If this was my poetry final, I would first of all notice the extreme opposites in the poem. The poem's use of polar opposites is what gives the poem its contrast, and something that makes the imagery used stand out to me. Another major observation is the way that the poem seems to move from a macro scale, where it is examining the landscape, to the micro scale, where it examines the actions of a single bug. To me, that shows how everything is important, and how everything massive has an affect on something minute. The use of separate sentences, such as 'up through time' and 'Splash!' puts emphasis on these sentences, and makes the emotion and description that those sentences have carry more weight.
The fact that the poem's title seems to be detached from the body of the poem, lends importance to the title. It seems to say that the Old Pond is the centre of attention, or maybe even the speaker, and that the poem is about what the pond experiences or notices in its surroundings.
I believe that the poem is speaking about what an effect a single object can have on its surroundings. The Old Pond seems to be something that has a hand in everything, it is what feeds the plants, what gives reflection to the mountains, and what gives the bug a habitat. The line, 'Up through time', tells how the tree's have experienced a lot of time, and that they change depending on how high up in the tree you go. The top of the tree is the youngest, and more likely to show the present, while the bottom of the tree is the oldest, and probably more likely to show what the past was like.
Response to Paglia's Commentary:
In the commentary on "Old Pond", Paglia analysis a variety of different things, and discovers things that I missed when reading the poem through by myself. She specifically notices the theme of the poem, and goes to great lengths to explain what she believes it is. She says that the theme is about nature being powerful and man being at the mercy of nature. On this, I disagree with what she says, because throughout the poem there is hardly any mention of man, and the only thing that I believe shows any relation to man is the grandness of the mountains. This shows how tiny man is, in the grand scheme of things, but I do not see what she means by men being at the mercy of nature. She also mentions how the overall shape of the poem is shaped to show diving, and moving from a very high point to a very low point. She says that the shape shows cliffs, trees and eventually diving.
The commentary was very well formatted and easy to follow, as it was organised chronologically, starting from the beginning of the poem, with the author and the context of writing being analysed as well. This gives some background on the poem as well, and some reason in to what was being written. What makes the commentary even more useful is how she sticks to only her observations, and then moves on to her interpretations. This helps in two ways: Firstly, it tells you what she notices in the poem, and secondly it tells us her personal opinion, something that helps with our own interpretation of the poem.
Response to Paglia's Commentary:
In the commentary on "Old Pond", Paglia analysis a variety of different things, and discovers things that I missed when reading the poem through by myself. She specifically notices the theme of the poem, and goes to great lengths to explain what she believes it is. She says that the theme is about nature being powerful and man being at the mercy of nature. On this, I disagree with what she says, because throughout the poem there is hardly any mention of man, and the only thing that I believe shows any relation to man is the grandness of the mountains. This shows how tiny man is, in the grand scheme of things, but I do not see what she means by men being at the mercy of nature. She also mentions how the overall shape of the poem is shaped to show diving, and moving from a very high point to a very low point. She says that the shape shows cliffs, trees and eventually diving.
The commentary was very well formatted and easy to follow, as it was organised chronologically, starting from the beginning of the poem, with the author and the context of writing being analysed as well. This gives some background on the poem as well, and some reason in to what was being written. What makes the commentary even more useful is how she sticks to only her observations, and then moves on to her interpretations. This helps in two ways: Firstly, it tells you what she notices in the poem, and secondly it tells us her personal opinion, something that helps with our own interpretation of the poem.
No comments:
Post a Comment