|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon May 26, 2008 8:13 pm
I want to go through a poem slowly and carefully with an audience responding.
The idea is to get you guys to be more confident about writing thoughtful opinions and asking good questions.
What I ask, for this project to work, is that you keep comments and questions short. If I let you write 10000 words, of course you'll have something sensible to say in that whole mishmash.
What I want is for you to 1) get every word to count 2) say what you want to say so that you get others who have responded involved in the convo 3) be ready to be wrong but still be eloquent, be ready to be right and still be gracious.
Post below if you're interested, and we'll start the club as soon as I have a few signees and picked a text.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 27, 2008 1:27 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2008 11:49 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 3:13 pm
Ok. Let's start reading. Remember, the goal of this isn't to be "right" about the text, the idea is to create conversation and get everyone involved. So if you know exactly what the poem below means, try to get others to articulate thoughts you think are more on track without bullying them.
And yes, this is a complicated but valuable skill. It's what the best teachers I've had can do. Here's the text:
Had I not This, or This, I said,
Appealing to Myself,
In moment of prosperity -
Inadequate - were Life -
"Thou hast not Me, nor Me" - it said,
In Moment of Reverse -
"And yet Thou art industrious -
No need - hadst Thou - of us?"
My need - was all I had - I said -
The need did not reduce -
Because the food - exterminate -
The hunger - does not cease -
But diligence - is sharper -
Proportioned to the Chance -
To feed upon the Retrograde -
Enfeebles - the Advance -
(Dickinson)
If there are words you don't know, ask or look them up (www.thefreedictionary.com is excellent).
To begin: just roughly speaking, what's this poem about, and why is it relevant to any of us?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 5:13 pm
I'd have to say that the poem listed is about cherishing what one owns. I can honestly say that I've never done this before, so if I'm waaayy out in left field somewhere... just no laughing. It sounds like someone who has plenty thinking of where they'd be if the things around them weren't there, and then feeling for those who have less than themselves.
And then finally understanding that they don't need the lustrous items surrounding them to be happy, but understanding that dignity and love is all they need.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2008 9:54 pm
jjnb11 I'd have to say that the poem listed is about cherishing what one owns. I can honestly say that I've never done this before, so if I'm waaayy out in left field somewhere... just no laughing. It sounds like someone who has plenty thinking of where they'd be if the things around them weren't there, and then feeling for those who have less than themselves. And then finally understanding that they don't need the lustrous items surrounding them to be happy, but understanding that dignity and love is all they need. I'm staying quiet because I want to see someone refine your answer politely. I think you've got a good grasp on the poem, this is a great start.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 3:09 pm
Here's my interpretation... I think it's about someone who, like many of us, is wondering whether they really need this material thing, but after much pondering, they realize it's superfluous, and that the nontangible items, like love and diligence, are really what helps us get through the day.
I'm probably way out in left-field as well... I was never good at poetry sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 5:08 pm
Shattered_Life Here's my interpretation... I think it's about someone who, like many of us, is wondering whether they really need this material thing, but after much pondering, they realize it's superfluous, and that the nontangible items, like love and diligence, are really what helps us get through the day. I'm probably way out in left-field as well... I was never good at poetry sweatdrop You and jj are doing great. The reason why you're both doing great is that you can ask questions of your interpretation and force answers from the text. Also - because you're staying close to the text, if you offered these interpretations in a workshop, people would feel like you had advanced the conversation in such a way that they'd be allowed to chime in too. To advance both of your thoughts via the poem: Are the objects the speaker of the poem is demanding necessarily material? Is she after money? Or is there no way to tell?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 10:21 am
Well, I guess the item doesn't necessarily have to be tangible. I don't think we know exactly what these objects are except that they possess the quality of something we deem necessary to survival when that isn't the case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 2:25 am
Shattered_Life Well, I guess the item doesn't necessarily have to be tangible. I don't think we know exactly what these objects are except that they possess the quality of something we deem necessary to survival when that isn't the case. The curious thing about the item is the movement from "This, or This" (1st stanza) to "us" (2nd stanza). It's like "either/or" changed to "and." What could that mean? One thing it could mean is that the speaker is shifting around in her mind what is necessary. At first, it didn't seem like much was necessary, one or the other thing will do. Now it's like both are necessary, esp. given how she responds in the 3rd stanza: "The need did not reduce." Contrast this line of reasoning with the 23rd Psalm for more.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 2:31 pm
I thought the "This, or This" meant to emphasize how there were more than one object, but neither of them served the purpose the narrator had in mind for them. Because they proved fruitless, they were unimportant and therefore given the names "This" as opposed to the actual name of the object.
What does the 23rd Psalm say?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:32 am
Shattered_Life I thought the "This, or This" meant to emphasize how there were more than one object, but neither of them served the purpose the narrator had in mind for them. Because they proved fruitless, they were unimportant and therefore given the names "This" as opposed to the actual name of the object. What does the 23rd Psalm say? That's a solid reading - there's definitely some lack of purposeless on the narrator's part early on in the poem. The only thing I'd add is that it isn't clear to me that the things are ever proved fruitless/useless: the whole poem is kinda saying "Hey, just because I didn't get and was productive doesn't mean I'm not needy." (I could quite obviously be wrong about this last idea, it depends on how closely and well one reads the last 2 stanzas). Psalm 23 - note what "wants" are here (they seem to be quite literally "needs"), and whether or not they are actually taken care of not: The LORD is my shepherd, I shall not want. He makes me lie down in green pastures, he leads me beside quiet waters, he restores my soul. He guides me in paths of righteousness for his name's sake. Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me; your rod and your staff, they comfort me. You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies. You anoint my head with oil; my cup overflows. Surely goodness and love will follow me all the days of my life, and I will dwell in the house of the LORD forever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 12:36 pm
Oooooo yeah I can definitely see a relationship between the psalm and the poem. I would have never thought of that. sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
