, but then he is like but that is what people want. He says also that the "eternal Footman hold my coat, and snicker/ and in short, I was afraid" 85-86. He feels like everyone is looking at him, talking about him, and picking out his flaws constantly. I believe he is a normal man, however when it comes to dating he gets extremely in secure and becomes a different person. I am sure in a normal setting that he is a great person to be around. He even says that "I have heard mermaids singing, each to each./ I do not think they will sing to me" 124-125. While this is sad, I got a chuckle when I he said I do not think they will sing to me. He is just so down on himself and feels like he is not worthy of anything. I do not really know why, except that he is just not confident in himself. Self confidence is something that some people have a very hard time with, and when a person gets down on there self like that they can be really negative and unpleasant to be around.
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
James Joyce
from Dubliners: Clay:
This was an interesting story about a nanny who took care of two brothers when they were younger. She seemed so wrapped up in their lives that they were literally what she lived for. Once they were grown she did not want to let them go and was not quite sure what to live for anymore. She said she did not want a man, however when she was on the tram she got very flustered by the man she met. She was so dishoveled that she actually forgot to bring the plumcake to Joe that she had searched around town for finding the perfect piece. Even though she claims to not want a husband her actions show us different. For her to forget the plumcake for Joe means that there was something pretty important happening because he was her life. She also struggled throughout the story because Joe and Alphy did not get along anymore. It would be like her own to children not getting along because she practically raised them. The boys had gotten her a job doing laundry to help pass her time and pay her bills. I thought it was neat that she worked at the laundry place for prostitutes they were trying to get off the street. She probably did not even have to work, however she was to stubborn to move in with Joe. She mentioned that Joe had offered for her to move in with him, but she felt she would be in the way. This is just like a typical grandparent in today's society. Once they become retired they find odd jobs to keep busy, and even though the need to be living with someone, and probably want to live with someone they feel like they are being a burden on them. I am not old enough to understand, but being 22 years old I would not find my grandmother or grandfather moving in a burden. Of course you lifestyle would change some, however this is your own flesh and blood. She seemed so happy when she was at the house with Joe and his family though. They drank, and she sang a song for the children. Also, I believe that her mind may be slipping her. When she sang the song to the children they did not point out that she sang the first verse twice instead of singing the first and second verses. Maybe this is a sign to Joe and the family that she is starting to slip and she needs to move in with them.
The thing that bugged me about the poem was that it just ends. We do not know what ends up happening to her, or if the brothers ever end up re-uniting. I was just starting to get into the story and boom it ends! I suppose according to the biography that Joyce does this a lot!
This was an interesting story about a nanny who took care of two brothers when they were younger. She seemed so wrapped up in their lives that they were literally what she lived for. Once they were grown she did not want to let them go and was not quite sure what to live for anymore. She said she did not want a man, however when she was on the tram she got very flustered by the man she met. She was so dishoveled that she actually forgot to bring the plumcake to Joe that she had searched around town for finding the perfect piece. Even though she claims to not want a husband her actions show us different. For her to forget the plumcake for Joe means that there was something pretty important happening because he was her life. She also struggled throughout the story because Joe and Alphy did not get along anymore. It would be like her own to children not getting along because she practically raised them. The boys had gotten her a job doing laundry to help pass her time and pay her bills. I thought it was neat that she worked at the laundry place for prostitutes they were trying to get off the street. She probably did not even have to work, however she was to stubborn to move in with Joe. She mentioned that Joe had offered for her to move in with him, but she felt she would be in the way. This is just like a typical grandparent in today's society. Once they become retired they find odd jobs to keep busy, and even though the need to be living with someone, and probably want to live with someone they feel like they are being a burden on them. I am not old enough to understand, but being 22 years old I would not find my grandmother or grandfather moving in a burden. Of course you lifestyle would change some, however this is your own flesh and blood. She seemed so happy when she was at the house with Joe and his family though. They drank, and she sang a song for the children. Also, I believe that her mind may be slipping her. When she sang the song to the children they did not point out that she sang the first verse twice instead of singing the first and second verses. Maybe this is a sign to Joe and the family that she is starting to slip and she needs to move in with them.
The thing that bugged me about the poem was that it just ends. We do not know what ends up happening to her, or if the brothers ever end up re-uniting. I was just starting to get into the story and boom it ends! I suppose according to the biography that Joyce does this a lot!
Monday, June 9, 2008
Thomas Hardy
The Convergence of the Twain
(Lines on the loss of the Titanic)
In 1912 Hardy wrote this poem, which was the same time the Titanic sunk. I have always been interested in the Titanic so that is why I chose to write on this poem. I could only imagine the emotions felt by people who were actually alive during the sinking of the Titanic. The Titanic received so much press coverage, and was the “unsinkable” ship. The excitement of the ship and then the devastation of the sinking of the ship would have spurred lots of emotions.
This poem took on a different perspective than what one would expect. Instead of focusing on the tragedy itself, the poem focused on the ship’s current state being submerged under the water. In fact, Hardy seemed to almost mock the ship for what it originally stood for and what it stands for in its current state months after sinking. He focuses a lot on the ship itself and how nice it was in the beginning of the poem. He says, “Of her salamandrine fires, / Cold currents third, and turn to rhythmic tidal lyres” 5-6. Meaning where the hot fires once burned and propelled the ship, now a cold current runs here, meaning that death and coldness run through the same place where the hot fires once were. To write a statement like this right after the ship had sunk would have been bold. Most people would be feeling bad for the families and all of the people on the ship who died, but Hardy continues to focus on the actual body of the ship and not the tragedy. He points out things such as the “glass opulent” 8 and then turns right around and compares it sea worms crawling around in the ship. All of these things that represented wealth, and upper class were just on the bottom of the sea rotting away. I think Hardy felt the ship was a waste of money and that all the fuss that had been made about the ship was ridiculous in the first place, and now he finds it ironic that the ship lies on the bottom of the ocean. If you remember, the Titanic was for the rich and wealthy upper class to ride on. They had the best of what could be offered at this time. Average people would not have been allowed on the ship. Another example he uses to show this is “Jewels in joy designed/ To ravish the sensuous mind/ Lie lightless, all their sparkles bleared and black and blind” 10-12. I think Hardy is being almost funny and mean here by being like all of these wonderful jewels that are so special simply lie on the bottom of the ocean and mean nothing now. They represent death now. I do not think he is mocking the fact that people died, but just the fact that such a big deal was made about the ship and the wealthy just wasted money on frivolous things just to have them on the bottom of the ocean.
Then Hardy goes on to talk about the “destiny” as he calls it of the ship and iceberg colliding. I like his line “And as the smart ship grew/ In stature, grace, and hue,/In shadowy distance grew Iceberg too” 22-24. I think what Hardy is trying to say is that the more fuss that was made about the ship and the more money they spent and the more the upper class people were being snobby about the ship the more the iceberg was growing. Kind of like the Pinocchio story, how every time he lied, his nose would grow. Except in this case the more money and more elegant the ship became the more the iceberg grew. He ends the poem with the ship and the iceberg hitting. There again he does not focus on the tragedy itself, but he focuses on the actual ship and the event solely. He obviously did not have anyone on the ship he knew, or his poem probably would have been very different. Since most of his poems focus on some aspect of nature though, this follows the same pattern. This poem focuses on the iceberg and the ship as it lies undersea. The ship still in today’s society plays an important role as it lies under water. People still are talking about the ship and how great it was for 1912. In today’s standards the ship was nothing beyond normal, however at this point in time I suppose riding on the ship would have given someone such a sense of class and really defined “gentlemen” as we read about earlier. If you were not allowed to be apart of this part of society and witnessed it from the stance that Hardy must have, then sure I suppose you may find the whole incident a bit funny and ironic. The “unsinkable” ship, the elegant wonderful Titanic that hit an iceberg and sunk and took down all of the wonderful things on board. I believe he is a little un sensitive about the event, but I enjoy his perspective on it.
(Lines on the loss of the Titanic)
In 1912 Hardy wrote this poem, which was the same time the Titanic sunk. I have always been interested in the Titanic so that is why I chose to write on this poem. I could only imagine the emotions felt by people who were actually alive during the sinking of the Titanic. The Titanic received so much press coverage, and was the “unsinkable” ship. The excitement of the ship and then the devastation of the sinking of the ship would have spurred lots of emotions.
This poem took on a different perspective than what one would expect. Instead of focusing on the tragedy itself, the poem focused on the ship’s current state being submerged under the water. In fact, Hardy seemed to almost mock the ship for what it originally stood for and what it stands for in its current state months after sinking. He focuses a lot on the ship itself and how nice it was in the beginning of the poem. He says, “Of her salamandrine fires, / Cold currents third, and turn to rhythmic tidal lyres” 5-6. Meaning where the hot fires once burned and propelled the ship, now a cold current runs here, meaning that death and coldness run through the same place where the hot fires once were. To write a statement like this right after the ship had sunk would have been bold. Most people would be feeling bad for the families and all of the people on the ship who died, but Hardy continues to focus on the actual body of the ship and not the tragedy. He points out things such as the “glass opulent” 8 and then turns right around and compares it sea worms crawling around in the ship. All of these things that represented wealth, and upper class were just on the bottom of the sea rotting away. I think Hardy felt the ship was a waste of money and that all the fuss that had been made about the ship was ridiculous in the first place, and now he finds it ironic that the ship lies on the bottom of the ocean. If you remember, the Titanic was for the rich and wealthy upper class to ride on. They had the best of what could be offered at this time. Average people would not have been allowed on the ship. Another example he uses to show this is “Jewels in joy designed/ To ravish the sensuous mind/ Lie lightless, all their sparkles bleared and black and blind” 10-12. I think Hardy is being almost funny and mean here by being like all of these wonderful jewels that are so special simply lie on the bottom of the ocean and mean nothing now. They represent death now. I do not think he is mocking the fact that people died, but just the fact that such a big deal was made about the ship and the wealthy just wasted money on frivolous things just to have them on the bottom of the ocean.
Then Hardy goes on to talk about the “destiny” as he calls it of the ship and iceberg colliding. I like his line “And as the smart ship grew/ In stature, grace, and hue,/In shadowy distance grew Iceberg too” 22-24. I think what Hardy is trying to say is that the more fuss that was made about the ship and the more money they spent and the more the upper class people were being snobby about the ship the more the iceberg was growing. Kind of like the Pinocchio story, how every time he lied, his nose would grow. Except in this case the more money and more elegant the ship became the more the iceberg grew. He ends the poem with the ship and the iceberg hitting. There again he does not focus on the tragedy itself, but he focuses on the actual ship and the event solely. He obviously did not have anyone on the ship he knew, or his poem probably would have been very different. Since most of his poems focus on some aspect of nature though, this follows the same pattern. This poem focuses on the iceberg and the ship as it lies undersea. The ship still in today’s society plays an important role as it lies under water. People still are talking about the ship and how great it was for 1912. In today’s standards the ship was nothing beyond normal, however at this point in time I suppose riding on the ship would have given someone such a sense of class and really defined “gentlemen” as we read about earlier. If you were not allowed to be apart of this part of society and witnessed it from the stance that Hardy must have, then sure I suppose you may find the whole incident a bit funny and ironic. The “unsinkable” ship, the elegant wonderful Titanic that hit an iceberg and sunk and took down all of the wonderful things on board. I believe he is a little un sensitive about the event, but I enjoy his perspective on it.
Sunday, June 8, 2008
Gerard Manley Hopkins
God's Grandeur:
In the beginning of this poem the speaker is letting us know that god is present here on Earth and this his presence is strong. He uses the metaphor of light shinning from a foil and the great power that has. When you think of light shining off of foil, it can go in all directions and make all sorts of different shapes and figures. The foil can be wrinkled up and the light can bounce of in all directions or it could be flat and it could bounce straight back like a reflection. The reason I believe he chose to use foil here is to say that god is everywhere and god is such a strong force. This force could be bad, however this force could be bad if we angry god. Then he compares God to "It gathers to a greatness, like the ooze of oil/ Crushed" 3-4. Here he is referring to how great god can be. In order to get oil out of seeds the seed must be crushed at a certain pressure. This is like saying that in order to get greatness out of God that a person must put in a certain amount of work for him. Then he is confused as to why people still misbehave and are not afraid of his reign. "Why do mean then now not reck his rod?"4.
In the next section he is referring to nature. This would be typical of Hopkins because he focused on nature and god throughout all of his poems. What is he trying to say in this second stanza is that in the current day society (being back in the early 1900's) that people do not appreciate the beauty of nature. He says, "And all is seared with trade; bleared, smeared with toil/ And wears man's smell: the soil/ Is bare now, nor can foot feel, being shod. (6-8) Right here he is blaming industry and factories for tearing up nature to build and produce their goods. He feels that these are taking away from nature and are an ugly eye sore. He feels that people have become unsensitive to nature and do not have any appreciation left for it. This is very troublesome to the speaker who sees so much beauty and greatness in nature.
In the last stanza he sort of changes his tone a bit. He reassures that nature will still continue trying to grow and be beautiful and that it is just waiting after each night. He also lets us know that since god is forgiving he is going to forgive us for what we have done to nature, but we need to be aware of it. Nature is going to keep coming back because it is deep in this world, and it represents freshness and good.
The Windhover:
In this poem once again the speaker is pointing out the beauty in nature. He finds the bird flying to be very beautiful and ponders how the bird was able to learn such a trait. In fact, he compares the bird flying to someone riding and being able to control the ride. Why would the speaker be so interested in this bird flying though besides just the beauty of it? I believe that the speaker became so obsessed with the perfection of the birds fligth that possibly he started to realize something about his own life. The speaker may realize that he is not putting his all into whatever it is that he does. I got this interpretation from the lines "My heard in hiding/ Stirred for a bird, -the acheve of, the mastery of the thing!" 7-8. He points out that to be able to acheive such perfection at something is so amazing. Maybe the speaker wants to do the same thing in his own life. Maybe, the speaker does not think he could ever acheive such perfection, and realizes that only god could have given the bird such a talent. The reason I believe he would relate it back to god is because all of Hopkins poems deal with nature and god's force in nature.
Hopkins was not my favorite author, however he was not bad. I was able to understand his poems for the most part, but there was nothing about them that really jumped out and grabbed my attention like the Ellis story I read!
In the beginning of this poem the speaker is letting us know that god is present here on Earth and this his presence is strong. He uses the metaphor of light shinning from a foil and the great power that has. When you think of light shining off of foil, it can go in all directions and make all sorts of different shapes and figures. The foil can be wrinkled up and the light can bounce of in all directions or it could be flat and it could bounce straight back like a reflection. The reason I believe he chose to use foil here is to say that god is everywhere and god is such a strong force. This force could be bad, however this force could be bad if we angry god. Then he compares God to "It gathers to a greatness, like the ooze of oil/ Crushed" 3-4. Here he is referring to how great god can be. In order to get oil out of seeds the seed must be crushed at a certain pressure. This is like saying that in order to get greatness out of God that a person must put in a certain amount of work for him. Then he is confused as to why people still misbehave and are not afraid of his reign. "Why do mean then now not reck his rod?"4.
In the next section he is referring to nature. This would be typical of Hopkins because he focused on nature and god throughout all of his poems. What is he trying to say in this second stanza is that in the current day society (being back in the early 1900's) that people do not appreciate the beauty of nature. He says, "And all is seared with trade; bleared, smeared with toil/ And wears man's smell: the soil/ Is bare now, nor can foot feel, being shod. (6-8) Right here he is blaming industry and factories for tearing up nature to build and produce their goods. He feels that these are taking away from nature and are an ugly eye sore. He feels that people have become unsensitive to nature and do not have any appreciation left for it. This is very troublesome to the speaker who sees so much beauty and greatness in nature.
In the last stanza he sort of changes his tone a bit. He reassures that nature will still continue trying to grow and be beautiful and that it is just waiting after each night. He also lets us know that since god is forgiving he is going to forgive us for what we have done to nature, but we need to be aware of it. Nature is going to keep coming back because it is deep in this world, and it represents freshness and good.
The Windhover:
In this poem once again the speaker is pointing out the beauty in nature. He finds the bird flying to be very beautiful and ponders how the bird was able to learn such a trait. In fact, he compares the bird flying to someone riding and being able to control the ride. Why would the speaker be so interested in this bird flying though besides just the beauty of it? I believe that the speaker became so obsessed with the perfection of the birds fligth that possibly he started to realize something about his own life. The speaker may realize that he is not putting his all into whatever it is that he does. I got this interpretation from the lines "My heard in hiding/ Stirred for a bird, -the acheve of, the mastery of the thing!" 7-8. He points out that to be able to acheive such perfection at something is so amazing. Maybe the speaker wants to do the same thing in his own life. Maybe, the speaker does not think he could ever acheive such perfection, and realizes that only god could have given the bird such a talent. The reason I believe he would relate it back to god is because all of Hopkins poems deal with nature and god's force in nature.
Hopkins was not my favorite author, however he was not bad. I was able to understand his poems for the most part, but there was nothing about them that really jumped out and grabbed my attention like the Ellis story I read!
Sara Stickney Ellis
From The Women of England: Their Social Duties and Domestic Habits [The influence of Women].
When I read under Sarah’s biography that she took the perspective that women should accept their inferiority I was eager to read what she could possibly have to say. Being a woman I could NOT imagine putting yourself in a situation where you honestly believe you are less important and a less being than a male. Very bizarre, however I tried to read with an open mind and figure out where she must be coming from. She begins not really by explaining why women are inferior, but she takes the side that men are so strong and go through such grievances in order to protect the woman who stays at home. The example she uses is that the man goes out into the market and gets his integrity shaken and is put under lots of pressure from beggars and what not. She explains the outside world as harsh and cold and a hard place to have to deal with and says that men have to go out into this world, while the woman is sitting in her warn cozy home tending to his needs and not having to face these harsh realities. It would have been true at this time that women did stay at home and did not have to face the harshness of the outside world, however that does not mean that men are superior because of it. In fact, some women probably did prefer it to be this way, and would just assume sit at home and mind to their husbands needs, however this is not the case for all women. And since this is not the case for all women it should not be stated that men are superior to women. Obviously Ellis was one of these women who would just assume to stay at home and take care of her husband’s and families’ needs. Then again maybe she was never given any other choice and therefore just believed this to be true. There is nothing wrong with her belief, but I am baffled that trying to understand where she is coming from. She says on page 558 “Will the common place frivolities of morning calls, or an interminable range of superficial reading, enable them to assist their brothers, their husbands, or their sons in becoming happier and better men? –NO” I underlined this sentence in my book because it made me very angry. I do not consider myself to be a feminist at all, however to say that educating women is not important because it will not cause them to make men happier just really made me mad. First of all, why does this have to be all about the man and him being happy? Do women not deserve the same amount of happiness as men. If a woman reading and broadening her experiences and education makes her a happier person and feel better about herself then who is to say it is wrong? Also, who is to say that she would not make her husband happier by being smarter and being able to relate to the outside world.
Then the next sentence that really hit another nerve with me was this one “Have these been the learned, the accomplished women; the women who could speak many languages, who could solve problems, and elucidate systems of philosophy? –NO.” p. 558. In this sentence she is referring to an earlier statement about women who have been honored and who have been remembered in this world. She is saying that no woman has ever been remembered for being smart, solving problems, or even being accomplished. That is nonsense. Women have the same right to being remembered for being accomplished as men. I almost feel like she could not possibly believe this herself, but that a man figure in her life must be making her think and write this way. This is just nonsense.
She then goes on to say that the woman has many wonderful sides and personalities, but the most important one is when the character she shows and the job she does when she is called in to deal with sickness. Well, there again that’s absurd. I do not believe for one minute that it is a woman or a man’s job to take care of the sick. This going straight to a personality trait. Some people are good at handling and soothing the sick, that is why they are doctors. Then there are people like myself who would be a terrible doctor because I am not really sensitive. This is not to say that I am a bad woman, it just says that I have other strong points in my life. Every person is born with different strong points, and if we are all able to focus on those points then the world will be a better place because we will all do what we are the strongest at.
Then towards the end of the story I was just ready to quit reading and throw the book away. I mean, I know she is speaking from a totally different perspective, but it just seems outrageous to me. I suppose because I was raised believing I could do anything I want, etc. Just like most children are raised today. Another reason I believe this poem really struck me so much is because I am a woman golfer, and being a woman golfer is challenging sometimes. Men are not always happy to see me at the course, and I have even been told that golf is a man’s game. There again that is absurd. However, when she starts saying that conversation is very powerful towards the end I go excited thinking, well she does believe the woman should be educated so she can carry a conversation with her wife. However, then she goes on to say that she should carry on a conversation about his interest. In other words she should find out what he likes to do, such as fox hunting, and then talk to him about that. She says, the evening will pass so pleasantly if the woman carries on such a conversation. Well, there again she completely leaves out the fact that there may be things the wife is interested in that they could talk about. Instead the wife is just an object who is there to serve every need of the husband, and practically be a slave even to the point of carrying on a conversation. I would have a real problem living in society at this time! Possibly if I were raised in it, I would have adapted well, but after seeing where we have evolved to, I am glad the world has changed.
From The Women of England: Their Social Duties and Domestic Habits [The influence of Women].
When I read under Sarah’s biography that she took the perspective that women should accept their inferiority I was eager to read what she could possibly have to say. Being a woman I could NOT imagine putting yourself in a situation where you honestly believe you are less important and a less being than a male. Very bizarre, however I tried to read with an open mind and figure out where she must be coming from. She begins not really by explaining why women are inferior, but she takes the side that men are so strong and go through such grievances in order to protect the woman who stays at home. The example she uses is that the man goes out into the market and gets his integrity shaken and is put under lots of pressure from beggars and what not. She explains the outside world as harsh and cold and a hard place to have to deal with and says that men have to go out into this world, while the woman is sitting in her warn cozy home tending to his needs and not having to face these harsh realities. It would have been true at this time that women did stay at home and did not have to face the harshness of the outside world, however that does not mean that men are superior because of it. In fact, some women probably did prefer it to be this way, and would just assume sit at home and mind to their husbands needs, however this is not the case for all women. And since this is not the case for all women it should not be stated that men are superior to women. Obviously Ellis was one of these women who would just assume to stay at home and take care of her husband’s and families’ needs. Then again maybe she was never given any other choice and therefore just believed this to be true. There is nothing wrong with her belief, but I am baffled that trying to understand where she is coming from. She says on page 558 “Will the common place frivolities of morning calls, or an interminable range of superficial reading, enable them to assist their brothers, their husbands, or their sons in becoming happier and better men? –NO” I underlined this sentence in my book because it made me very angry. I do not consider myself to be a feminist at all, however to say that educating women is not important because it will not cause them to make men happier just really made me mad. First of all, why does this have to be all about the man and him being happy? Do women not deserve the same amount of happiness as men. If a woman reading and broadening her experiences and education makes her a happier person and feel better about herself then who is to say it is wrong? Also, who is to say that she would not make her husband happier by being smarter and being able to relate to the outside world.
Then the next sentence that really hit another nerve with me was this one “Have these been the learned, the accomplished women; the women who could speak many languages, who could solve problems, and elucidate systems of philosophy? –NO.” p. 558. In this sentence she is referring to an earlier statement about women who have been honored and who have been remembered in this world. She is saying that no woman has ever been remembered for being smart, solving problems, or even being accomplished. That is nonsense. Women have the same right to being remembered for being accomplished as men. I almost feel like she could not possibly believe this herself, but that a man figure in her life must be making her think and write this way. This is just nonsense.
She then goes on to say that the woman has many wonderful sides and personalities, but the most important one is when the character she shows and the job she does when she is called in to deal with sickness. Well, there again that’s absurd. I do not believe for one minute that it is a woman or a man’s job to take care of the sick. This going straight to a personality trait. Some people are good at handling and soothing the sick, that is why they are doctors. Then there are people like myself who would be a terrible doctor because I am not really sensitive. This is not to say that I am a bad woman, it just says that I have other strong points in my life. Every person is born with different strong points, and if we are all able to focus on those points then the world will be a better place because we will all do what we are the strongest at.
Then towards the end of the story I was just ready to quit reading and throw the book away. I mean, I know she is speaking from a totally different perspective, but it just seems outrageous to me. I suppose because I was raised believing I could do anything I want, etc. Just like most children are raised today. Another reason I believe this poem really struck me so much is because I am a woman golfer, and being a woman golfer is challenging sometimes. Men are not always happy to see me at the course, and I have even been told that golf is a man’s game. There again that is absurd. However, when she starts saying that conversation is very powerful towards the end I go excited thinking, well she does believe the woman should be educated so she can carry a conversation with her wife. However, then she goes on to say that she should carry on a conversation about his interest. In other words she should find out what he likes to do, such as fox hunting, and then talk to him about that. She says, the evening will pass so pleasantly if the woman carries on such a conversation. Well, there again she completely leaves out the fact that there may be things the wife is interested in that they could talk about. Instead the wife is just an object who is there to serve every need of the husband, and practically be a slave even to the point of carrying on a conversation. I would have a real problem living in society at this time! Possibly if I were raised in it, I would have adapted well, but after seeing where we have evolved to, I am glad the world has changed.
Robert Browning
Robert was a very privileged child who could never really decide what to do with his life. After he married Elizabeth Barrett he became wound up in her and still could not focus on his works. It was after he died that he felt really sad and decided that he was going to stop and really focus on his work and influence others. That is exactly what he did.
Porphyria’s Lover:
This poem was very dramatic. Just by reading the title I thought it would be a love poem. While, I suppose it is a love poem it is not what one would expect. The first clue that this poem is not a normal love story is the title. If you are in love with someone you title a poem after them possibly, but in this case the title is actually about the speaker in the poem, instead of the woman he loves.
The poem begins by setting the mood with a dreary stormy night. A storm had been through and done damage to the area. The speaker says “It tore the elm-tops down for spite” 3. The speaker points this out to say that the storm was a real beast and did these things on purpose. However, then comes the lady the speaker is in love with, Porphyria. The speaker says, “When glided in Porphyria; straight/ She shut the cold out and the storm” 6-7. Pretty much the speaker is very much in love with this lady. He says that just by her entering the room she makes the “storm and cold” go away and she warms the place up. However, then the speaker begins to describe her. When he describes her she does not sound all that appealing. It makes me wonder if this poem is about a personal experience Robert had with Elizabeth since she was so sick the first time they met. His biography says that the first time they met Elizabeth was very skinny, and on the couch covered in many blankets. This sounds very similar to the Porphyria being described. He describes Porphyria with “a dripping cloak and shawl, / and laid her soiled gloves by, untied/ Her hat let the damp hair fall” 12-13. He describes her as imperfect coming in wet from a storm. Then he goes on to talk extensively about her hair being misplaced and wet and not fixed. He seemed at this point in the poem quite obsessed with her hair. I found this interesting that he would point out so much about her hair, but then later we find out why. He also points out that she is weak. This is where I see the connection between the speaker and Robert coming in. Porphyria is very in love with the speaker, but she has some troubles in her life which the speaker does not really go into detail about. We just know that there is something there causing her pain. The speaker likes that fact that she is in love with him though because he says, “Happy and proud, at last I knew/ Porphyria worshipped me” 32-33. He was so happy and was uncertain what to do about her loving him. Then all of a sudden he decides to kill her with her own hair by strangling her. At this point in the poem I begin to think that the speaker probably has a mental condition. The reason I say this is because he really believes it was alright to kill her. In fact he says, almost to re-assure himself, “No pain felt she; / I am quite sure she felt no pain” 41-42. He is stating that because he is trying to make the situation better in his head and make himself feel better about what he did. This is an argument with himself that he is not wrong for strangling her. Then he goes on to prop her up by a tree with her head on his shoulder. We still do not know until the end of the poem why he killed her, which here again points to the speaker having a mental problem, or just being crazy. The reason he killed her was so that they could spend the rest of their lives together sitting there by that tree. His reasoning is because he was granting her the wish she wanted, which was to be with him. He says, “Her darling one wish would be heard” 57. I do not believe this is what Porphyria wanted, however the speaker seemed crazy, and obviously loved her too, but he took it a little too far. This poem starts out as a nice love story, and ends up with murder being justified through love. Maybe the speaker believed she was in some sort of pain, and by killing her he could take away that pain and they could sit there and be in love the rest of their lives. He did not kill her out of fury or angry, and we see in the poem that he is justifying what he did. Therefore, the speaker clearly believes he did this for the best of Porphyria. This poem reminds me of an Edgar Allen Poe poem.
Porphyria’s Lover:
This poem was very dramatic. Just by reading the title I thought it would be a love poem. While, I suppose it is a love poem it is not what one would expect. The first clue that this poem is not a normal love story is the title. If you are in love with someone you title a poem after them possibly, but in this case the title is actually about the speaker in the poem, instead of the woman he loves.
The poem begins by setting the mood with a dreary stormy night. A storm had been through and done damage to the area. The speaker says “It tore the elm-tops down for spite” 3. The speaker points this out to say that the storm was a real beast and did these things on purpose. However, then comes the lady the speaker is in love with, Porphyria. The speaker says, “When glided in Porphyria; straight/ She shut the cold out and the storm” 6-7. Pretty much the speaker is very much in love with this lady. He says that just by her entering the room she makes the “storm and cold” go away and she warms the place up. However, then the speaker begins to describe her. When he describes her she does not sound all that appealing. It makes me wonder if this poem is about a personal experience Robert had with Elizabeth since she was so sick the first time they met. His biography says that the first time they met Elizabeth was very skinny, and on the couch covered in many blankets. This sounds very similar to the Porphyria being described. He describes Porphyria with “a dripping cloak and shawl, / and laid her soiled gloves by, untied/ Her hat let the damp hair fall” 12-13. He describes her as imperfect coming in wet from a storm. Then he goes on to talk extensively about her hair being misplaced and wet and not fixed. He seemed at this point in the poem quite obsessed with her hair. I found this interesting that he would point out so much about her hair, but then later we find out why. He also points out that she is weak. This is where I see the connection between the speaker and Robert coming in. Porphyria is very in love with the speaker, but she has some troubles in her life which the speaker does not really go into detail about. We just know that there is something there causing her pain. The speaker likes that fact that she is in love with him though because he says, “Happy and proud, at last I knew/ Porphyria worshipped me” 32-33. He was so happy and was uncertain what to do about her loving him. Then all of a sudden he decides to kill her with her own hair by strangling her. At this point in the poem I begin to think that the speaker probably has a mental condition. The reason I say this is because he really believes it was alright to kill her. In fact he says, almost to re-assure himself, “No pain felt she; / I am quite sure she felt no pain” 41-42. He is stating that because he is trying to make the situation better in his head and make himself feel better about what he did. This is an argument with himself that he is not wrong for strangling her. Then he goes on to prop her up by a tree with her head on his shoulder. We still do not know until the end of the poem why he killed her, which here again points to the speaker having a mental problem, or just being crazy. The reason he killed her was so that they could spend the rest of their lives together sitting there by that tree. His reasoning is because he was granting her the wish she wanted, which was to be with him. He says, “Her darling one wish would be heard” 57. I do not believe this is what Porphyria wanted, however the speaker seemed crazy, and obviously loved her too, but he took it a little too far. This poem starts out as a nice love story, and ends up with murder being justified through love. Maybe the speaker believed she was in some sort of pain, and by killing her he could take away that pain and they could sit there and be in love the rest of their lives. He did not kill her out of fury or angry, and we see in the poem that he is justifying what he did. Therefore, the speaker clearly believes he did this for the best of Porphyria. This poem reminds me of an Edgar Allen Poe poem.
Elizabeth Barrett Browning
Sonnets from the Portuguese:
Elizabeth Barrett Browning wrote this poem right before her wedding with Robert Browning. The poem was about her courtship and the love she felt for him. The poem was showed to her husband after the wedding, and he talked her into publishing it. She would only publish it under a false name though, so that people would not suspect what the poem was about. One thing I assumed is that in this poem Elizabeth Barrett Browning is the speaker of the poem and that she is speaking to Robert. Usually you cannot assume the author is the speaker, however in this case the book tells us she wrote these poems about her courtship with Robert and gave them to him after their wedding night.
In the beginning of this poem Browning conveys a sense of loneliness and an expectation of death. She speaks about a song that the Greeks sang about a man and a woman getting together and falling in love. She thinks about this song, and then she looks back on her life so far and points out “in gradual vision through my tears/ The sweet, sad years, the melancholy years,/ Those of my own life, who by turns had flung/ A shadow across me.” 7-9. What I believe she meant by this statement is that through the tears she has cried, and the sadness she has dealt with throughout her life so far she feels as if there is a cloud over her head. It kind of reminds me of the cartoons you watch where the rain cloud follows over the characters head no matter where they go. Browning feels this way because she has not experienced love, and she feels this happiness they sing about is not for her. Even when asked “Guess now who holds thee?” 13 she responds “death” 13. This could possibly be partly because of her sickness also. The first stanza defiantly gives us a dark picture of Browning, however this begins to change rather rapidly.
At the end of the first stanza she conveys to us that she has found love. Beginning in the second stanza we begin understanding just how strong her love with Robert is. The example she uses is “And hold the torch out, while the winds are rough” 3. When I read this I immediately pictured a heavy wind storm and a torch and the light going out instantly. But she was comparing their love to this torch and saying that even this strong wind could not blow out their torch because their love for each other was so strong. This is such an interesting metaphor to me because to find something that strong seems almost impossible. She also says an interesting line in line 9 “Nay, let the silence of my womanhood/ Commend my woman love to thy belief” 9-10. This goes back to her strong political views I believe. She is saying that she is a woman and she is supposed to “be quiet” in society and just accept the man she shall marry and not speak out. However, Browning is saying that I am speaking out about our love and about my love for you.
In the third stanza she is speaking directly to Robert I believe. She says she wants to hear him say “I love you” over and over again. She even pointed out that saying I love you repeatedly is like a “cuckoo song” 3. This is very true even in today’s society. People use the phrase “I love you” way too often and when it is not necessarily true. Possibly what Browning meant by this though is that she wanted to hear him say it over and over again even if it seemed repetitive and unimportant because it was important to her. While even though she said repeating it was like the cuckoo bird, she also pointed out “never to the hill or plain,/ Valley and wood, without her cuckoo-strain/ Comes the fresh Spring in all her green completed” 4-6. What she meant by this is that even though the bird may be repetitive and even annoying, Spring time would not be complete without the bird. Just like the love between her and Robert would not be complete if he did not re-assure her of his love. There again I thought this was a brilliant metaphor, comparing the Spring time coming with the song of a cuckoo bird. The comparison to the song with saying I love you and how the song and Spring, and I love you and actual love go together made perfect sense to me.
In the next stanza she starts talking about how happy she is on Earth, which seems to be a pretty quick change from the first stanza when she felt like a shadow was cast over her all the time. In fact, she says “what bitter wrong/ can the earth do to us, that we should not long/ Be here contented?” 4-6. She is saying that there is nothing that could be so bad on this earth that would make her be un-content right now. She is so happy and so in love with Robert her world seems to be perfect. She says she would rather stay on Earth and love him even though she knows she will eventually die then to go to heaven right now. She does not want to ever have to live without him.
In the fifth stanza we learn about Robert arranging their first meeting. She said, “Once, as a friend: this fixed day in Spring” 5. So at this point in time she viewed Robert simply as a friend when she went to this arranged meeting to meet him. On their first meeting she said that he touched her hand and she knew right then she loved him. I believe she went and wrote about it because she said “this… the paper’s light/ Said, Dear, I love thee”8-9. I suppose after their first meeting she knew she was in love with him and since she is a poet, she went home to write about it and express how she felt through her writing. This would be the same case as someone today going and calling their best friend to tell them about it.
In the sixth stanza she describes how she felt when he first told her that he was in love with her. She did what most people do who are afraid and in love at the same time. She jumped to conclusions about him loving her. She said “Quick-loving hearts, I thought, may quickly loathe” 5. I believe she was saying that someone who can love me some quickly will be just as quick to leave me. Then she started to doubt herself “For such man’s love!—more like an out of tune/ Worn viol, a good singer would be wroth/ To spoil his song with, and which, snatched in haste” 7-9. She is now comparing his love to an old broken down instrument, which is not good for playing. She is almost convincing herself here that this cannot be good. Then she says later on “For perfect strains my float/ ‘Neath master hands, from instruments defaced-/ and great souls, at one stroke, may do and doat” 12-14. She realizes later that Robert is a good guy and that he really does love her and she says she placed a wrong on him, and she was wrong because even the worst instruments that are worn out can be great when played by a great musician.
In the next stanza she talks about the more intimate side of their relationship. She tells us exactly how she felt each time he kissed her. Her metaphor for the first kiss on her forehead was really impressive. She says, “The first, and sought the forehead, and half missed…..That was the chrism of love”8-10. She compares him kissing her on the forehead to the oil that is put on your forehead during a coronation. This is such a neat metaphor because she takes something truly special and compares it to the first time he kissed her. That shows what a strong connection she must have felt for him.
Then in her last stanza she simply explains all of the ways in which she loves Robert. This section is pretty self explanatory, she loves him purely, freely, etc. The neat thing she says to him at the end is that she hopes god will let her love him in the after life.
This poem was very well written and clearly showed Browning’s love for her husband. The obviously had a very special bond. She is probably my favorite author as of now.
Elizabeth Barrett Browning wrote this poem right before her wedding with Robert Browning. The poem was about her courtship and the love she felt for him. The poem was showed to her husband after the wedding, and he talked her into publishing it. She would only publish it under a false name though, so that people would not suspect what the poem was about. One thing I assumed is that in this poem Elizabeth Barrett Browning is the speaker of the poem and that she is speaking to Robert. Usually you cannot assume the author is the speaker, however in this case the book tells us she wrote these poems about her courtship with Robert and gave them to him after their wedding night.
In the beginning of this poem Browning conveys a sense of loneliness and an expectation of death. She speaks about a song that the Greeks sang about a man and a woman getting together and falling in love. She thinks about this song, and then she looks back on her life so far and points out “in gradual vision through my tears/ The sweet, sad years, the melancholy years,/ Those of my own life, who by turns had flung/ A shadow across me.” 7-9. What I believe she meant by this statement is that through the tears she has cried, and the sadness she has dealt with throughout her life so far she feels as if there is a cloud over her head. It kind of reminds me of the cartoons you watch where the rain cloud follows over the characters head no matter where they go. Browning feels this way because she has not experienced love, and she feels this happiness they sing about is not for her. Even when asked “Guess now who holds thee?” 13 she responds “death” 13. This could possibly be partly because of her sickness also. The first stanza defiantly gives us a dark picture of Browning, however this begins to change rather rapidly.
At the end of the first stanza she conveys to us that she has found love. Beginning in the second stanza we begin understanding just how strong her love with Robert is. The example she uses is “And hold the torch out, while the winds are rough” 3. When I read this I immediately pictured a heavy wind storm and a torch and the light going out instantly. But she was comparing their love to this torch and saying that even this strong wind could not blow out their torch because their love for each other was so strong. This is such an interesting metaphor to me because to find something that strong seems almost impossible. She also says an interesting line in line 9 “Nay, let the silence of my womanhood/ Commend my woman love to thy belief” 9-10. This goes back to her strong political views I believe. She is saying that she is a woman and she is supposed to “be quiet” in society and just accept the man she shall marry and not speak out. However, Browning is saying that I am speaking out about our love and about my love for you.
In the third stanza she is speaking directly to Robert I believe. She says she wants to hear him say “I love you” over and over again. She even pointed out that saying I love you repeatedly is like a “cuckoo song” 3. This is very true even in today’s society. People use the phrase “I love you” way too often and when it is not necessarily true. Possibly what Browning meant by this though is that she wanted to hear him say it over and over again even if it seemed repetitive and unimportant because it was important to her. While even though she said repeating it was like the cuckoo bird, she also pointed out “never to the hill or plain,/ Valley and wood, without her cuckoo-strain/ Comes the fresh Spring in all her green completed” 4-6. What she meant by this is that even though the bird may be repetitive and even annoying, Spring time would not be complete without the bird. Just like the love between her and Robert would not be complete if he did not re-assure her of his love. There again I thought this was a brilliant metaphor, comparing the Spring time coming with the song of a cuckoo bird. The comparison to the song with saying I love you and how the song and Spring, and I love you and actual love go together made perfect sense to me.
In the next stanza she starts talking about how happy she is on Earth, which seems to be a pretty quick change from the first stanza when she felt like a shadow was cast over her all the time. In fact, she says “what bitter wrong/ can the earth do to us, that we should not long/ Be here contented?” 4-6. She is saying that there is nothing that could be so bad on this earth that would make her be un-content right now. She is so happy and so in love with Robert her world seems to be perfect. She says she would rather stay on Earth and love him even though she knows she will eventually die then to go to heaven right now. She does not want to ever have to live without him.
In the fifth stanza we learn about Robert arranging their first meeting. She said, “Once, as a friend: this fixed day in Spring” 5. So at this point in time she viewed Robert simply as a friend when she went to this arranged meeting to meet him. On their first meeting she said that he touched her hand and she knew right then she loved him. I believe she went and wrote about it because she said “this… the paper’s light/ Said, Dear, I love thee”8-9. I suppose after their first meeting she knew she was in love with him and since she is a poet, she went home to write about it and express how she felt through her writing. This would be the same case as someone today going and calling their best friend to tell them about it.
In the sixth stanza she describes how she felt when he first told her that he was in love with her. She did what most people do who are afraid and in love at the same time. She jumped to conclusions about him loving her. She said “Quick-loving hearts, I thought, may quickly loathe” 5. I believe she was saying that someone who can love me some quickly will be just as quick to leave me. Then she started to doubt herself “For such man’s love!—more like an out of tune/ Worn viol, a good singer would be wroth/ To spoil his song with, and which, snatched in haste” 7-9. She is now comparing his love to an old broken down instrument, which is not good for playing. She is almost convincing herself here that this cannot be good. Then she says later on “For perfect strains my float/ ‘Neath master hands, from instruments defaced-/ and great souls, at one stroke, may do and doat” 12-14. She realizes later that Robert is a good guy and that he really does love her and she says she placed a wrong on him, and she was wrong because even the worst instruments that are worn out can be great when played by a great musician.
In the next stanza she talks about the more intimate side of their relationship. She tells us exactly how she felt each time he kissed her. Her metaphor for the first kiss on her forehead was really impressive. She says, “The first, and sought the forehead, and half missed…..That was the chrism of love”8-10. She compares him kissing her on the forehead to the oil that is put on your forehead during a coronation. This is such a neat metaphor because she takes something truly special and compares it to the first time he kissed her. That shows what a strong connection she must have felt for him.
Then in her last stanza she simply explains all of the ways in which she loves Robert. This section is pretty self explanatory, she loves him purely, freely, etc. The neat thing she says to him at the end is that she hopes god will let her love him in the after life.
This poem was very well written and clearly showed Browning’s love for her husband. The obviously had a very special bond. She is probably my favorite author as of now.
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
Thomas Carlyle was an interesting author because he influenced so many people through his works. He was not afraid to write the truth and call people out for their wrong doings. We see this in a story he wrote called Past and Present [The condition of England]. The way he wrote about the conditions really gives the reader an insight as to just how bad they were. In fact I had no idea that it was this bad until reading his short story. Another thing he points out in this story is that who are these wealthy people in England and who could feel better about themselves with all of these people living in such despair. Carlyle wanted a change in government. He felt that it was the leadership of England who was responsible for the terrible conditions that the people were having to live in. One of the things that Carlyle talks about Workhouses and Poor-Law prisons. Workhouses were provided for the poor people, however the footnote mentions that the conditions were made to be unbearable because they did not want loafers. However, just like Carlyle obviously feels, I feel that this is absurd. The government should not be able to put people in such harsh conditions, especially when they are holding down jobs working very hard in factories. If these people go to work everyday they should be able to survive. I believe this is the argument Carlyle may be trying to make. The leadership of the country should be held more responsible. He mentions that there were hundreds of thousands of people living in these conditions. The other bad thing about the men in this situation is that they feel bad about themselves. It says in the middle of the story on page 478 “that seemed to say “do not look at us. We sit enchanted here, we know not why””. The men are embarrassed about their situation, however in reality there is nothing they can do about it, and there is nothing they have done wrong. This also puts the children in foul moods because the children feel that the world is a bitter place and they look at the world negatively. If the children grow up with a negative attitude towards the world then the future generation is going to be bad.
Another interesting person Carlyle talks about is Doctor Alison. Doctor Alison was trying to do good and help the people. He told an interesting story called “Gospel of Mammonism”. The story tells how inhumane people become when times are hard. Even though this lady with three children was sick and needed help each person sent her on to another person to get the help. Then when she sees people in her own family they deny her. The point the doctor is making is that she ended up killing seventeen people because she infected others before she died. He says “Would it not have been economy to help this poor widow?” p. 480. And these people deny her as if they did not know her. This is sad, but this is how things become when times are hard. People begin to act as heathens and do not want to help anyone. And honestly who is to blame them because maybe they did not have the resources to help her. However, possibly they did have the resources to help her. His point that he is making is that it has become a supply and demand economy due to the poor conditions. Here again Carlyle is using this story to show how the government is to blame for the problems of society. This widow could not do anything about her condition and there was no help available. In Carlyle’s eyes the rich people running the country should feel responsible and should be held responsible for the happenings.
Another interesting person Carlyle talks about is Doctor Alison. Doctor Alison was trying to do good and help the people. He told an interesting story called “Gospel of Mammonism”. The story tells how inhumane people become when times are hard. Even though this lady with three children was sick and needed help each person sent her on to another person to get the help. Then when she sees people in her own family they deny her. The point the doctor is making is that she ended up killing seventeen people because she infected others before she died. He says “Would it not have been economy to help this poor widow?” p. 480. And these people deny her as if they did not know her. This is sad, but this is how things become when times are hard. People begin to act as heathens and do not want to help anyone. And honestly who is to blame them because maybe they did not have the resources to help her. However, possibly they did have the resources to help her. His point that he is making is that it has become a supply and demand economy due to the poor conditions. Here again Carlyle is using this story to show how the government is to blame for the problems of society. This widow could not do anything about her condition and there was no help available. In Carlyle’s eyes the rich people running the country should feel responsible and should be held responsible for the happenings.
The Steam Loom Weaver:This poem was poking fun at the Industrial era. When this poem was written the Industrial age was just beginning and people were missing the Romantic period. They missed the days when they were out in the country, walking by a stream, or weaving in their own house. Now they were being forced to work in harsh conditions, and if they were not working then they were not providing money for their home. The way this poem compares working with love is funny. It takes what would be your typical love story, and turns it into a man and a woman conversing about having to hurry up and get to work. This is not something that would have been heard of in the Romantic period.
In the first stanza we see how different a “love story” is during the Industrial period. The speaker says “Two lovers walking in their bloom/ The lassie was a steam loom weaver/ The lad an engine driver keen” 4-6. One difference to point out is that in the Romantic period it would have been unheard of for a woman to be working outside of the home. This was another hot topic of the Industrial Period because people felt that by women having to work outside of the house that they were putting the “home life” in jeopardy.
In the second stanza we see an almost impatient woman. She says “So work away without delay,/ And quickly muster up the steam” 15-16. She would have been impatient because she would have had a very demanding boss who would have only been concerned about her production.
The man in this poem seems to be a little more laid back than the woman. He says to her “I said fair maid you seem determined/ No longer for idle be..” 17-18. I suppose being a steam engine driver maybe he did not have as strict of a boss as the woman. However, another possibility is that during this period they were very hard on the women. I am sure that women were not treated as equals to the men.
Then in the next stanza the man almost takes on a boyfriend/husband role because he is telling the lady that he will provide for her. Even though in the poem he is talking about providing for her in a work environment this is representing in the sense of a relationship. This is funny and ironic because this is not traditional at all. Typically a man would go out and work and provide for his wife who would stay at home and do house chores or small jobs in the house. All of a sudden the man is having to provide for her in a factory.
The ending of the poem pretty much ends with the man having to hurry up and go off and work the rest of the day. He does not have time to stay and chat with the lady. In fact she says to him “But work away while yet it’s day” 43. In the Romantic period it seemed like time was never really an issue. I feel like in this poem it is much like modern day- as in rush rush to get as much work done as possible. When I say modern day I mean modern day United States. In the United States we rush and try to make the most out of every hour. We are a lot like the Industrial period, except we are not all working in factory jobs.
Another interesting story I found in this section was “London Labour and the London Poor- Watercress Girl. This short story written by Henry Mayhew was to point out the injustices of the children during the Industrial period. He talks to an eight year old girl and it is so sad to think that things like this went on during this time. I have a younger brother who is eleven and I could not imagine if he were walking the streets begging and selling. Also, this girl at the age of seven had been responsible for another child. As the speaker points out- “had entirely lost all childish ways, and was, indeed in thoughts and in manner a woman” p.508. Some critics say that we carry childhood to far in today’s society. We see this with college students who go off to college and do not want to grow up. Mainly we do not want to grow up because the majority of us live off of our parents, have no responsibility, and we like being children. In the Industrial society we see that there is no childhood. The parents go off to the factory to work, and the children must go out also and make money just to survive. We also see in this story that the girl is uneducated. We see this because of the way she speaks. All of the things happening to this girl are so sad, and so bad for the future generations following this Industrial period. What is going to happen is that this girl and all the children like her will not be able to do anything besides follow in their parent’s footsteps and work in a factory. This is one of the reasons that the rich got richer and the poor poorer during this period. Even though they were working very hard, they were not reaping the benefits.
In the first stanza we see how different a “love story” is during the Industrial period. The speaker says “Two lovers walking in their bloom/ The lassie was a steam loom weaver/ The lad an engine driver keen” 4-6. One difference to point out is that in the Romantic period it would have been unheard of for a woman to be working outside of the home. This was another hot topic of the Industrial Period because people felt that by women having to work outside of the house that they were putting the “home life” in jeopardy.
In the second stanza we see an almost impatient woman. She says “So work away without delay,/ And quickly muster up the steam” 15-16. She would have been impatient because she would have had a very demanding boss who would have only been concerned about her production.
The man in this poem seems to be a little more laid back than the woman. He says to her “I said fair maid you seem determined/ No longer for idle be..” 17-18. I suppose being a steam engine driver maybe he did not have as strict of a boss as the woman. However, another possibility is that during this period they were very hard on the women. I am sure that women were not treated as equals to the men.
Then in the next stanza the man almost takes on a boyfriend/husband role because he is telling the lady that he will provide for her. Even though in the poem he is talking about providing for her in a work environment this is representing in the sense of a relationship. This is funny and ironic because this is not traditional at all. Typically a man would go out and work and provide for his wife who would stay at home and do house chores or small jobs in the house. All of a sudden the man is having to provide for her in a factory.
The ending of the poem pretty much ends with the man having to hurry up and go off and work the rest of the day. He does not have time to stay and chat with the lady. In fact she says to him “But work away while yet it’s day” 43. In the Romantic period it seemed like time was never really an issue. I feel like in this poem it is much like modern day- as in rush rush to get as much work done as possible. When I say modern day I mean modern day United States. In the United States we rush and try to make the most out of every hour. We are a lot like the Industrial period, except we are not all working in factory jobs.
Another interesting story I found in this section was “London Labour and the London Poor- Watercress Girl. This short story written by Henry Mayhew was to point out the injustices of the children during the Industrial period. He talks to an eight year old girl and it is so sad to think that things like this went on during this time. I have a younger brother who is eleven and I could not imagine if he were walking the streets begging and selling. Also, this girl at the age of seven had been responsible for another child. As the speaker points out- “had entirely lost all childish ways, and was, indeed in thoughts and in manner a woman” p.508. Some critics say that we carry childhood to far in today’s society. We see this with college students who go off to college and do not want to grow up. Mainly we do not want to grow up because the majority of us live off of our parents, have no responsibility, and we like being children. In the Industrial society we see that there is no childhood. The parents go off to the factory to work, and the children must go out also and make money just to survive. We also see in this story that the girl is uneducated. We see this because of the way she speaks. All of the things happening to this girl are so sad, and so bad for the future generations following this Industrial period. What is going to happen is that this girl and all the children like her will not be able to do anything besides follow in their parent’s footsteps and work in a factory. This is one of the reasons that the rich got richer and the poor poorer during this period. Even though they were working very hard, they were not reaping the benefits.
Felicia Hemans
The Wife of Asdrubal:
The thing to note about this poem is the title. The title does not refer to being a mother, but it refers to the speaker being a wife. I believe the speaker in this poem has developed mental issues. The reason I believe this is because she kills her own two sons. I do not know any mother who would kill their own children, unless they are mentally unstable. Not only does she kill her own children she kills them to spite her husband who is standing safe from the fire. I could not imagine a mother saying what she says in line 61 "the arms that cannot save/ Have been their cradle, and shall be their grave" 61-62. She is pretty much saying that I cannot save them from the fire so I will kill them in front of you to make you suffer. I believe the Hemans and the speaker in this poem are very closesly correlated. I feel this way because Hemans suffered rejection throughout her life. She did not have a father figure in her life because her mother's marriages did not work out. Also, after she was married her own husband left her for "illness issues" and he never returned to help her take care of the children. At this point Hemans became determined to make a living for her and her children through writing. Possibly Hemans was also a bit crazy, and she expressed it through her writing. Another thing that points to the speaker in the poem being very angry with her husband and border line crazy is when she says "Live traitor live!" 45. To call someone a traitor even today is very harsh. It would have been a very harsh thing to say to him at that time. She is pretty much telling him since you are a traitor go ahead and live, but the three of us will die. Nobody wants to be called a traitor. It would have been neat to have heard some type of response from the husband. Once again though I feel that the evidence of the poem is sufficient to say the speaker has some type of mental dammage because she killed her own children. It makes one wonder just what people will do "in the name of love".
Hemans may not have been crazy in her own life, but I do believe that she felt similar feelings as the wife of Asdrubal felt. She had to many similar experiences in her life. I believe this is why this poem is so strong and has so much feeling though, is because Hemans was able to express these feelings due to the fact the she really felt them. I feel poetry is much stronger when the author has had real experience on what they are writing.
The thing to note about this poem is the title. The title does not refer to being a mother, but it refers to the speaker being a wife. I believe the speaker in this poem has developed mental issues. The reason I believe this is because she kills her own two sons. I do not know any mother who would kill their own children, unless they are mentally unstable. Not only does she kill her own children she kills them to spite her husband who is standing safe from the fire. I could not imagine a mother saying what she says in line 61 "the arms that cannot save/ Have been their cradle, and shall be their grave" 61-62. She is pretty much saying that I cannot save them from the fire so I will kill them in front of you to make you suffer. I believe the Hemans and the speaker in this poem are very closesly correlated. I feel this way because Hemans suffered rejection throughout her life. She did not have a father figure in her life because her mother's marriages did not work out. Also, after she was married her own husband left her for "illness issues" and he never returned to help her take care of the children. At this point Hemans became determined to make a living for her and her children through writing. Possibly Hemans was also a bit crazy, and she expressed it through her writing. Another thing that points to the speaker in the poem being very angry with her husband and border line crazy is when she says "Live traitor live!" 45. To call someone a traitor even today is very harsh. It would have been a very harsh thing to say to him at that time. She is pretty much telling him since you are a traitor go ahead and live, but the three of us will die. Nobody wants to be called a traitor. It would have been neat to have heard some type of response from the husband. Once again though I feel that the evidence of the poem is sufficient to say the speaker has some type of mental dammage because she killed her own children. It makes one wonder just what people will do "in the name of love".
Hemans may not have been crazy in her own life, but I do believe that she felt similar feelings as the wife of Asdrubal felt. She had to many similar experiences in her life. I believe this is why this poem is so strong and has so much feeling though, is because Hemans was able to express these feelings due to the fact the she really felt them. I feel poetry is much stronger when the author has had real experience on what they are writing.
John Keats
Ode to a Nightingale:
In the first stanza of this poem we find out that the speaker is sad for some reason. He says “Tis not through envy of thy happy lot/ but being too happy in thine happiness” lines 5-6. I think what he is trying to say here is that he is not envious of the bird being happy, however he is almost mad because the bird is so happy with himself. I suppose when a person is depressed, or becomes numb to emotions that they may have a tendency to be jealous of others, even in this case a bird. I do not necessarily know that the speakers has taken any sedatives or drugs, however he mentions that he feels as if he had. “My sense, as though of hemlock I had drunk/ Or emptied some dull opiate to the drains” 3-4. When a person is inebriated they do not have as many cares in the world. Things become less important to them, and since in most cases these types of drugs are what they call “downers” it can bring people down to a depressed state of mind. I believe this is how the speaker is trying to describe his mood right now.
In the second stanza the speaker asks for wine. There again I am not sure the speaker is trying to get drunk, however is trying to get into a state of mind where he can relate to the bird. He says things such as “Tasting of Flora and the country green,/ Dance, and Provencal song, and sunburnt mith” 13-14. I believe what he is trying to say throughout this whole stanza is that he wants to be able to relate to the bird and feel what the bird feels. By drinking the wine he is enabling himself to feel these feelings. We are still unsure why the speaker is in pain at this point in the poem. However, he wants to relate to the bird. His last line in this stanza says “And with thee fade away into the forest dim” 20. For some unknown reason I believe he is trying to escape reality. He wants this bird, whom he sees as happy to be his companion.
It seems that in the third stanza the speaker snaps back into reality for a bit. He seems a bit bitter at the bird because he is telling the bird that it knows nothing about the reality of growing old and losing beauty. He says “What thou among the leaves hast never known/The weariness, the fever, and the fret” 22-23. He is telling the bird you do not know anything about worrying you just live up among the leaves and live your beautiful happy life.
In the fourth stanza the speaker gets excited and says “Away! Away! For I will fly to thee, /Not charioted by Bacchus and his pards” 31-32. He is saying I will fly away with you bird, and I will not drink the wine. He decides he is going to rely on poetry instead of the wine or other drugs. We still are unsure of why he has such heartaches, but obviously they are painful and hard for him to forget.
In the fifth stanza the speaker is in the dark. He is flying with the nightingale, however he must depend on other senses to get him through the flight because he cannot see. Even though he cannot see his relies on this other senses and describes beautiful things to us. He says, “Wherewith the seasonable month endows/ The grass, the thicket, and the fruit tree wild” 45-46. Possibly since he is letting the nightingale lead the flight for once in his life is he able to focus on the positives in life instead of the negatives.
In stanza six all of a sudden the speaker goes back to his depressed state and starts talking about how he wants to die. He says, “I have been half in love with easeful Death/ Call’d him soft names in many a mused rhyme” lines 52-53. This is one of the options the speaker finds fit in order to help heal his heartache. Before he was talking about drinking wine, but now he is referring to killing himself as an option.
The speaker says that the bird is immortal. I believe what the speaker is trying to say is that the bird as a species is immortal. He refers to “In ancient says be emperor and clown…that found a path” 64-65. I believe what he is trying to say is that your species has been there for ancient emperors just as it was there for the speaker. Maybe he sees this as the birds purpose in life, and he feels that he does not have a purpose.
In the last stanza of the poem the bird leaves the speaker. The bird is going on to sing a song to someone else. At this point the speaker is not sure if he were dreaming or not. He says in the last line “Do I wake or sleep?” 80. At this point you wonder if the bird ever existed or if he was using the idea of the bird to express how he feels.
In the first stanza of this poem we find out that the speaker is sad for some reason. He says “Tis not through envy of thy happy lot/ but being too happy in thine happiness” lines 5-6. I think what he is trying to say here is that he is not envious of the bird being happy, however he is almost mad because the bird is so happy with himself. I suppose when a person is depressed, or becomes numb to emotions that they may have a tendency to be jealous of others, even in this case a bird. I do not necessarily know that the speakers has taken any sedatives or drugs, however he mentions that he feels as if he had. “My sense, as though of hemlock I had drunk/ Or emptied some dull opiate to the drains” 3-4. When a person is inebriated they do not have as many cares in the world. Things become less important to them, and since in most cases these types of drugs are what they call “downers” it can bring people down to a depressed state of mind. I believe this is how the speaker is trying to describe his mood right now.
In the second stanza the speaker asks for wine. There again I am not sure the speaker is trying to get drunk, however is trying to get into a state of mind where he can relate to the bird. He says things such as “Tasting of Flora and the country green,/ Dance, and Provencal song, and sunburnt mith” 13-14. I believe what he is trying to say throughout this whole stanza is that he wants to be able to relate to the bird and feel what the bird feels. By drinking the wine he is enabling himself to feel these feelings. We are still unsure why the speaker is in pain at this point in the poem. However, he wants to relate to the bird. His last line in this stanza says “And with thee fade away into the forest dim” 20. For some unknown reason I believe he is trying to escape reality. He wants this bird, whom he sees as happy to be his companion.
It seems that in the third stanza the speaker snaps back into reality for a bit. He seems a bit bitter at the bird because he is telling the bird that it knows nothing about the reality of growing old and losing beauty. He says “What thou among the leaves hast never known/The weariness, the fever, and the fret” 22-23. He is telling the bird you do not know anything about worrying you just live up among the leaves and live your beautiful happy life.
In the fourth stanza the speaker gets excited and says “Away! Away! For I will fly to thee, /Not charioted by Bacchus and his pards” 31-32. He is saying I will fly away with you bird, and I will not drink the wine. He decides he is going to rely on poetry instead of the wine or other drugs. We still are unsure of why he has such heartaches, but obviously they are painful and hard for him to forget.
In the fifth stanza the speaker is in the dark. He is flying with the nightingale, however he must depend on other senses to get him through the flight because he cannot see. Even though he cannot see his relies on this other senses and describes beautiful things to us. He says, “Wherewith the seasonable month endows/ The grass, the thicket, and the fruit tree wild” 45-46. Possibly since he is letting the nightingale lead the flight for once in his life is he able to focus on the positives in life instead of the negatives.
In stanza six all of a sudden the speaker goes back to his depressed state and starts talking about how he wants to die. He says, “I have been half in love with easeful Death/ Call’d him soft names in many a mused rhyme” lines 52-53. This is one of the options the speaker finds fit in order to help heal his heartache. Before he was talking about drinking wine, but now he is referring to killing himself as an option.
The speaker says that the bird is immortal. I believe what the speaker is trying to say is that the bird as a species is immortal. He refers to “In ancient says be emperor and clown…that found a path” 64-65. I believe what he is trying to say is that your species has been there for ancient emperors just as it was there for the speaker. Maybe he sees this as the birds purpose in life, and he feels that he does not have a purpose.
In the last stanza of the poem the bird leaves the speaker. The bird is going on to sing a song to someone else. At this point the speaker is not sure if he were dreaming or not. He says in the last line “Do I wake or sleep?” 80. At this point you wonder if the bird ever existed or if he was using the idea of the bird to express how he feels.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
