Sonnet 18 by William Shakespeare and Ars Poetica by Archibald Macleish are both distinctly unique when it comes to style of poetry. One of the biggest differences between the two poems are the rhyme and meter patterns. Shakespeare wrote Sonnet 18 which is, as the title implies, a sonnet, so it has fourteen lines, with four quartets that rhyme (ABAB, CDCD, EFEF) and a rhyming couplet (GG) at the end. Shakespeare's Sonnet 18 also has a iambic pentameter, so ten syllables, per line. However, in Macleish's poem, while he does have consistent sets of couplets throughout Ars Poetica, he does not follow a specific rhyme or meter pattern. In Ars Poetica, some of the couplets feature a rhyme, while others simply do not rhyme. In these two poems, Shakespeare seems to care more for the format of his poetry, while Macleish does not view it as the most important part of his poem, simply bypassing it in order to get his message across. Shakespeare chooses to follow a much more rigid structure in order to communicate, while Macleish chose to create a free form poem.
Although both poems differ vastly in style, they do share similar elements. Both Ars Poetica and Sonnet 18 make frequent use of comparisons. Ars Poetica contains countless similes, and the very premise of Sonnet 18 is comparing (or contrasting) the subject of the poem to summer. Both poems are believe that poetry is timeless or eternal. Ars Poetica, especially through use of the second section where Macleish writes "as the moon climbs," describes poetry as being timeless, and continuing to be relevant even as the moon continues to "climb." In Sonnet 18, Shakespeare writes that his subject will continue to live on, even after death, through his poetry because his poetry is eternal. Both Macleish and Shakespeare see and believe in the power and beauty of poetry, and though their styles differ, both poets respect the art form.
Tuesday, August 23, 2016
Sunday, August 21, 2016
Ars Poetica by Archibald Macleish
This poem begins by stating all the things a poem should be, while the speaker lists things that are not possible for a poem. A poem cannot be "wordless" because a poem is a collection words, and this is also why a poem cannot be silent because that is against the very nature of a poem. Throughout the poem, the speaker continues to state things that a poem should be, but that it inherently cannot be or uses comparisons that contradict themselves. I think the speaker is expressing how it is fruitless to try and define or categorize a poem because, as the speaker says in the final line, a poem should just be, it should just exist as a work of art. The mood and the tone of the poem seem to be very reflective, as the speaker goes through all of the things a poem should be.
This poem relies heavily on the use of imagery. Almost every stanza in the poem creates an image in the reader's mind, and each varying image shows a different way a poem could be created or interpreted. No two poems are the same and poetry in general does not fit within a single definition, so all of the different similes in the poem create different images of what a poem could be. The speaker often repeats "a poem should be" throughout the poem, which adds to the message of the poem. No one person can define what all poems are, so in trying, and ultimately failing, to define what "a poem should be,"the speaker creates a clear message that the task is impossible. Rhyme is used in some of the stanzas in the poem. I think this again adds to the speaker's message that a a poem cannot be defined or categorized because he does not seem to be following a rhyming pattern, thus showing that not all poems have to be strictly confined within in a rhyme or meter scheme. The poem is separated into two line stanzas, then further separated into three main sections of the poem. The two line stanzas present the idea of what "a poem should be" in an over-simplified manner, expressing in an exaggerated way how one should not try to define a poem because all definitions will be over-simplified since poetry is so diverse. Most words used in the poem are used in a metaphorical sense because, since a poem is an inanimate object, it cannot be "motionless" or "palpable."
Overall, this poem challenges people who try to set guidelines what a poem can and cannot be, for a poem simply is a poem and is a work of art that cannot be confined to a single definition.
This poem relies heavily on the use of imagery. Almost every stanza in the poem creates an image in the reader's mind, and each varying image shows a different way a poem could be created or interpreted. No two poems are the same and poetry in general does not fit within a single definition, so all of the different similes in the poem create different images of what a poem could be. The speaker often repeats "a poem should be" throughout the poem, which adds to the message of the poem. No one person can define what all poems are, so in trying, and ultimately failing, to define what "a poem should be,"the speaker creates a clear message that the task is impossible. Rhyme is used in some of the stanzas in the poem. I think this again adds to the speaker's message that a a poem cannot be defined or categorized because he does not seem to be following a rhyming pattern, thus showing that not all poems have to be strictly confined within in a rhyme or meter scheme. The poem is separated into two line stanzas, then further separated into three main sections of the poem. The two line stanzas present the idea of what "a poem should be" in an over-simplified manner, expressing in an exaggerated way how one should not try to define a poem because all definitions will be over-simplified since poetry is so diverse. Most words used in the poem are used in a metaphorical sense because, since a poem is an inanimate object, it cannot be "motionless" or "palpable."
Overall, this poem challenges people who try to set guidelines what a poem can and cannot be, for a poem simply is a poem and is a work of art that cannot be confined to a single definition.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)