Blog Portfolio #4
Coverage:
Baraka!
Chimpanzee Attack Poem
Harlem Dancer First Attempt
If this was my poetry exam I would…
Exactly 500 Words. Great Success!
Power
Depth:
If this was my poetry exam I would…
I chose this piece for my depth blog because I had to do two things. First I had to write a commentary on a poem I did not really understand and then I had to add on to the post about my response to Paglia’s commentary on the same poem. Reading this was integral to understanding how to write a proper commentary because just after writing my poor commentary I read a really good one, and thus, I was able to discern the differences and it made me realize what I didn’t do and how I can do it. Especially important was understanding her structure because at this stage in my commentary progression, I did not really have such a strong structure I was comfortable with. However, it turns out that the structure I prefer was not the same one that Paglia used in her commentary of “Old Pond.”
Interaction:
Baraka!
In this piece I used a section of Akash’s piece of the same topic in my blog to further the idea of the importance of context to a definition of a word. There are many different interpretations to all words and Akash uses the idea of dictionary definitions to further this. I did not realize this, but it makes a lot of sense. He says it clearly “he word money probably has a similar definition in each dictionary, yet based on the fashion in which one uses the word we associate different meanings to it.” His interpretation of the piece was complementary to mine and it helped establish the idea that there are no absolute definitions to words.
Discussion:
Exactly 500 Words. Great Success!
This was the blog post that was the informal commentary to Wanda Coleman’s “Why Aren’t You Dead.” Giving further proof to Baraka’s ideas, poetry has different interpretations and this is evident as classmates of mine had different ideas about the same poetry and shared their ideas on my blog. Although the intent on some of the comments was a criticism of the format etc., interesting points were made that lead to discussion.
Xenoblogging:
Akash’s Post
This is my response to Akash’s attempt of a commentary on “Wanda Why Aren’t You Dead?” I bring up ideas about repetition and ask him why he chose repetition as one of his techniques. I also suggested that he make sure he knows one hundred percent of what he is going to talk about and then write, because this will help his overall writing because he will understand what he is writing and it will show in his work.
Wildcard:
Power
This is just a rant that was long in the coming and I wanted to have it concrete before I forgot it over summer.
Sunday, May 22, 2011
Saturday, May 21, 2011
Power
If I had to go mad, I would prefer to go mad with power. In my history class, the teacher had a lecture in which he explained the amount of power three men had during WWII. These men divided up Europe into different zones. What power. The biggest thing about this power isn’t the fact that they are changing the maps of the world, but it is that they are effected so many people directly into their households and changing things up drastically for them, and they probably do not realize. The power they have comes from their ability to change the world on both the macro and the micro.
I feel this yearning of power is a very primal feeling that has to do a lot with the psychology of a person. One can speculate about the social and neural disorders that Adolf Hitler had that made him so successful and the paranoia that Stalin had that secured his presence in Russia. Why does this want for power arise? Having power gives one a feeling of importance, and whether or not one shows it, that feeling is integral to happiness. One might be content behind the scenes, but it is impossible that a person does not have thoughts of what it would be like to have extreme power.
It would be interesting to be a dictator. I want to be a dictator, obviously one with good intentions, and only for like a week to see how it went. I wonder how quickly I would become corrupt with power. How quickly would I change a law to suit me because I could? I assume the most frivolous of rules would be made because I had a whim. This is why you have to show some respect for people like Hitler, even though he was one of the most despicable people ever. He had good intentions, although extremely skewed. The horrid things he did seem to overshadow his intelligence. In classrooms in Nazi Germany, the cross was replaced by a photo of Hitler. Instead of any national anthem, praise to Hitler was chanted. Wow. Millions of people cheered when he walked to the pedestal and this is what gets to me. How does one become such a national hero? His power came from this. What he said, people followed. In all honesty, he was a mortal form of God for the people of Germany.
Lenin has an even more psychologically interesting story. At a young age, both his father and brother were executed. His family was ostracized from society and he was even expelled from Kazan University after attending a peaceful protest. This created such extreme hatred that one cannot possible fathom for the state that he eventually tore it down. This relates to existentialism and is really the characteristics of a brilliant man. Instead of pulling a protagonist of Hunger, this man was able to change his hate into success. He did not waste time being bitter about his situation, but rather, he used his anger to become one of the most powerful men in Russia. Is a rocky childhood a mandate for coming to power? I guess I can say it is so that I don’t feel bad once I don’t become a dictator of my small country of the coast of Europe. It would be a nice country to visit for a while, but I know myself well enough to know that it would not stay nice for very long.
This begs a question. The president of the United States is always considered to be one of the most powerful men in the world. He is not a dictator. He is a beacon of democracy and all the great things that America stands for like freedom and love and all those other things that are a part of their façade. The reason that the president is a dictator is because of democracy. If a yearning for power is a primal feeling, isn’t democracy a step towards dystopia because it takes away such a feeling? You cannot say that Barack Obama has never had the urge to declare Martial Law or do some other thing “unconstitutional.” If I may go off on a tangent, I want to point out the hypocrisy that is the United States. They base their foundations of the protection of democracy and freedom. Although the writers of the constitution had ideals, if the constitution was rewritten for some reason, I have a feeling that “democracy and freedom” would change into “personal interests.” America was, for the most part, “clean” before its entangling in the Middle East, although their meddling in Latin America and their tinkering with Panama to create the Panama Canal cannot be considered righteous. However, when they entered the Middle East, oil became the main reason to fight. Rather than raising the good old “red white and blue,” they might as well raise a “QT” logo or something like that.
Now, back to my point about power. I believe everyone wants power, but no one can get enough power to quench their thirst. It is like an impossible game. When you get to the next level, ten more levels are presented for you and you not what prize you will get when you complete these levels, so you keep heading down a dangerous road full of twist and turns and very large robots and monsters until you die. All because you wanted power. So would it be better if we never had to have a possibility of power? Couldn’t one argue that power is the reason for all conflicts in the world? Don’t worry, if I come into power I will make sure that only I hold onto it and no one else can have any of it so that no one else will have to face the trials and tribulations of gaining it. Some could call me the most generous man ever.
I feel this yearning of power is a very primal feeling that has to do a lot with the psychology of a person. One can speculate about the social and neural disorders that Adolf Hitler had that made him so successful and the paranoia that Stalin had that secured his presence in Russia. Why does this want for power arise? Having power gives one a feeling of importance, and whether or not one shows it, that feeling is integral to happiness. One might be content behind the scenes, but it is impossible that a person does not have thoughts of what it would be like to have extreme power.
It would be interesting to be a dictator. I want to be a dictator, obviously one with good intentions, and only for like a week to see how it went. I wonder how quickly I would become corrupt with power. How quickly would I change a law to suit me because I could? I assume the most frivolous of rules would be made because I had a whim. This is why you have to show some respect for people like Hitler, even though he was one of the most despicable people ever. He had good intentions, although extremely skewed. The horrid things he did seem to overshadow his intelligence. In classrooms in Nazi Germany, the cross was replaced by a photo of Hitler. Instead of any national anthem, praise to Hitler was chanted. Wow. Millions of people cheered when he walked to the pedestal and this is what gets to me. How does one become such a national hero? His power came from this. What he said, people followed. In all honesty, he was a mortal form of God for the people of Germany.
Lenin has an even more psychologically interesting story. At a young age, both his father and brother were executed. His family was ostracized from society and he was even expelled from Kazan University after attending a peaceful protest. This created such extreme hatred that one cannot possible fathom for the state that he eventually tore it down. This relates to existentialism and is really the characteristics of a brilliant man. Instead of pulling a protagonist of Hunger, this man was able to change his hate into success. He did not waste time being bitter about his situation, but rather, he used his anger to become one of the most powerful men in Russia. Is a rocky childhood a mandate for coming to power? I guess I can say it is so that I don’t feel bad once I don’t become a dictator of my small country of the coast of Europe. It would be a nice country to visit for a while, but I know myself well enough to know that it would not stay nice for very long.
This begs a question. The president of the United States is always considered to be one of the most powerful men in the world. He is not a dictator. He is a beacon of democracy and all the great things that America stands for like freedom and love and all those other things that are a part of their façade. The reason that the president is a dictator is because of democracy. If a yearning for power is a primal feeling, isn’t democracy a step towards dystopia because it takes away such a feeling? You cannot say that Barack Obama has never had the urge to declare Martial Law or do some other thing “unconstitutional.” If I may go off on a tangent, I want to point out the hypocrisy that is the United States. They base their foundations of the protection of democracy and freedom. Although the writers of the constitution had ideals, if the constitution was rewritten for some reason, I have a feeling that “democracy and freedom” would change into “personal interests.” America was, for the most part, “clean” before its entangling in the Middle East, although their meddling in Latin America and their tinkering with Panama to create the Panama Canal cannot be considered righteous. However, when they entered the Middle East, oil became the main reason to fight. Rather than raising the good old “red white and blue,” they might as well raise a “QT” logo or something like that.
Now, back to my point about power. I believe everyone wants power, but no one can get enough power to quench their thirst. It is like an impossible game. When you get to the next level, ten more levels are presented for you and you not what prize you will get when you complete these levels, so you keep heading down a dangerous road full of twist and turns and very large robots and monsters until you die. All because you wanted power. So would it be better if we never had to have a possibility of power? Couldn’t one argue that power is the reason for all conflicts in the world? Don’t worry, if I come into power I will make sure that only I hold onto it and no one else can have any of it so that no one else will have to face the trials and tribulations of gaining it. Some could call me the most generous man ever.
Thursday, May 12, 2011
Exactly 500 Words. Great Success!
Wanda Coleman’s “Wanda Why Aren’t You Dead” documents the mental battle forced upon African American women because of society’s mandates. The poem is about a woman with children who is introspecting and yelling at herself, most likely in her head. She is reproving herself because she is unable to keep up what every aspect of the world wants. Through repetition, speaker, and structure, Coleman is able to place us in the mental battle that Wanda is undergoing.
In the poem, most lines start with the name “Wanda” and it is repeated in the poem sixteen times. The repetition of this name makes it seem like Wanda is at fault for everything. The statements are direct shots to her as she is the main culprit for all her problems. Also there is a precarious line which reads “if I were you were you were you.” This repetition of “were you” makes it seem that there is so much another person could do if he or she was in Wanda’s position, making her unfortunate situation all the more fault. There is another similar repetition when the line reads “I didn’t remember that that that that that that was so important to you.” The “that’s” are things which Wanda cares for, and with the repetition of the word, it seems like the reader takes Wanda for granted in many ways. This makes Wanda seem like a weaker character because no one seems to care for what she wants or sees important.
The speaker in this poem is never specified, but because of the lack of capitalization of proper nouns and responses, I believe the speaker is Wanda herself. She is speaking to herself, representing an emotional and mental fight. The lack of responses makes it seems like whatever Wanda has to say is insignificant, further degrading her. Her hatred of herself overpowers her love of herself and this distress was nourished by society’s mandates. “why don’t you lose weight” signifies how social acceptance is Wanda’s primary weapon to injure herself.
The structure of this poem further shows Wanda’s self disrespect. The whole poem is lowercase, including the name “Wanda.” Because she does not choose to give proper punctuation to her own name, we can assume she has very little self respect. Moreover, the lack of proper punctuation shows that Wanda is from a lower class, further demonstrated as she “can’t […] afford to move out of this hell hole.” The use of contraction furthers this idea.
Through the use of repetition, speaker, and structure, Coleman portrays Wanda’s poor quality of life. More importantly, it is used to show Wanda’s inability to be happy with her situation. Because she is not as perfect as she feels she could be, or as perfect as society mandates, she beats herself up in a mental battle in which her pessimistic side will always win. This poem represents a problem that we all face. We need to stop getting angry if we do not meet expectations. Be happy.
In the poem, most lines start with the name “Wanda” and it is repeated in the poem sixteen times. The repetition of this name makes it seem like Wanda is at fault for everything. The statements are direct shots to her as she is the main culprit for all her problems. Also there is a precarious line which reads “if I were you were you were you.” This repetition of “were you” makes it seem that there is so much another person could do if he or she was in Wanda’s position, making her unfortunate situation all the more fault. There is another similar repetition when the line reads “I didn’t remember that that that that that that was so important to you.” The “that’s” are things which Wanda cares for, and with the repetition of the word, it seems like the reader takes Wanda for granted in many ways. This makes Wanda seem like a weaker character because no one seems to care for what she wants or sees important.
The speaker in this poem is never specified, but because of the lack of capitalization of proper nouns and responses, I believe the speaker is Wanda herself. She is speaking to herself, representing an emotional and mental fight. The lack of responses makes it seems like whatever Wanda has to say is insignificant, further degrading her. Her hatred of herself overpowers her love of herself and this distress was nourished by society’s mandates. “why don’t you lose weight” signifies how social acceptance is Wanda’s primary weapon to injure herself.
The structure of this poem further shows Wanda’s self disrespect. The whole poem is lowercase, including the name “Wanda.” Because she does not choose to give proper punctuation to her own name, we can assume she has very little self respect. Moreover, the lack of proper punctuation shows that Wanda is from a lower class, further demonstrated as she “can’t […] afford to move out of this hell hole.” The use of contraction furthers this idea.
Through the use of repetition, speaker, and structure, Coleman portrays Wanda’s poor quality of life. More importantly, it is used to show Wanda’s inability to be happy with her situation. Because she is not as perfect as she feels she could be, or as perfect as society mandates, she beats herself up in a mental battle in which her pessimistic side will always win. This poem represents a problem that we all face. We need to stop getting angry if we do not meet expectations. Be happy.
Sunday, May 8, 2011
If this was my poetry exam, I would...
If I was in my poetry exam with this poem, I would read the poem many times to get as much out of it as I could. First I would look for literary devices, hopefully with the help of my commentary wheel, and once I had them all I would put them together and try to formulate the theme of the poem. Once I had that, I would go back to my literary elements and chose the ones that I feel best convey the theme. I would hopefully be able to select three and once there, I would begin writing a commentary. I would format my paper so that the three body paragraphs each had a literary element being discussed. The following is an attempt at a very informal commentary to Gary Snyder’s “Old Pond.”
In Gary Snyder’s “Old Pond” a scenic pond is described. Through the use of syntax and speaker, the author is able to convey that nature is a peaceful place where humans and animals can coexist.
In this poem, adjectives are almost always followed by nouns, as exemplified in the first sentence: “Blue mountain white snow gleam…” This syntax is very simple; however it is useful in describing nature. The first stanza of the poem follows this style as it describes nature. However, in the second stanza, the syntax is switched to a more passive style with the noun coming before the description. “a naked bug with a white body and brown hair.” When describing the subject of the upcoming action, the syntax changes to a more passive tone, contrasting the active syntax used when the author described the nature which had no action. This paradoxical writing style shows the emphasis that the description of nature has. Rather than the action in the poem being the focus of it, it is the environment that the poem is taking place in that demands more attention.
The speaker of this poem is a narrator observing all the actions of this pond. Interestingly, he or she says “after all day scrambling on the peaks, a naked bug with a white body and brown hair dives into the water…” Rather than saying a human dove into the water, he or she describes the human as much as he or she described the rest of nature. There reason the author does this is to show the connection that human’s can have with the environment. The narrator is unable to identify the species of “human” and so he or she describes him with respect to a bug. Moreover, man is commonly perceived as being the dominant animal, however here, he is not. When in real nature, man is not special, and rather, he is not known to everyone. The portrayal of animals and humans being equal pertains to the theme of the poem which glorifies nature and shows that animals and humans coexist.
After reading Paglia’s commentary of “Old Pond” things have changed. However, it seems that I got a few things right, and by right I mean I just skimmed the surface of Paglia’s ideas. I talked about the odd syntax of the first part of the poem however, I did not realize that it is used to describe the poets overwhelmed expression of nature. “Nature’s elements are reduced to primary color and essential form, hitting the eye before the mind can organize them logically” This is interesting because it really works. The way the words are used make it so that the reader does not stop to think about what is happening, but rather, he absorbs this information without analyzing of doing anything with them. Another subject I got right was the way that the human was perceived. I noticed that he is seen as a naked bug in nature however, I did not notice that he is described as perfect pray for a nuthatch. Moreover, like almost every poem I have ever analyzed, there was a biblical allusion. I did not realize that the naked man is used to represent a primal innocence like Adam in the Garden of Eden.
There were a lot of other things that Paglia got that I did not, and some of it seems a bit farfetched. “The spindly needle sprays, all fine lines and sharp points are also metaphorical: over time, the pines are spraying or scattering their needles in the endless cycle of birth and death, where wast and fertility are often indistinguishable” How is one to get that out of such a simple line. This is my biggest issue with poetry commentary. It seems that some people can pull things out of nowhere and I really wonder if Snyder ever thought of this once. If he did, kudos to Paglia. Other things that I did not realize were that the bird is the “unembellished voice of nature himself.” This makes sense, but I did not get it from the poem. I suppose if I were to fully understand the theme of the poem, I would be able to pick out these cute things.
I think that this paper is well organized; however, it does not really need to be. All the examples argued could be rearranged and I do not feel that it would hinder the paper at all. Because she is portraying so many different arguments, the exact order of them is not necessary. Moreover, with such a compelling argument, one can risk not having the best structure in the world. But, overall there is a nice introduction, body, and conclusion with a lot of allusions to other poets that make her sound much more intelligent. I like to read these types of things because they make you realize something’s that you missed in your commentary, however, I feel like some if it is a bit farfetched, but I guess that’s what poetry is all about.
In Gary Snyder’s “Old Pond” a scenic pond is described. Through the use of syntax and speaker, the author is able to convey that nature is a peaceful place where humans and animals can coexist.
In this poem, adjectives are almost always followed by nouns, as exemplified in the first sentence: “Blue mountain white snow gleam…” This syntax is very simple; however it is useful in describing nature. The first stanza of the poem follows this style as it describes nature. However, in the second stanza, the syntax is switched to a more passive style with the noun coming before the description. “a naked bug with a white body and brown hair.” When describing the subject of the upcoming action, the syntax changes to a more passive tone, contrasting the active syntax used when the author described the nature which had no action. This paradoxical writing style shows the emphasis that the description of nature has. Rather than the action in the poem being the focus of it, it is the environment that the poem is taking place in that demands more attention.
The speaker of this poem is a narrator observing all the actions of this pond. Interestingly, he or she says “after all day scrambling on the peaks, a naked bug with a white body and brown hair dives into the water…” Rather than saying a human dove into the water, he or she describes the human as much as he or she described the rest of nature. There reason the author does this is to show the connection that human’s can have with the environment. The narrator is unable to identify the species of “human” and so he or she describes him with respect to a bug. Moreover, man is commonly perceived as being the dominant animal, however here, he is not. When in real nature, man is not special, and rather, he is not known to everyone. The portrayal of animals and humans being equal pertains to the theme of the poem which glorifies nature and shows that animals and humans coexist.
After reading Paglia’s commentary of “Old Pond” things have changed. However, it seems that I got a few things right, and by right I mean I just skimmed the surface of Paglia’s ideas. I talked about the odd syntax of the first part of the poem however, I did not realize that it is used to describe the poets overwhelmed expression of nature. “Nature’s elements are reduced to primary color and essential form, hitting the eye before the mind can organize them logically” This is interesting because it really works. The way the words are used make it so that the reader does not stop to think about what is happening, but rather, he absorbs this information without analyzing of doing anything with them. Another subject I got right was the way that the human was perceived. I noticed that he is seen as a naked bug in nature however, I did not notice that he is described as perfect pray for a nuthatch. Moreover, like almost every poem I have ever analyzed, there was a biblical allusion. I did not realize that the naked man is used to represent a primal innocence like Adam in the Garden of Eden.
There were a lot of other things that Paglia got that I did not, and some of it seems a bit farfetched. “The spindly needle sprays, all fine lines and sharp points are also metaphorical: over time, the pines are spraying or scattering their needles in the endless cycle of birth and death, where wast and fertility are often indistinguishable” How is one to get that out of such a simple line. This is my biggest issue with poetry commentary. It seems that some people can pull things out of nowhere and I really wonder if Snyder ever thought of this once. If he did, kudos to Paglia. Other things that I did not realize were that the bird is the “unembellished voice of nature himself.” This makes sense, but I did not get it from the poem. I suppose if I were to fully understand the theme of the poem, I would be able to pick out these cute things.
I think that this paper is well organized; however, it does not really need to be. All the examples argued could be rearranged and I do not feel that it would hinder the paper at all. Because she is portraying so many different arguments, the exact order of them is not necessary. Moreover, with such a compelling argument, one can risk not having the best structure in the world. But, overall there is a nice introduction, body, and conclusion with a lot of allusions to other poets that make her sound much more intelligent. I like to read these types of things because they make you realize something’s that you missed in your commentary, however, I feel like some if it is a bit farfetched, but I guess that’s what poetry is all about.
Harlem Dancer First Attempt
The Harlem Dancer by Claude McKay is a sonnet describing a young women performing before a group of fans. This piece of work was published during the Harlem Renaissance and thus has a lot of references to the African American culture. McKay uses similes and alliteration to describe the beauty of the dancer, but also uses diction to describe the greediness of the audience.
McKay uses alliteration in the lines “blown by black players upon a picnic day” and “to me she seemed a proudly swaying palm.” Both these lines are used to describe the grace and beauty of the dancer. McKay said she sang like “blended flutes” and danced as good as a palm tree being moved by the wind. These alliterations are also integral to the setting in which this poem would take place. It would be in a club and the music in the background would be jazz. The repetition of consonance helps add to the sound of jazz and reminds me of the blowing off a trumpet. The use of alliteration gives the flow a poem that is similar to the music that the dancer would be dancing to.
To further demonstrate the beauty of the dancer, similes are used as well. McKay compares the dancer’s voice to that of “blended flutes.” Although this comparison helps demonstrate the beauty of the dancer, it also alludes to African American culture. The next line reads “Blown by black players upon a picnic day…” The author compares her voice to a joyous occasion. The dancer is also compared to a “proudly swaying palm.” This simile helps show the dancer’s gracefulness as well as beauty as the world proudly is used.
Unlike the way the dancer is described, McKay uses diction to show the greediness of the audience. The words “devoured” and “eager, passionate gaze” demonstrate the hunger of the audience. Devoured is a word that is generally used with food, however here, the audience is “devouring” the girl with their eyes. This makes it apparent that the audience cares solely for the dancing rather than for the girl. They want what she offers, not what she is. Contrasting to those words, the dancer has a “falsely-smiling face.” The difference between the audience and the dancer demonstrates their difference in happiness. Although on the exterior the dancer is beautiful, on the outside she “is not in that strange place” which is happiness.
McKay uses alliteration in the lines “blown by black players upon a picnic day” and “to me she seemed a proudly swaying palm.” Both these lines are used to describe the grace and beauty of the dancer. McKay said she sang like “blended flutes” and danced as good as a palm tree being moved by the wind. These alliterations are also integral to the setting in which this poem would take place. It would be in a club and the music in the background would be jazz. The repetition of consonance helps add to the sound of jazz and reminds me of the blowing off a trumpet. The use of alliteration gives the flow a poem that is similar to the music that the dancer would be dancing to.
To further demonstrate the beauty of the dancer, similes are used as well. McKay compares the dancer’s voice to that of “blended flutes.” Although this comparison helps demonstrate the beauty of the dancer, it also alludes to African American culture. The next line reads “Blown by black players upon a picnic day…” The author compares her voice to a joyous occasion. The dancer is also compared to a “proudly swaying palm.” This simile helps show the dancer’s gracefulness as well as beauty as the world proudly is used.
Unlike the way the dancer is described, McKay uses diction to show the greediness of the audience. The words “devoured” and “eager, passionate gaze” demonstrate the hunger of the audience. Devoured is a word that is generally used with food, however here, the audience is “devouring” the girl with their eyes. This makes it apparent that the audience cares solely for the dancing rather than for the girl. They want what she offers, not what she is. Contrasting to those words, the dancer has a “falsely-smiling face.” The difference between the audience and the dancer demonstrates their difference in happiness. Although on the exterior the dancer is beautiful, on the outside she “is not in that strange place” which is happiness.
Chimpanzee Attack Poem
Sitting quietly upon a tree
The soft breeze
No sound but that of a faint bee
And the ushering of leaves
The timid blue sky above lets light to flow
Oh look, there’s a crow
Screams from the right and from the left and the shaking of the trees the dark figures attacking all the drumming on the trees underneath the footsteps the leaves crack and limbs fall to their death they do not stop until we lose our breath and they continue their ferocious moves unable to be shaken from their paths they overpower us with sticks they confuse us what is happening
The soft breeze
No sound but that of a faint bee
And the ushering of leaves
The timid blue sky above lets light to flow
Oh look, there’s a crow
Screams from the right and from the left and the shaking of the trees the dark figures attacking all the drumming on the trees underneath the footsteps the leaves crack and limbs fall to their death they do not stop until we lose our breath and they continue their ferocious moves unable to be shaken from their paths they overpower us with sticks they confuse us what is happening
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Baraka!
In Amiria Baraka’s “Expressive Language” an interesting stance on the importance of language is taken. I believe that the author argues that poetry derives from personal experiences that belong to a certain type of people. This culture and these experiences are then demonstrated in the poem through language. However, the mere language is not the important thing; rather, it is the person saying the language that is integral. An example he used which I liked had to do with money. He says that for a poor man, money might mean 70 cents, however for a hotshot like David Rockefeller, money means much more than that. When you say “Where is the money?” to someone like him, you would be talking about a lot of it. I believe that from this, Baraka is trying to show that poetry is different to everyone. A classmate of mine, Akash had an interesting take on the same idea:
"It’s incredible how accurate that statement really is, the word money probably has a similar definition in each dictionary, yet based on the fashion in which one uses the word we associate different meanings to it. For example, if we see a man get out of a Ferrari and say, “I made so much money today,” we would associate the word money in a very different way then if a waitress said to another, “I made so much money today.” The sentences used are identical, but based on the manner in which these people conduct themselves we make the two sentences strangers to each other"
The dictionary definitions of words are all the same, however it the context and the speaker of the writing, in this case poetry, that really defines the words. This was exemplified by the poetry activity we did in class. My poem was a pretty light one about a kid being rowdy in an airplane. From my point of view, it’s a harmless poem, however, from a mother’s point of view it could be something else entirely. She would be able to relate to it and thus, the problems the son is creating would be more realistic for her, and shut they would possibly strike more emotion. Moreover, which has to do about the mother raising her voice was put in there because I needed a word that rhymed, but a mother who had trouble disciplining her children could probably see this as an analogy to her everyday struggle. The problem with my poem is that I don’t have any emotion attached to it, and I feel if I did, there would be so many different interpretations to it. That must be one of the joys of being a poet. It would be interesting to see how others viewed your work of art.
“Words have users, but as well, users have words.” This line demonstrates the ability that word choice has to represent the author’s culture and what he is hoping to achieve with his work. The culture around a word or sentence says a lot and Baraka uses the phrase “God don’t never change!” to signify this. There is a huge difference in meaning if a successful business man was saying this or if a hopeless African American one was. Reverend Pearly Brown purposefully says “don’t never” because this explains the purpose of the statement. On the other hand, if a well off person says it he would be singing it to reconfirm his good fortune.
Attempts to unify language, as seen in “1984” would be the death to art forms like poetry because the different slang of different cultures says a lot about both the poem and the author. The different dialogues used lend to different analysis by the reader. Poetry is a very raw art form and the emotions expressed through it often contained many feelings that come from a person’s upbringing, thus, it makes sense that lingo plays such a crucial role in the art.
"It’s incredible how accurate that statement really is, the word money probably has a similar definition in each dictionary, yet based on the fashion in which one uses the word we associate different meanings to it. For example, if we see a man get out of a Ferrari and say, “I made so much money today,” we would associate the word money in a very different way then if a waitress said to another, “I made so much money today.” The sentences used are identical, but based on the manner in which these people conduct themselves we make the two sentences strangers to each other"
The dictionary definitions of words are all the same, however it the context and the speaker of the writing, in this case poetry, that really defines the words. This was exemplified by the poetry activity we did in class. My poem was a pretty light one about a kid being rowdy in an airplane. From my point of view, it’s a harmless poem, however, from a mother’s point of view it could be something else entirely. She would be able to relate to it and thus, the problems the son is creating would be more realistic for her, and shut they would possibly strike more emotion. Moreover, which has to do about the mother raising her voice was put in there because I needed a word that rhymed, but a mother who had trouble disciplining her children could probably see this as an analogy to her everyday struggle. The problem with my poem is that I don’t have any emotion attached to it, and I feel if I did, there would be so many different interpretations to it. That must be one of the joys of being a poet. It would be interesting to see how others viewed your work of art.
“Words have users, but as well, users have words.” This line demonstrates the ability that word choice has to represent the author’s culture and what he is hoping to achieve with his work. The culture around a word or sentence says a lot and Baraka uses the phrase “God don’t never change!” to signify this. There is a huge difference in meaning if a successful business man was saying this or if a hopeless African American one was. Reverend Pearly Brown purposefully says “don’t never” because this explains the purpose of the statement. On the other hand, if a well off person says it he would be singing it to reconfirm his good fortune.
Attempts to unify language, as seen in “1984” would be the death to art forms like poetry because the different slang of different cultures says a lot about both the poem and the author. The different dialogues used lend to different analysis by the reader. Poetry is a very raw art form and the emotions expressed through it often contained many feelings that come from a person’s upbringing, thus, it makes sense that lingo plays such a crucial role in the art.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)