Read the poem and annotate: Note any prevalent patterns in structure, diction, imagery, syntax, metaphors. Try and see if the overall poem relates to some greater concept.
- In Gary Snyder's Old Pond, he uses a specific and unusual structure. Divided into two stanzas, both follow the pattern of Setting and Action. The isolation of the line 'Splash!' is also an interesting aspect of the poem, for it gives the poem a dramatic ending. A final ending.
- What does structure add to the meaning of this poem?
- What is the significance of the isolation of the lines "up through time" and "dives in the water"?
- The setting uses very descriptive diction, for each noun is always preceded by an adjective. The images depicted by such diction as "blue mountain" and "white snow" are very calming. The images he presents are very natural and peaceful, as are the descriptions of the following actions.
- What does the use of descriptive diction and peaceful imagery contribute to the poem?
- The use of alliteration: "hemlock half" and "raged rocky" add to the flow of his descriptions, making it sound very sing-songy. This related to the fact that he is describing a bird's call, relating content to sound and rhythm.
- Is rhythm an important aspect in this poem?
- Snyder uses many short sentences in this poem, with simplistic descriptions and observations. The short, choppy syntax he uses creates a very structured tone. By structured tone, I mean that the reader follows every action as it is occurring, as if they are watching it themselves. The use of short sentences gives this feel for it is describing them as they occur, with no prevalent analysis of his own.
- Why does Snyder chose to create this effect in his poem?
I would then write a conclusion summarizing all the points mentioned in my commentary regarding literary techniques, and try to come to an overall conclusion as to the reason behind the use of these techniques. I would then state this conclusion. Historical background of the author would be helpful here - but since we don't know anything about the author my conclusions will have to be based upon assumption.
Camille Paglia's poem went into an extensive analysis on the poem, one which I would have never been able to conjure up upon first glance of the poem. Gary Snyder's poem is quite simplistic, hence I would not assume such a deep meaning in his words. At some points I feel that Pagalia's analysis went a bit too far in-depth, for I feel that some of her critiques, although extremely intelligent, were very far fetched. It made me wonder why a poetry in it's simplest form cannot just be simple, and has to have some deeper meaning. I like that she organized according to the organization of the poem itself. Being quite short, one would assume that structure plays an important role. Therefore, the organization of a commentary in correspondence to it's structure was very smart and easy to follow. Her references to Snyder's life provide great insight regarding his poem, comparing the raw curiosity regarding nature to his curiosity as a young boy. I really enjoyed reading her analysis on the first two lines of the poem, for it provided great insight. The observations she made are those that most would take for granted. Both creative and logical, Paglia's observations describe the process of perception that Snyder portrays in his first two lines. Most would not realize the sheer impact that nature's beauty had on him; however, Paglia gives an intelligent break down of the meaning behind his words. I thought her analysis to be very in-depth, giving me clarification on the depth of such a simplistic poem. I would have never analyzes Snyder's simple and fun lines with such logic and reason the Paglia did, and for that I found her analysis very refreshing.
Camille Paglia's poem went into an extensive analysis on the poem, one which I would have never been able to conjure up upon first glance of the poem. Gary Snyder's poem is quite simplistic, hence I would not assume such a deep meaning in his words. At some points I feel that Pagalia's analysis went a bit too far in-depth, for I feel that some of her critiques, although extremely intelligent, were very far fetched. It made me wonder why a poetry in it's simplest form cannot just be simple, and has to have some deeper meaning. I like that she organized according to the organization of the poem itself. Being quite short, one would assume that structure plays an important role. Therefore, the organization of a commentary in correspondence to it's structure was very smart and easy to follow. Her references to Snyder's life provide great insight regarding his poem, comparing the raw curiosity regarding nature to his curiosity as a young boy. I really enjoyed reading her analysis on the first two lines of the poem, for it provided great insight. The observations she made are those that most would take for granted. Both creative and logical, Paglia's observations describe the process of perception that Snyder portrays in his first two lines. Most would not realize the sheer impact that nature's beauty had on him; however, Paglia gives an intelligent break down of the meaning behind his words. I thought her analysis to be very in-depth, giving me clarification on the depth of such a simplistic poem. I would have never analyzes Snyder's simple and fun lines with such logic and reason the Paglia did, and for that I found her analysis very refreshing.
No comments:
Post a Comment