Although the two poems by Robert Bridges and Anne Stevenson revolve around Eros, the god of love, both possess a significantly different view of the topic. Based upon first observation, mutual uses of diction and imagery appear noticeable, emphasizing the overwhelming and insightful background of the Greek god; however, despite focusing solely on equal topics, the representations of both are clearly dissimilar in terms of expressing both the mood and atmosphere of the theme. Robert Bridges’ representation of Eros is just one example of how one possesses an individual of the Greek god. Bridges’ poem contains a string of words can fall under a more optimistic light, such as the uses of “idol”, “lovely”, “proud”, “joy”, and a plethora of similar words. These strings of words …show more content…
all combine and form a lighter, more positive mood, setting a content tone throughout the poem.
Bridges’ refers the Greek god as having “immense” power, highlighting his already high status and admiration given by others; however, the poem also addresses the fear pupils have when looking up to Eros, expressing the vast respect held towards him. The diction in Bridges’ poem appears more formal and strictly esteemed, making it seem as if the reader recognizes Eros’ high status. Anne Stevenson’s depiction of Eros completely differs from Bridges’ viewpoint; Bridges’ displays the Greek god under a more positive, lighter spotlight; Stevenson relies on pessimism to get her insight across to the reader. Contrary to the first poem, this one uses words such as “broken”, “slaves”, “battered”, and “bruised” – crafting a tired, distressed visual of the Greek god who’s fed up with the demands of individuals. Being of a higher order, it’s expected that civilians would possess a plethora of needs, eventually “break[ing]” Eros, stirring pity around him. Stevenson’s illustrates the unfortunate aftermath of being held up in such a high position, which holds it’s downfalls as well. The
diction used in this poem opposes in comparison to the first poem, as this one appears more informal, causing the reader to gradually pity the position of Eros, feeling almost apologetic for him. Despite opposing of one another, the main priority and goal of both author’s is to alter the perspective of the reader. By creating specific atmosphere and mood throughout the poems, the reader is able to gather newfound viewpoints, observing and understanding both sides individually.
Stevenson and Bridges both begin Eros with a question, indicating the speakers’ desires to reach the god of love. But, the speaker in Bridges’s poem uses an apostrophe in his question, “Why hast thou nothing in thy face?” The question creates a distance between the god and the speaker, and reveals the mysterious nature of Eros. Bridges’ Eros is expressionless and inscrutable. In contrast, Stevenson’s speaker asks “for love” and is surprised by who shows up. She asks, “But help me, who arrives?” This question expresses her surprise and disappointment that Eros is ugly...
The Greek god of love, Eros, is seen in varying perspectives. To some, he is a powerful force that takes a leadership role in life. He is mighty and unwavering. To others, he is a servant of the people. One such concept of servitude is portrayed in the poem “Eros,” written by Anne Stevenson. Through the use of rhyme, alliteration, and other literary devices, Stevenson produces the reader with a clear image of a beaten god. Because of this, “Eros” can easily be approached with the formal critical strategy.
The use of formal language is more associated with dignity and respectfulness, which Bridges’ was trying to aim for in his poem. This makes the Eros in Bridges’ poem more disconnected from reality. Using modern language makes Eros seem more “human-like”, because of the hits he has taken from human lust and is seen as more vulnerable. The dialogue (or lack thereof) causes a difference in how Eros is seen. The rhyme schemes helped convey different feelings within the two poems. Bridges’ has a more formal and traditional rhyme scheme while Stevenson has a disjoint simple 4-line scheme. Bridges’ poem, Eros is simply admired from far away, while Stevenson’s poem has the speaker and Eros actually engage in dialogue. Both are similar however, in that they convey a message of not understanding love. In Bridges’ poem the speaker cannot fully understand love because he cannot see Eros’ face, and in Stevenson’s poem the speaker, as well as others cannot understand love, because they deceive themselves into what they think actual love
Of all the heroic traits such as honor and glory, given to the reader through Homer’s epic poems loyalty seems to be the strongest, as with Patroclus in the Iliad, so it is with Penelope, Telemachus, and Eumaeus in the Odyssey. Through the use of these characters loyalty is demonstrated to Odysseus, the hero if the poem. Their undying loyalty and devotion to the warring hero gives perfect examples of how humans should act to those they claim to be faithful too.
In Ancient Greece, the role of rhapsodes was the delivery of epic poems - long, narrative poems concerning heroic deeds and events significant to a culture or nation - to the population in oral tradition. The rhapsode’s recitation went beyond storytelling. Principally, they were performers whose delivery and accuracy were key components of their profession. One aid in the accuracy of a performance was the format of the poetry itself. Homer’s epic work, The Odyssey, is written in dactylic hexameter - a metrical pattern in which a line is broken into six feet (Struck). Using this format, rhapsodes often used epithets - words or phrases attributed to a person or thing to describe an actual or attributed quality - as convenient devices in meeting the metric pattern. Simultaneously, the syllabic format of epithets in dactylic hexameter - one long syllable followed by two short syllables - allowed rhapsodes to easily improvise when exact recollection failed (Struck). When used in repetition, epithets emphasized especially relevant qualities in characters or things. Epithets were an integral part of the Odyssey in relation to the oral
Poetry is often meant to be smooth, flowing, pleasing to the ear and the mind. To achieve this effect, many poets use different poetic techniques to help convey the meanings of their poetry. In the sonnet, 'Yet Do I Marvel' written by Countee Cullen, many different features of poetry is used. In this essay, I will discuss the relationship between the meanings and the theme Cullen tries to convey in his sonnet and the techniques of metaphors, both religious and non-religious, allusions to Greek mythology, different rhyme schemes and repetition that he uses.
While Lord Byron's poem enhances the beauty of love, Keats' does the opposite by showing the detriments of love. In “She Walks in Beauty,” the speaker asides about a beautiful angel with “a heart whose love is innocent” (3, 6). The first two lines in the first stanza portray a defining image:
Love can mean different things according to circumstances, the objects of affection, and the person experiencing the feeling. Correspondingly, many things can characterize love as well. Yet, one of the most common 'syndromes' is admiration, in other words, awe. Two poets George Gordon and Percy Bysshe Shelly describe such reverence in their poems "She Walks in Beauty" and "To a Skylark". In both of these poems the characters experience this felling. One experiences it towards a woman, another, towards a skylark. Even though the relationships between the characters and the objects of their affections are fundamentally different, the admiration that they feel is somewhat similar.
The average American is separated from the Greek epic. Although the lowest man is as capable of tragic struggle and feeling as any Greek hero, he is not capable of comprehending the scale and scope of the epic in his own life. We have no way of grasping the gargantuan undertaking of an epic. The epic poem is nonexistent in modern literature, and the number who read epic poems is decreasing rapidly as well. We may read excerpts or quotes about famous works, and from those remarks be able to afford remarks of our own, but this is a form of Cliffs Notes to cultural fluency. The fact that these facile and passing acquaintances serve as the bulk of our culture's understanding reveals the imperfect nature of what we assume we know. We feel qualified to claim a connection with the Greeks, through no proper understanding of our own, but rather through an opinion about an interpretation of a translation.
In Bridges’ poem, he discusses both love, and its interactions with humanity, from the perspective of a person deep in introspective contemplation. For example, Bridges writes, “What is thy thought? I dream thou knowest it is nought” (19-20). The fact his poem is written as a monologue allows Bridges to ask rhetorical questions to Eros, and then answer them, in order to put further emphasis on the general message of the poem. On the other hand, Stevenson comments on love by directly addressing its personified form. In the quotation, “‘Madam’, cries Eros, ‘Know the brute you see is what long overuse has made of me’” (9-12), Stevenson depicts Eros stating how offenses against love have tarnished its beauty. This dialogue format allows Eros to stand trial and give a formal statement against the accusations made by Stevenson in the first stanza. Stevenson addresses Eros in the quotation, “‘Can this be you, with boxer lips and patchy wings askew?’” (6-8). Here, Stevenson accuses personified form of love of being a broken image of its former self. While Bridges and Stevenson differ in the way they converse with Eros, the two poems also diverge in the tone with which the poets address the
In "Eros" by Robert Bridges and Anne Stevenson show a different prospective of the Greek mythology god of love. Robert Bridges poem shows an admiration and idolization for Eros. Unfortunately, Anne Stevenson poem shows how Eros is being degraded by the human. Even though both poems are talking about Eros the ideas are drastically different, but the tone is similar, however, both use similar and different techniques to upbringing their poems.
Many years ago in ancient Greece, Plato initiated a debate about the usefulness of literature by declaring that poetry had no place in the ideal society, mainly because it was full of lies and because it evoked undesirable emotions. His pupil Aristotle, however, took the opposing side of this dispute and argued that literature was, in fact, useful. Aristotle agreed with Plato that literature induces undesirable emotions, but he stated that it only does so in an attempt to purge us of these harmful sentiments, a process which he termed “catharsis”. The events in Homer’s Iliad, while used by both Plato and Aristotle to defend their theories about literature, lend themselves to the defense of Aristotle’s ideas more so than Plato’s. Specifically, the juxtaposition of Achilleus’s intense lamentation with the portrayal of Hephaistos’s shield, the description of Hektor’s increasing pride, and the account of Patroklos’s impulsive nature in battle all perfectly exemplify Aristotle’s idea of catharsis and demonstrate the true worth of literature.
From the works of William Shakespeare and Edmund Spenser it is clear that some similarities are apparent, however the two poets encompass different writing styles, as well as different topics that relate to each other in their own unique ways. In Shakespeare’s “Sonnet 18” and Spenser’s “Sonnet 75”, both poets speak of love in terms of feelings and actions by using different expressive views, allowing the similar topics to contain clear distinctions. Although Edmund Spenser’s “Sonnet 75” and William Shakespeare’s “Sonnet 18” relate in the sense that love is genuine and everlasting, Spenser suggests love more optimistically, whereas Shakespeare focuses on expressing the beauty and stability of love.
In “Astrophil and Stella” sonnet one by Sir Philip Sydney is about the speaker’s love towards Stella. While “Jordan (1)” by George Herbert is about the speaker’s love towards the divine (God). Both of these sonnets are similar as both poems are wanting to convey their love through formal features. However, I will be arguing in this essay that the formal features are not expressing the speaker 's love but is questioning their love. Furthermore, love is challenged through the formal features of imagery, diction, and symbolism. Moreover, this essay will have ideas integrated from others essays to support my argument. Nonetheless, after the speaker in “Jordan (1)” questions his love through formal features he can convey his love. While the speaker
Myths are explored and alluded to in all kinds of art forms. The tales of greek gods and heroes being echoed down through literature and art throughout the ages. These myths are even portrayed in poetry, as seen in Natasha Trethewey’s “Myth” and W. H. Auden’s “Musèe des Beaux Arts.” “Myth” makes a quick allusion to Erebus, part of the underworld in Greek mythology, while Auden’s poem references the story of Icarus, the boy who flew too close to the sun. The use of myths in both poems help to strengthen the message that the poem is giving, one by using it as a metaphor, while the other compares it to the concept that incidents do not affect everybody the same way.