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.
No comments:
Post a Comment