Howl Ginsberg Analysis

Art is defined as the production to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance. So to what extend do critics have the power to determine what category do artworks describe. The emotion that artist present to one another can have many different forms. Take the poem “Howl” by Allen Ginsberg this art work has been criticized by many in being a very obscene piece of art, this can be seen in the way the poet describes events. However, the way he builds his poem is brilliant. Ginsberg offers an artistic perspective to events that happen all around the world and some exoticism events. In return it allows the viewers of the art to connect more with the artist and interpret ate the main point with

He brings strong events into the readers mind to intrigue the reader. This example will demonstrate the power of his words, “who let themselves be fucked in the ass by saintly motorcyclist, and scream with joy,”(Reader 135). Some people may read this and say its not artwork. However, what needs to be grasped is that Ginsberg is trying to say that no matter what happens in life there will be up and downs but you need to enjoy life. In other words Ginsberg want the reader to take the scenario and learn something out of it. However, his emotions in the poem are very orientated around hardships in his life. Over all the poem “Howl” has many different emotions written. So then why would any one label any art work as a specific emotion/category? As a consequence labels can have horrible effects on readers by obstructing there mindset with a judgment of another

Multiple critics have give “Howl” a review but one critic that stood out was Richard Eberheart, he gets into more of a technical view of what the poem resembles. This small section of Eberhearts review shows the main points on his position on the poem: My first reaction was that it is based on destructive violence. It is profoundly Jewish in temper. It is Biblical in its repetitive grammatical build-up. It is a howl against everything in our mechanistic civilization which kills the spirit, assuming that the louder you shout the more likely you are to be heard. It lays bare the nerves of suffering and spiritual struggle. Its positive force and energy come from a redemptive quality of love, although it destructively catalogues evils of our time from physical deprivation to madness. (Eberheaert 1)
Eberhearts criticism is simply taking a look at the contexts of the poem and trying to pick out the main emotions. Eberhearts comments have a similarity to mine, we both take a look a the emotion side of the poem but I don't specify what emotions in order to let the reader connect in there own way. Comprehensively the output of reading “Howl” is that its a deep play of