Amiri Baraka's essay on language depicts the correlation between culture and language. His analysis on language and culture depicts the true conundrum we face when dealing with poetry. Poetry itself can be analyzed like a painting. Paintings - especially abstract paintings - can be analyzed to any level with regards to the viewer. It can be analyzed for brush work, color, shape, and tone. The analysis of such art depends on the viewer, and their mood regarding the poem. I feel this aspect of art, being the universal ability to analyze, is what Baraka is trying to describe with poetry. A person's mood when analyzing art is parallel to one's culture when analyzing poetry. Like described in the article, certain words or phrases could mean very different things depending on one's social status or cultural background.
Thereby lies the true beauty: its varying levels of depth and meaning. For example, during class I had to analyze a poem about a Hippo doing the jive. The author described the Hippo's movements as sensual and smooth. I understood this to be a statement about the ironies of beauty; however, one could just see this as a humorous image to give someone a good chuckle. The notion that one can never be wrong in analysis comes into play here, for one's various cultures and ethnic backgrounds could produce some very strange interpretations. This is what causes the universality and everlastingness of poetry.
As I mentioned before with my example of a painting, a poem can similarly be analyzed for diction, tone, and structure, as a painting can be for brush strokes, color, and shape. Such tools of writing give analysis some boundaries, so that we have a universal understanding on how to interpret writing. By learning the different cultures of speech, we open ourselves to greater ability for analysis and understanding. The true purpose of analyzing a poem is to find the mysteries and secrets that the author embedded in his/her words. Words can be interpreted and meant in so many different ways, thereby portraying how language is simply a puzzle for what we are truly trying to communicate. As Asim mentioned in his blog (http://asimlikesenglish.blogspot.com/), the conformity of such an aspect of language would lead to a 'death of poetry'. It would lead to the removal of confusion and interpretation between cultures, killing the essence of embedded themes and stories. Perhaps this would make things a lot easier for our understanding, but it would also destroy a universal art.
I also enjoyed reading Saumya's interpretation on this essay (http://saumya22.wordpress.com/2011/05/04/blood-of-the-soul/) for she compares Baraka as a modern day George Orwell. The correlation between this essay and 1984 has been discussed in many of my peer's blogs, and it was a comparison I had noticed - but not doted upon. Both Baraka and Orwell death with language as a way of expressing thought, leading to the conclusion that control of language could thereby control thought. Using TOK lingo, language is one of the main WOKs (ways of knowing) and therefore a limitation on language could seriously influence our knowledge. Whether it leads to the death of poetry and interpretation, or complete control of thought both authors show the importance of language on our culture.
Thereby lies the true beauty: its varying levels of depth and meaning. For example, during class I had to analyze a poem about a Hippo doing the jive. The author described the Hippo's movements as sensual and smooth. I understood this to be a statement about the ironies of beauty; however, one could just see this as a humorous image to give someone a good chuckle. The notion that one can never be wrong in analysis comes into play here, for one's various cultures and ethnic backgrounds could produce some very strange interpretations. This is what causes the universality and everlastingness of poetry.
As I mentioned before with my example of a painting, a poem can similarly be analyzed for diction, tone, and structure, as a painting can be for brush strokes, color, and shape. Such tools of writing give analysis some boundaries, so that we have a universal understanding on how to interpret writing. By learning the different cultures of speech, we open ourselves to greater ability for analysis and understanding. The true purpose of analyzing a poem is to find the mysteries and secrets that the author embedded in his/her words. Words can be interpreted and meant in so many different ways, thereby portraying how language is simply a puzzle for what we are truly trying to communicate. As Asim mentioned in his blog (http://asimlikesenglish.blogspot.com/), the conformity of such an aspect of language would lead to a 'death of poetry'. It would lead to the removal of confusion and interpretation between cultures, killing the essence of embedded themes and stories. Perhaps this would make things a lot easier for our understanding, but it would also destroy a universal art.
I also enjoyed reading Saumya's interpretation on this essay (http://saumya22.wordpress.com/2011/05/04/blood-of-the-soul/) for she compares Baraka as a modern day George Orwell. The correlation between this essay and 1984 has been discussed in many of my peer's blogs, and it was a comparison I had noticed - but not doted upon. Both Baraka and Orwell death with language as a way of expressing thought, leading to the conclusion that control of language could thereby control thought. Using TOK lingo, language is one of the main WOKs (ways of knowing) and therefore a limitation on language could seriously influence our knowledge. Whether it leads to the death of poetry and interpretation, or complete control of thought both authors show the importance of language on our culture.
Pooja, your post is interesting. I think you're right when you say by learning different cultures we open ourselves to a greater ability of analysis and understanding. That is why when we write we usually consider the context, the cultural context. But sometimes dont you think knowing the other culture can hinder our own opinion? Or restrict us from making our own interpretations?
ReplyDeletePooja, very interesting post! Its engrossing to learn how cultures have an impact on our communication skills.
ReplyDelete@Saumya, I think you bring up an interesting point about how pure knowledge can hinder our interpretations. However I personally don't think that knowing about the background culture will truly hinder our own opinion. We as humans would be aware of the analysis that was derived from our own culture/background. If an external knowledge is then provided, it would only improve us fabricate an ameliorated analyzation. For example, I am pretty sure you have heard of the esteemed poem, "A Dream Deferred," by Langston Hughes.
What happens to a dream deferred?
Does it dry up
like a raisin in the sun?
Or fester like a sore--
And then run?
Does it stink like rotten meat?
Or crust and sugar over--
like a syrupy sweet?
Maybe it just sags
like a heavy load.
Or does it explode?
If you give the poem a quick glance, you would most probably interpret it as an metaphor for a lost dream, perhaps even relating it to Harlem Renaissance.... However, if you knew the cultural context of this poem, its truly about something else; Langston Hughes, in fact, wrote this poem as a response to the horrid movement of lynchings during the 19th century. The moment we learn that this poem regards lynching and not just a 'dream,' our interpretation is ameliorated as we can further see the meaning of the metaphors in the poem:"Does it dry up
like a raisin in the sun? Or fester like a sore..,"you see now we can interpret this actually as a beguiled reference the body left hanging after it has been lynched.
I suppose but at the same time I feel when knowing the context everyone is drawn to the same conclusion the same take away from the poem. Although we ultimately try to describe each poem's meaning with respect to the author. I find sometimes knowing the cultural context takes away from what one may draw from the poem personally. And we as may people may not be able to relate to poems, I feel poetry is one of those things that everyone should be able to relate to despite the context of it. ANd some times knowing a cultural background takes away from that.
ReplyDelete