Many fundamental modern poets, both past and present, have used their work to create a revolution in the world of poetry. The modernist era has created a new standard for the general definition of the poem, changing traditional form and meaning. Through specific focus on two works by modernist and imagist poet William Carlos Williams, “This is Just to Say” and “The Red Wheelbarrow”, one observes a trend modernist poetry seems to follow which is also the most important one. Arguably, modernism’s greatest concern is changing the traditional views of the subject matter of poetry. The extraordinary nature of poetry does not necessitate the mainstream structure and content it has known for centuries, but rather whatever structure and content that the respective poet decides will properly convey the desired message. It is the modernist poet’s intent to shift the view of what poetry should be about and to broaden the horizons of what makes a poem, a poem. The examination of William Carlos Williams’ aforementioned poems will prove, through the content and form, that for a work to be considered a poem, it does not require extraordinary subject matter and profound words to portray a meaning.
Many have debated the question of whether William Carlos Williams’ 1934 imagist poem “This is Just to Say” can in fact be considered a poem. The commonplace idea and subject matter resembling a note left on a kitchen counter acts as proof for the change poetry has seen after the modernist era. William Carlos Williams’ intent in writing a poem as simple as this is to not only leave the reader with a wide range of possible meanings to interpret, but also to demonstrate imagism, a fundamental style of poetry with a strong link to modernism. Imagism is one...
... middle of paper ...
...rse and simple language is used. “This is Just to Say” employs simple language that is comprehensible to the common reader, leaving the reader to focus on decoding the meaning within the poem. Unlike traditional poetry, modern poetry prefers let the reader interpret and extract meaning on their own terms. By using simple ideas and images, modern poets allow their readers to create their own meaning on the basis of the poet’s ambiguity.
All things considered, poetry has seen great advances in the general idea of what makes a poem a poem. This being said, the change in form and overall arrangement of the poem has brought new life to the field of poetry now that everyday readers can comprehend the message and offer up their own conclusions. Modern poetry will prove in the years to come that poetry is not a dying art, but one guaranteed to flourish in a brand new way.
Poetry’s role is evaluated according to what extent it mirrors, shapes and is reshaped by historical events. In the mid-19th century, some critics viewed poetry as “an expression of the poet’s personality, a manifestation of the poet’s intuition and of the social and historical context which shaped him” ( Preminger, Warnke, Hardison 511). Analysis of the historical, social, political and cultural events at a certain time helps the reader fully grasp a given work. The historical approach is necessary in order for given allusions to be situated in their social, political and cultural background. In order to escape intentional fallacy, a poet should relate his work to universal
Revolution: Three Major stepping stones towards the Revolution. Why are those major aspects in the development from separate British colonies towards an American Perspective?
In William Carlos Williams’ poem, “The Red Wheelbarrow,” he artistically paints a picture using words to depict a simple object that to some may appear mundane. Through his illustration the red wheelbarrow, which might otherwise be overlooked, becomes the focal point of his poem and the image he is creating for the reader. He paints the illusion through his writing style, use of color and word choices to remind the reader of the importance of a simple object, the wheelbarrow.
According to Webster’s Online Dictionary, revolution is “a sudden, radical or complete change.” During the early settlement of the British colonies, settlers became so culturally different from those in Great Britain that they already seemed to be their own country. This is what John Adams meant in saying, “What do we mean by the Revolution? The war? That was no part of the Revolution; it was only an effect and consequence of it. The Revolution was in the minds of the people… years before a drop of blood was shed at Lexington.” In fact, the revolution began years before the colonists began to feel mistreated by the British. As they arrived in the new colonies, they noticed many major differences in the society and culture of this new place. As time went on, they learned about the colonies and the society there, and eventually, they evolved their cultures and lifestyles to comply with this new society. The primary changes the colonists the colonists made were in their economic system, their lifestyle, and their freedoms. In England, the economic system was primarily industrious, while in it was agriculture. In addition, the colonists, especially those in the south, relied very heavily on slave labor for agricultural purposes. In Great Britain, however, slavery did exist, but it was not relied upon for a functional society. The final change the settlers made in the New World was religion. In Great Britain, the king forced everyone to join the Church of England and leave the Roman Catholic Church. When in the colonies, settlers could go back to whatever religion they desired, so colonial religion was extremely diverse. Therefore, three main changes or “Revolutions”
During the election of 1800, Thomas Jefferson succeeded in defeating the incumbent, John Adams, and assumed the presidency. In terms of elections though, the election of 1800 itself was a fascinating election in that it a heavily-contested election and was effectively the first time political parties ran smear campaigns against each other during an election. The Republican Party attacked the Federalists for being anti-liberty and monarchist and tried to persuade the public that the Federalists were abusing their power through acts such as the Alien & Sedition Acts and the suppression of the Whiskey Rebellion (Tindall and Shi 315). The Federalists, on the other hand, attacked Jefferson for his atheism and support of the French Revolution and warned that his election would result in chaos (316). By the end of the presidential election, neither Adams nor Jefferson emerged with his reputation completely intact. Still, rather than an election between Adams and Jefferson, the election of 1800 ultimately boiled down to a deadlock between Jefferson and his vice presidential candidate, Aaron Burr, who each held seventy-three electoral votes, resulting in the election was sent to the House of Representatives. In the end, the deadlock was resolved only by Alexander Hamilton, whose immense hate for Burr allowed Jefferson to claim the presidency. However, the election of 1800 was more than just a simple presidential election. The election of 1800 was the first peaceful transfer of power from the incumbent party to the opposition and represented a new step in politics, as well as a new direction in foreign policy that would emerge from Jefferson’s policies, and to this extent, the election of 1800 was a revolution.
During the late eighteenth century the colonies were in a fight for independence; a fight for a revolution from a government that had oppressed them, taxed them, and basically enslaved them. So why did the new government they were struggling to construct so closely resemble the government they detested to be under? Thirteen colonies all fighting against one common foe, however governing themselves would cause many obstacles within. The new government was being pieced together from the only political system they have even been a part of, a monarchy. As a result there was a severance between the people on how the government was to be run. Some felt it was too democratic while others opposed claiming it was not enough. Colonists really didn't have a choice in the matter. It was going to be a trial and error situation until they could agree how to govern the new world. Even with the Articles of Confederation established, many things were still unethical and people felt that the new government was no better then the government they condemned. In time the fight for independence would change many things however the "Revolution" of the new government was a slow process. Some aspects of Parliament remained leaving speculation to whether or not this was a revolution at all.
“The story of post-revolutionary America,” writes Rosemarie Zagarri, “is the story of how American women and men sought to define – and ultimately to limit and restrict – the expansive ideals they had so successfully deployed against Britain.” In this excerpt from Revolutionary Backlash, Zagarri depicts the extreme radicalism of the American Revolution, while also suggesting that there were some constraints to its extremism. Unlike the normal way of life in European government and society, Americans desired a nation in which the inherent rights and freedoms of individuals were recognized and respected. While these rights and freedoms were ultimately achieved, many groups of people were still left out. Women of all kinds, people of color, and men of poverty were often unable to enjoy and appreciate America’s newfound rights and freedoms. Despite these limits and restrictions, however, the American Revolution was still extremely radical in the sense that it was able to surpass traditional, European political and social ideology.
In today’s modern view, poetry has become more than just paragraphs that rhyme at the end of each sentence. If the reader has an open mind and the ability to read in between the lines, they discover more than they have bargained for. Some poems might have stories of suffering or abuse, while others contain happy times and great joy. Regardless of what the poems contains, all poems display an expression. That very moment when the writer begins his mental journey with that pen and paper is where all feelings are let out. As poetry is continues to be written, the reader begins to see patterns within each poem. On the other hand, poems have nothing at all in common with one another. A good example of this is in two poems by a famous writer by the name of Langston Hughes. A well-known writer that still gets credit today for pomes like “ Theme for English B” and “Let American be American Again.”
“Billy Collins' “Introduction to Poetry” isn’t an ars poetica poem about writing poetry, but about reading poetry. The speaker is a teacher who tells his students that they should experience a poem, rather than dissect it. The f...
One of the most well known historic characteristics of poetry is that of rhyme, a technique that Alexander rejects. In American Sublime, every poem is written in free verse. Although some poems may contain an occasional slant rhyme, there is no fixed rhyme scheme in Alexander’s works. Along with her lack of rhyme, there is a no consistency in the structure of Elizabeth Alexander’s poetry. This is best demonstrated in the “Amistad” section of American Sublime. Each of the poems in this part tell a piece of the story of the Amistad ship and the slave revolt. However, only a few of these poems share similar structures. While some poems contain seven stanzas, others a written in haikus, and while others do not contain stanza breaks, making the poem one long stanza. By doing this, Elizabeth Alexander keeps herself from having a signature structure for her poems. Instead, by neglecting to use a specific style, Alexander creates a stark distinction between herself and other
I do not know how without being culpably particular I can give my Reader a more exact notion of the style in which I wished these poems to be written, than by informing him that I have at all times endeavored to look steadily at my subject; consequently, I hope that there is in these Poems little falsehood of description, and my ideas are expressed in language fitted to their respective importance. Something I must have gained by this practice, as it is friendly to one property of all good poetry, namely, good sense; but it has necessarily cut me off from a large portion of phrases and figures of speech which from father to son have long been regarded as the common inheritance of Poets.
The world is changing and evolving at an astounding rate. Within the last one hundred years, the Western community has seen advances in technology and medicine that has improved the lifestyles and longevity of almost every individual. Within the last two hundred years, we have seen two World Wars, and countless disputes over false borders created by colonialists, slavery, and every horrid form of human suffering imaginable! Human lifestyles and cultures are changing every minute. While our grandparents and ancestors were growing-up, do you think that they ever imagined the world we live in today? What is to come is almost inconceivable to us now. In this world, the only thing we can be sure of is that everything will change. With all of these transformations happening, it is a wonder that a great poet may write words over one hundred years ago, that are still relevant in today’s modern world. It is also remarkable that their written words can tell us more about our present, than they did about our past. Is it just an illusion that our world is evolving, or do these great poets have the power to see into the future? In this brief essay, I will investigate the immortal characteristics of poetry written between 1794 and 1919. And, I will show that these classical poems can actually hold more relevance today, than they did in the year they were written. Along the way, we will pay close attention to the style of the poetry, and the strength of words and symbols used to intensify the poets’ revelations.
Lawrence and Langston both have been compared to many notable poets. In the poems “Piano” by D. H. Lawrence and “The Weary Blues” by Langston Hughes both poets use speaker, tone and form as part of their strategy in composing their poems, while they have similarities they also have vast differences. They share likenesses in their poetry, however, when it comes to the form of these two poems and the manner in which they use words; the importance of word usage is different. These poets are innovative and celebrated, who try to unlock sound, song, rhythm and emotions through their poems. The poets poems “Piano” and “The Weary Blues” both use music as a theme, the use of speaker, tone and form are used to portray two different tales. Both Lawrence and Hughes gained their writing influences from their travels. This is evident through their mental conflict within these poems and how they passionately express themselves through language. Both poems use tone effectively to sets up the mood for the reader.
Elizabeth Bishop’s “The Fish” and “This is Just to Say” are both imagist poems, which have an underlying Christian theme. In Christian religion, the fish is considered a symbol of Jesus Christ and in “This is Just to Say” reminds of the story of Eve eating the forbidden fruit. ...
Historians have named the period between 1750 and 1914, as the era of a modern revolution and it is those revolutions that were witnessed during that period that have continued to shape today’s world. The modern revolution was made up of several developments that interacted with one another to yield better living conditions amongst human beings. Until the 19th century, the main source of energy used was biomass, combustion of heat to obtain heat and use of either animal or human muscle power. However, with the Big Era Seven, coal and steam power were adopted as the major sources of energy. By the early periods of the 19th century, steam power had enabled human beings to increase the amount of energy produced from burning coal and this yielded increased amount of energy that could now be used for purposes of industrialization. By 1914, fossil fuel was in use as well as natural gas.