Things Fall Apart

Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart initially seemed to be a drastic transition from the poetic works of Dickinson and Susan Howe’s novel. Achebe’s presentation of Okonkwo’s story is in a much more straightforward manner. There less of this need to dig through the meanings to uncover the message of the underlying text. Achebe does, however, present the details of his story very poetically. He paints these vivid pictures of the African culture and accompanies them with various poetic versus and traditional chants and songs. I look forward to reading the remaining two parts to see where Achebe takes us in Okonkwo’s journey of self-discovery and whether or not he sticks to his traditional beliefs or works to adapt the beliefs in the surrounding culture.

Things Fall Apart

I read 'Things Fall Apart" in my high school critical literature class. I was actually glad that this class requires me to read it again because I'd like to see how the text is analyzed. The approach of this class is very different from my high school class. From my experience in this course, I feel that we won't analyze 'Things Fall Apart' simply for the symbols or motifs or themes, but for its importance within itself and within literature.

Reading this book again at an older age is very different. I understand the system of the tribes and family since I have learned about similar non-Western lifestyles. I am going into this with a more open mind. I am taking Okonkwo as a protagonist and trying not to shut down if the situations involving him frustrate me. Also, I am particularily interested in the relationship between Okonkwo and Ezinma because father-daughter relationships are coming up in much of what I'm currently studying.

Things Fall Apart

I liked reading Things Fall Apart. The African culture they describe is unlike anything I have ever witnessed or experienced before. Their traditions and lifestyles are so different. Like previous readings, there is a heavy sense of religion and hierarchy. It is interesting to me, however, that religious figures have such an impact in their lives, yet they resort to much violence and drug use. Power within the hierarchy here, is developed by hard work, age, and strength. Also, I noticed that although this is a novel which means most of its meaning is straight-forward, there is still a presence of poetry within the culture which allows personal perspective and inferences to be made.

Things Fall Apart

I really enjoyed this reading. It is a nice change of pace from the poetry we have been focusing on for the past two weeks. I also liked this story because it is much easier to read. I don't have to sit and re-read every paragraph or try to decipher what each line is saying in order to understand it. Learning about the African culture is also very interesting and helps to keep me engaged in the story. It will be fun to move on from American and European literature to African literature. This semester I am in a class about Native American history and I can see a lot of ties between Native Americans and African tribes. For example, in both societies stories play an important role. That was one of the things in the story I enjoyed the most. It is fun to read the stories and see the connections to real life as well as find their meanings and lessons. I'm looking forward to reading the rest of the book.

Things Fall Apart

I was pleasantly surprised after reading part one of 'Things Fall Apart'. I figured since the last few weeks of class we have focused on poetry, that would we be delving deeper into the use of poetry in a scholarly way. This book is much different from "My Emily Dickinson'. Part one was a simple story that told of a strong man living in a secluded village. I enjoyed how the text was so much easy to read. Not only that, but the story comes at face value and does not take much deciphering to understand. This is a nice break from looking at many possible meanings for a individual text. I think that moving on to this text will help give a good comparison between all the different types of literature that exist.

Things Fall Apart

I read this book in high school, but at the time I had not read Heart of Darkness, so I am excited to reread this book now that I am familiar with Conrad's novelette. It is very clear that Achebe wants to undermine Conrad's depictions of African culture. In the first few pages Achebe presents the people as culturally sophisticated, intelligent, and wise. This is a far cry from Conrad's descriptions of savage cannibals running naked through the jungle. Although he does establish them as possessing culture, African culture is very clearly different, but no less sophisticated, as European culture. This gives the novel more impact, as it does not simply capitulate to European notions of what is and what is not culture.

Things Fall Apart

I am very excited to be starting a piece that is much less confusing than the last few pieces we have been working on during class. I enjoy this book because I am learning about different cultures, especially cultures that I am not in the least bit familiar with. The changing of cultures is also thing that I find very intriguing. To me it is interesting to see many differences of several cultures. As the main character is stuck whether or not to change or stick with what the traditions are, I am curious to see what the outcome will be.

Things Fall Apart

Part one of "Things Fall Apart" was good. I like it when the wives would tell their children stories because they were all very symbolic and of course there was a lesson to be learned in each story. I especially liked the one about the tortoise and the birds. It's always interesting to read a story that takes place in a totally different type of culture and way of living. I don't think I've ever really read a piece of literature that focuses on a specific tribe, or clan. Their concept of religion is really intriguing. It never fails to amaze me how differently some cultures view the world.

Things fall apart

This weeks reading was very different from what we have been reading in the past weeks. It was a nice change of pace to read a book that seemed more comfortable to me. It was a little difficult for me to connect with this book like I normally tend to do with books because the cultural differences were so great however I did find it interesting to read about this village and their cultural differences. I have read many different books about many different cultures and this one seemed to bring a different perspective on a culture. I like that Okonkwo is trying to resist the urge to change his culture, and stay true to it. I'm interested to see if Okonkwo decides to stay true to his original beliefs, or decides to evolve and adapt to the new changes that are beginning to take place.

Things fall apart: part 1

So this week we are starting a new book by Chinua Achebe. I was very excited for this week because this was the only book I found at a normal book store. I felt that this meant that it would be the most interesting in my eyes. I was intrigued by the story of this book. This book was much easier to read and much more my style of read. I am super excited for this week because I'm actually going to like what we are reading for once. I am really interested in how the rest of our class reacts to this book. I think that this is a change in pace of what we were doing but I also think that it is going to be a great change and our class will be much more vocal this week because this is a book like ones many of us read on a regular basis.

"Things Fall Apart" Chinua Achebe

A much different style of writing then previously encountered, “Things Fall Apart” by Chinua Achebe was an interesting and thought provoking read. Its focus on the main character Okonkwo, his heritage, and tribal practices as well all serve as attention-grabbing elements. Its structure bears a slight resemblance to “1001 Nights” in the sense that it deviates at random intervals to clarify previous happenings or things of relevance in current events. The setting as well as plotline is a bit difficult to follow due to its inability to find connections with the culture or rituals performed, nevertheless, Achebe’s writing drew me in and maintained my interest throughout the entire excerpt.

Things Fall Apart

This week we had to read “Things Fall Apart” by Chinua Achebe. I really like this book because I feel like it’s an easier read and match more of what I’m used to reading. Literature continues to change and this book looks at culture and how it and traditions have changed. Everyone has their own traditions in every culture and everyone follows them. Things Fall Apart has a few different cultures within the first half of the book and while reading, you are able to tell who follows which traditions and why these people do it. The main character in the book, Okonkwo tries to resist the culture changing traditions because he feels like this may hurt and change the way his culture is looked at. I think it will be interesting to continue to read to see if Okonkwo decides to change with his culture or if he will stand up and stick with his traditions.

Things Fall Apart

This week’s reading was from “Part 1” of the book Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe. I really enjoyed reading this book and found that the main character and his tribe have some cultural similarities to my culture. For example, his culture believes in karma and what most people today would call superstition. My culture is also superstitious and calls upon the ancestors or gods to try to correct the wrong if one were committed. It’s interesting though to see the difference in cultures. Although I was born in the United States I still hold on to who I am; the culture, traditions, beliefs, but the assimilation into the American culture is inevitable. It would interesting to read on and see how Okonkwo and his village deals with the European missionaries.

Things Fall Apart

I have found Chinua Achebe's book "Things Fall Apart," to be a nice departure from all of our previous readings because it is more like what I've been used to reading in my English courses. Although the form of the literature may be different from what we've had previously, it fits in to the other works's ideas of tradition. "Things Fall Apart" looks at how this culture is at the verge of change and how each of the various characters are reacting to that said change. Okonkwo for example, is resisting the culture's changes from the traditional to the new because he is dependent on his societal status and feels that these changes may hinder that status. This idea brings us back to past readings of how literature continues to move from the traditional to the more abstract and new ways of thinking and looking at literature as a form.

"Things Fall Apart"

Chinua Achebe’s “Things Fall Apart” is very different from the things we have read so far. It is written more like a book I would read for fun rather than some scholarly article. The turn towards the end of Part 1 was totally unexpected for me. I found Okonkwo to be a very interesting and complex character, and I could see him as both a hero and a villain at the same time. He was a hero for his stereotypical rags to riches story, but the way he treats his wives and children would be seen in our culture as more or less villainous. I really enjoyed how the plot seemed so straightforward, but there was underlying tension and foreshadowing. As I was reading it I wondered how the story would be taken differently in different cultures because it seems that, from my reading experience at least, people put their own culture’s standards onto the characters consciously or subconsciously. How would this story be viewed in the country and village that was its setting? Would there be as much tension?

Material and Form

My feelings about this are great but I am going to express them in brief. #1: I thought this book would be about Emily Dickinson, not Emily Bronte and William Shakespeare. #2: Sure, she liked Dickinson's work but that doesn't mean she has to make her work so fragmented you can't tell what anything has to do with Emily Dickinson. #3: I thought her own poetry was interesting. #4: I really liked Joseph Harris' passage.

Howe and Dickinson

When reading Howe's poetry, it was very hard to follow but I love how every person can read the poems in different orders. It makes each poem different to each person who reads them, especially with the poems where some of the lines were diagonal over the horizontal lines. There are no rules to her poetry.
Howe's book "My Emily Dickinson" was just as confusing as her poetry. While Howe made a lot of good points about Dickinson's writing, Howe also was just all over the place. One minute she was talking about Edwards, then she was on Bronte and all of her paragraphs are broken by poems and quotes. She needs to let her points come across before breaking her reader's attention by quotes.

Howe and Dickinson

The Susan Howe excerpt that we had to read was interesting because after having read her comments on Emily Dickinson’s poetry, we were able to read some of her own poetry. In similarity to Dickinson’s poetry, they both defy the norms as her title implies, The Nonconformist's Memorial. In my opinion, the way she writes her poems may also be a symbol in itself complimenting the text. This form of writing has broadened the definition and understanding of scholarly works. As Harris mentions in the chapter “Countering,” we should not rebut the views of other writers but rather bring to light the unquestioned aspects of a text. This leads to the question of what can be or is considered as scholarly today since the term has broadened. A scholar is defined as a learned individual in one or more disciplines. Therefore, does it mean that any person who is knowledgeable in a particular area can be considered a scholar and that the material they produce be considered scholarly?

Susan Howe on Emily Dickinson

Reading "My Emily Dickinson" makes my head spin in circles. Susan Howe does an extensive close reading of "My Life had stood-a Loaded Gun-." Sometimes, what she says is interesting, but most of the time I find her too hard to understand. Howe's frequent references to Robert Browning, Shakespeare, and events of the past block my comprehension of what she is trying to say. I think she has a lot of insight, but her interpretations of Dickinson's poems are very confusing. I did however see the focal points of Dickinson's poem through what Howe explained. Power and domination, happiness and loneliness, marriage, death, and the gun as a weapon controlled by man are all key features of this Loaded Gun poem. But putting together their meanings and forming an interpretation I understand is what I have a hard time with.

Emily Dickinson/Susan Howe and Countering

Dickinson’s poem “My life has stood-a loaded gun” bears many words that carry multiple meanings and references, however to me the most impressive theme prevalent through the entire text was the relevance to nature. The second stanza holds a wealth of information and comparisons to the natural world. The most obvious of these being the identification of being in a wooded area, and by partaking in the act of hunting, but also by using the word “Sovereign” the reference to religion and God’s rule is present. This constant idea of nature brings unity and a sort of common ground into her work, much like religion of her time brought organization to the community.

Howe and Countering

Does anyone else seem to find this extremely challenging at points? I get so stressed trying to think about what is going on sometimes! Along with my frustration, the form of the Howe poems just added to my headache. I think it is an unique idea but at the same time, is it too far? Has this been taken so far out that it looses the "poeticness"? I am very much so confused.
I just wanted to comment on the discussions that were held on Monday. I am not sure if our group was the only group, but did anyone else feel like that had to really stretch it to feel as though they were on a solid lead to finding the answer to their questions? I am at a constant battle with some of these pieces of whether or not I am getting it or I am just way too farfetched.

Countering and Howe

This chapter on countering I thought was really valuable. I think it's always important to look at the other side of an issue and to understand that other side as well as your own. That way you know the positives and negatives of an argument. You then, in turn, come to understand and gain more knowledge about a topic. The end of "My Emily Dickinson" was good. I had no idea you could look at one poem in so many different ways, and how each word or phrase could mean something totally different from the next. The Howe poems were interesting. It was really a nonconformity, it was cool though. Almost like an art within the poetry.

Non Conformism

Howe's poems certainly lived up to their title. I think she is challenging the reader to find meaning in a work that is apparently devoid of any meaning. Like Dickinson and Stein, she points in a direction and then in another, and still another direction the reader should take toward any understanding of the text. The challenge is to find the underlying theme, if it even exits. In some ways this writing makes for uncomfortable reading. I would compare it to reading the first chapter of A Clockwork Orange. You have to reformulate your understanding of language to comprehend the author's design. That book and these poems cannot be filtered through the lens of tradition.

Harris' "Countering" and Howe

After reading this week's chapter of Rewriting, Susan Howe's writing in My Emily Dickinson seemed so much clearer. While I was reading the Introduction, Part 1, and Part 2, I found the way she wrote intriguing, but I didn't fully understand what she was trying to communicate through her poetic way of writing a scholarly essay. After reading "Countering," I realized that Howe was demonstrating how Dickinson has influenced her, becoming Howe's "My Emily Dickinson," through her poetic style. After reading an excerpt from Howe's The Non-Conformist's Memorial, it is clear enough to see that Howe was inspired by Dickinson's dashes, which where innovative. Howe plays with the format of her poems, making them nicer to look at than read in some cases. I wonder it enlightening how Howe highlighted Dickinson's skill at revealing and concealing in her poem. "My Life had stood- a Loaded Gun" is an example of that skill, as Howe points out with her list of the different meanings of what "My Life" can mean.

Howe and "Countering"

Susan Howe’s works in The Non-Conformists Memorial really stretched the idea of the poetic form. With some sentences upside-down and overlapping, a lot of the poems took a much closer look. She seems to be playing into this idea that the meanings of poems often overlap and intertwine, and it is up to the audience to distinguish the meaning. While I did enjoy the very innovative format, it seemed a bit forced at times. Being a fan of Williams, I’m sure Howe was trying to break into this idea of new poetic forms and structures and experiment with the way words look. However, sometimes the way the poem looked took away from the meaning of the poem. It became so indistinguishable that I was more focused on how all these words were crossing over each other rather than what the words themselves were saying.

Re: Sonnets

(sorry this got deleted or something...awesome) Learning about sonnets was really interesting and how they are evolving, but in some ways they are evolving for the worse. Sonnets that are becoming more straight forward are losing their intriguing quality. I think poetry is full of wonder and questions and when poems lose that, it takes away from how special they are. Instead of a sonnet it just becomes a short essay. An essay tells how to think, but a poem lets you take the lines as you want it. I like poets that are able to break the mold of what poetry is and constantly push the boundaries. Keeping things fresh and exciting keeps people interested in the art form. This gives it even more of an audience to change things.

My Emily Dickison

Susan Howe is presenting a new way to read Dickinson. I a way she is telling readers to read Dickinson's poems with out her gender in mind, but there is also the catch of reading her poems with a feminine voice. One of the questions presented was finding the the feminine voice in poems that use a masculine form. It was a hard concept to try to figure. I makes you question what and how you Dickinson. I like to read her as mold breaker and how she fit into a masculine literary world. It's poets like Dickinson that laid the ground work for other writers like Gertrude Stein. I almost consider her to be a "modern day" Dickinson. They both created works that didn't rely on their gender. Both women could write gender neutral works that were groundbreaking. I really enjoyed comparing these two writers.

Countering and Dickinson

After reading about what countering is I was able to better decipher Howe's scholarly analysis of Dickinson's work. I chose to read the countering chapter before the required reading from Howe's book today just for this purpose. Throughout the span of this course thus far, I have developed a liking for Harris's "Rewriting". After each chapter I read, I find myself developing more as a writer and scholarly thinker. Dickinson's poem "My Life had stood-a Loaded gun" really stood out to me after thinking about what countering is. For example, I payed special attention to how Dickinson used capitalized and un-capitalized letters to add emphasis to her writing. Finally, I thought that how Howe broke down all the possible meanings of the phrase "My Life" in the poem was creative and thought provoking. Initially I only assumed the phrase to be coinciding with Dickinson herself, but quickly learned that it could be many different things. This of course greatly changed the meanings of the remaining lines in the poem.

Dickinson, Howe and Harris

For our reading we had to read the second part of "My Emily Dickinson," and I found that I understood and was able to follow it a lot better after discussing it on Monday. I found it really interesting that Howe compared Emily Dickinson's thoughts and ideas to those in "Wuthering Heights." Howe talked about how each of these separate works deal with romantic ideals and desires mixed with struggles of religious beliefs. This also got me thinking about ideas for our paper coming up, because this is the aspect that we are looking to achieve with them, taking a work of literature and finding similarities between that and the other pieces we have read. Looking at Howe's poems, I found them to be pretty interesting because they didn't form the typical poetry pattern. Instead, they were abstract and all over the place and all containing some aspect from the bible. Looking at Harris's "Countering" excerpt was interesting because he shed light on the many different ways in which people choose to tackle incorporating their work with another writer's.

Countering and My Emily Dickinson

Today, we had to read Countering in the book called, Rewriting and the second half of My Emily Dickinson. My Emily Dickinson was still pretty hard for me to fully understand and I found myself re-reading a lot of sentences that I just read. I believe that if I had a bigger interest in poetry and knowing more about it, this read would have been easier to understand. Being able to discuss this book more fully in class has helped me understand what I didn’t when I was reading it. I found it interesting when he talks about what countering means and how everyone has their own definition of it. Everyone has their own opinions and thoughts of what countering means and they all use it differently in their writings.

Dickinson and Howe

After reading the second part of Howe’s “My Emily Dickinson,” and Harris’s section “Countering,” I saw that Howe was using Harris’s countering strategy throughout her book. She said at the beginning that scholars’ views Dickinson were not entirely correct. She then used her own ideas to prove that her reading of Dickinson was a fuller, more accurate reading. In Howe’s “The Nonconformist’s Memorial” she writes very abstract poems, not even sticking to the conventional method of having straight lines that are parallel to each other. It seemed like Howe somehow took the Bible verses at the beginning page and incorporated them into her own poems. Was she trying to make some sort of comment on religion and modernism by doing this? Howe mentions that if Emily Dickinson would have changed her style, she could have become a well-read poetess. Why did Dickinson chose to write her poems in private, sending only a few into the outside world, when she could have gained much more recognition? This reminded me of Benjamin’s cult and exhibition value. To the scholars Howe mentions at the beginning, Dickinson’s poems are framed by the life of a woman who shut herself off from the world in her house. To Howe, Dickinson’s poems are framed by religious influences and a rebellious spirit. The poems maybe had more meaning to Dickinson if she kept them inside with her.

Emily Dickinson and Countering

For our next class we read the last part of My Emily Dickinson and the chapter Countering in Rewriting. In the countering chapter I found it interesting the way that Harris explains countering and the differences of peoples definitions and what it means in writing. I am interested in seeing how the others in class took this chapter. In the rest of My Emily Dickinson i actually understood some of what Howe was talking about because of our discussion in class. I was in the group talking about her madness and I was interested in seeing what else if anything was mentioned about this. I still do not like or understand poetry fully, but I will be able to get through this week with the discussions we have in class because they help me a lot.

My Emily Dickinson

Howe's writing style is unique. I was trying to discern for large portions of it if she was inserting her own interpretations of Emily Dickinson's poetry or--as I later suspected--if she was writing from 'her' Emily Dickinson's point of view. Her short hand ("Initial of creation. In the beginning was the word. Relation of opposition; misprison -- double meaning and uncertain.") seems to support this.

Stein & Dickinson

Gertrude Stein is one of my most favorite poets. She writes with such a sadness. She had quite a few of her lovers die and she was never able to have any children. These elements always seem to come across in her work. For example, in "A Little called Pauline" the focus in one a small girl. I always been lead to believe that Emily Dickinson was a bit of a morbid poet also, having always read "I heard a Fly buzz- when I died-" in any class having to do with poetry. After reading more of her works and Susan Howe's "My Emily Dickinson," I see that there are more facets to Emily Dickinson, but that I was not altogether wrong when I first pegged her as morbid and eccentric.

Dickinson and Stein

Prior to the readings, I knew almost nothing of Emily Dickinson. I am very glad that we are getting an opportunity to learn about a female poet. Maybe it is just because she is a female, but I feel more connected to her poetry than the poetry we have been reading in class. I feel like it is random, yet it goes extremely well. I enjoyed reading her pieces. However, reading a few of Stein's pieces make me feel like I might enjoy her poetry a little bit more. I feel like Stein can be witty with her words, almost like she has a lot of spunk in her personality and I love it!

Dickin, Stein, & Correcting Blind Spots

I was very excited about reading some of Emily Dickinson's poetry. I have only read a few in high school and never really got to learn about Dickinson as a person and a poet. I enjoyed this poetry more than the sonnets we were reading last week. Her poetry comes off as being more natural. It is easier to understand. There is a clean meter, like a sonnet, but I feel there is more of a structure to it. Comparing Dickinson's poetry to Berrigan and Shakespeare's it's easy to see how poetry progressed and changed over time. I'm looking forward to reading more of her work. Stein however took a different approach to her poetry. It was very unique, but I was able to appreciate it. I really enjoyed the poems by both poets. These women were breaking boundaries and putting women on the map as being noteworthy poets.

Dickinson & Stein, Correcting Blind Spots

Reading some of Emily Dickinson’s poems, I could see how her poems were much different from Berrigan and the Shakespearean way of writing we focused on this past week. Dickinson’s rhythm and rhyme, as well as the language she uses, are much different from the Shakespearean format, but I liked it a lot. For whatever reason, her poems came more naturally as I read them. I liked Gertrude Stein’s poems a lot as well. Her very unconventional way of writing is so unique. Some of her poems are written in full sentences while others like “New” are merely one-word lines. As far as Susan Howe’s “My Emily Dicksinon,” any blind spots that I have from the discussions we had last week are much the opposite of corrected; I’m not quite sure what her overall purpose/statement is.

Dickinson & Stein

Emily Dickinson and Gertrude Stein remain to be some of the most influential women poets. Dickinson, it is obvious, was completely consumed by her writing. She seemed to be a poet first and a human after that. With her particular style, it is obvious that she was taking a chance. Though she still followed a standard format (within her work), she was ahead of her time. It is a shame that she couldn't have seen her work succeed, though I don't know what importance that would have to her anyway.

Gertrude Stein's poetry is very abstract. She modeled her work after the type of ideas that were present in visual art at the time. She was somewhat of a linguistic cubist. In one of her pieces, she presents an auditory portrait of Pablo Picasso in which she creates a space that is repetitive and non-linear. Poems such as this exemplify her personal style and prove that her style was and still is unique and groundbreaking. Even if you do not enjoy her work, it is true that it had a huge and important influence on writing thereafter.

Dickinson and Stein

With this week’s readings, you can really see the progression of poetry from the times of Shakespeare to that of Dickinson and Stein. With Dickinson, this idea of structured rhythm and rhyme is still apparent. She definitely has a specific scheme with her end rhymes, and the meter of her poems is very clean, similar to that of the sonnet. However, Dickinson hasn’t stuck to the typical ABAB iambic pentameter format for her poems. The language in her poetry is obviously not exactly equivalent to today’s English. However, her language and word choice is significantly more modernized than the Old English of Shakespeare.
Stein takes a completely different approach to her poems. Being structured as a paragraph, you get the feel of poetic prose when reading her work. She takes this idea of free verse and runs with it. The ambiance, along with the aesthetics of the poetry, is also very different than that of a Shakespearian sonnet. Being a creative writing major, I’m a big fan of poetry. I can’t always understand it as much as I’d like to think I can, but it’s cool for me to be able to see the progression of poetic structure and how the meanings of a poem are very much affected by its structure.

Fixing Blind Spots

After reading the first few chapters of Susan Howe's book, I have made some observations regarding her particular writing style. I enjoyed how in the first chapter she compares and contrasts Dickinson with other scholarly female writers of that time period. I found it interesting how Howe explains what Dickinson was doing for women as a community. Prior to Emily Dickinson, scholarly writing was considered something only rich white men did. By deciphering this scholarly discourse, Emily was able to transcribe various meanings regarding poetry. From this she was able to develop her own style of writing. Also, I noticed some similarities with what Joesph Harris suggests for rewriting and interpreting texts with what Howe was saying about how Dickinson developed as a writer.

Dickinson and Stein

After reading the poems by Emily Dickinson and Gertrude Stein, I realized that they were uniquely different from Barrigan and Shakespeare’s poems. To me poetry has always been a form of self expression and way to just relieve the mind of whatever was in it. I could see that many of these poems by these poets do just that. Both Dickinson and Stein’s poetry style share certain similar forms. They both write with short lines and not always complete sentences. Their writing was unconventional during their time period which makes me admire them as female writers. I think it takes a lot of guts to go against the norms and try something new. Although I do not always understand their poems I’ve come to admire them and the message hidden inside. It has led me to wonder, why and how these poets have come to be as well known as they are now?

Stein and Dickinson

I am excited at the opportunity to read Dickinson again. HIgh school was the last time I read her work. I have never read Stein, although in another class I did get to listen to her read one of her poems, I do not remember which one. After reading more of her work, I have to say that listening to her read adds a more rhythmic quality to her poems that I think makes it more enjoyable. In her readings she is able to communicate every nuance of her poem that she wishes the audience to hear. Without the authors recitation, the work seems almost flat.

Emily Dickinson

So this week we are doing some more poetry reading and I am not too excited again. I've read Emily Dickinson before and never really understood her poetry. I'm hoping this week I will be able to learn from our discussions in class of what her poems are about. In reading about Emily Dickinson and Gertrude Stein I have learned a lot and have been thinking a lot about these two ladies. I have a few questions that I am still wondering about after reading about them. I am hoping that through the discussion tomorrow I will get these questions answered. I am very interested to learn what the other people in our class thought about these people.

Emily Dickinson and Gertrude Stein

When I was younger I used to spend a lot of time reading Emily Dickinson. I always enjoyed her writing and really felt connected to everything that she wrote, even if it may not have made sense to me at the time. I really feel that Dickinson has a very feminine way of writing her poetry and possibly that's the reason I was always drawn to her writing. Even though I always enjoyed reading Dickinson's work, I never read anything that told me who she was as a person or how she lived her life. After reading Susan Howe's book I felt that I understood her writing just a little bit better than I had before. I thought it was very interesting that Stein and Dickinson had very similar styles of poetry, however, their lifestyles were complete opposites. I started to wonder that if Dickinson had not led such a solitary life if her poems could have possibly gained more publicity or respect in her time, even though women writers weren't often taken seriously. After reading the first two parts of this book I am interested to see what is to come in the end of this book.

Dickinson and Stein

When we had the first class, we talked about who has read “My Emily Dickinson” before in high school because I guess it’s a very popular book for high school students to read. My high school had very good English teachers but when it came to curriculum, it wasn’t the strongest. I have never read “My Emily Dickinson” before but I have heard of it. What caught my attention the most was her basis religion and having her put it into her writing. Without this, I couldn’t really pay attention to the book much. It was easy to read because of the rhyming scheme but over all it was hard to keep my attention. I found that Howe and Stein had very similar writing styles even though they are two completely different women. Personally, these two readings were much easier then Shakespeare.

Dickinson and Stein

Once I read that Emily Dickinson was one of the most reclusive artists ever, she would go so far as to give interviews through her mail slot. Knowing this and reading about her history and influences and reading her poems have almost re-affirmed this in a weird way. She writes beautifully and to me her poetry seems very descriptive and eloquent. It seems as if all great artists have a prerequisite to be a little, or a lot, crazy. But, for me at least, you can see that she was alone most of the time. Also in "My Emily Dickinson" when Howe said that poetry was her religion it all seems to make sense. I really liked Stein too, I read "A White Hunter" and had to laugh at how simple it was. It was nice though, it's nice to see the simplicity in things sometimes.

Emily Dickinson and Gertrude Stein

Thanks to my limited experience on poetry, reading both Dickinson’s and Stein’s work allowed me to view more varieties on the spectrum known as artistic writing. Despite the varying subjects, I was drawn distinctly to Dickinson’s work more so than Stein’s. I am unsure as to why Emily Dickinson was exiled in such a manner as illustrated in the Preface of “My Emily Dickinson” by Susan Howe because her writings were both interesting and alluring to me. Her basis in religion and its incorporation into her writing served as one of the main factors that held my attention. What also assisted in maintaining my interest was her ability to keep a rhyme scheme as well as measure in her work.

In high school I learned a few things about Emily Dickinson, but after reading "My Emily Dickinson," I learned a great deal more about her and her lifestyles. I thought that there weremajor differences between Emily Dickinson and Gertrude Stein. Emily kept herself where as Gertrude was more outgoing didn't mind the recognition she was receiving. However, I did noticed that their literally work, were very similar and they were both on the same path with writing skills and language. I also thought that it was a lot easier to understand versus the sonnets we had to read for last week.

Emily Dickinson and Gertrude Stein

When reading Susan Howe's book "My Emily Dickinson," I was able to learn a lot more about Emily Dickinson and the kind of person she was and how her surroundings encouraged her writing. When looking at Emily Dickinson, we know that she was a woman in recluse and didn't have the support of her own family, as well as not having very many of her poems published until after her lifetime. Then Susan Howe mentions Gertrude Stein and the fact that these two women were polar opposites of one another. Whereas Emily Dickinson remained a shut in, Stein, loved the spotlight and the recognition she was receiving in the literary world. Although these women lead very different lives, in their poetry it is easy to see that they have very similar writing styles and use the same type of language in their poems. I also found that I could understand what these poems were trying to say a lot better than the sonnets of Shakespeare and Berrigan.

Emily Dickinson and Gertrude Stein

The Introduction, Part 1, and Part 2 of Susan Howe’s “My Emily Dickinson” gave me a more complete picture of Emily Dickinson. Like Howe mentions, many scholars wrote off Emily Dickinson and continue to write her off. They say she was just a woman recluse. This is the view of her that I had before I read some of Howe’s piece. Emily Dickinson lived in New England, and was surrounded by the Puritan religious tradition. Her poem writing was also complicated because she was a woman, and women writers could not be taken seriously. Knowing this gave Dickinson’s poems a new meaning for me. They weren’t just the writings that a lonely woman who chose to scribble down some poems that weren’t discovered until after she died. But why didn’t she try to publish more of her poems? Would Dickinson have become a more respected poet if she did? When reading Gertrude Stein’s poems, I noticed that her style seemed similar to Dickinson’s. Both of their poems use more straightforward, unembellished language. Both of them also grew up in New England. Maybe the New England tradition has something to do with this.

Sonnets Part 2

I thought that the 100,000,000,000 Sonnets was the most interesting reading this time. It was really thought provoking how you could read a line one way in a sonnet and then when you changed a line or two that it could change completely in meaning. This highlights what I find most interesting about poetry, it can be so abstract. I thought it was really cool how you could take a line from each Shakespeare Sonnet in order of the sequence and it would create a sonnet that still portrayed the general theme of the sequence. Reading William Carlos Williams was interesting. I took a class on the Beat writers and they referenced him alot but I had never had a chance to actually read him before.

Sonnets

Playing around with the sonnets was somewhat interesting. It's almost as if taking the time to play around with them made reading the poems more fun and entertaining. It made me realize how poetry can be turned into a work of art just like Queneau says. While reading the sonnets I found it very interesting how he was able to keep a continued rhythm and rhyme within each line. However, this all tended to get confusing. While each line almost switched topics it made the poems harder to understand and sometimes it didn't even make sense. Because there was so much jumping around and switching of topics, I realized this probably could have been because of the translation that had to occur. Sometimes things like movies, books, and here, even poetry, aren't as good as the original. I definitely can understand how the translation takes away from the original meaning of the poem.

Sonnets & Such

I really enjoyed playing around with Queneau’s sonnets. I think he truly turned poetry into a work of art which makes reading poetry much more interesting and fun. However, as I read various poems I wasn’t sure if they were supposed to make sense or not. Maybe the translation from French to English impacted the meaning, or maybe the meaning has nothing to do with Queneau’s purpose at all. And though each line sometimes seemed to jump to a different subject, Queneau managed to continue his rhythm and rhyme which I found interesting. Reading the rest of Berrigan’s sonnets I found confusing. I can sort of pull out what most of the sonnets are saying, but Berrigan’s language and use of punctuation are very different than what I am used to. I found his format to be much different than Shakespearean writing and I wondered how his use of punctuation (like many spaces in a line, capital letters, certain quotation marks) impacts the meanings of his sonnets and what he is trying to say/do.

Forwarding and sonnets

What I appreciated about the sonnets was the opportunity to reconfigure them according to your own feelingsor thoughts. The ability to alter a poem, which is something so dependent on form, is such a profound privledge. A reader of that poem decides it's meaning through altering it's structure. Then again, if an author allows anyone to randomly reformilate th text, is the form really valuable? What happens when anyone can take a piece and edit it? Does the piece become "fatherless." I do like ghe idea that a reader can be invested in a particular work. That idea is very democratic and conversation like. It is reminiscnt of the old young adult books that would allow you to choose an ending to the story by deciding which pages to turn to in the story.

Form and Process

I am very interested in how form changes meaning. Ted Berrigan used the same lines in different contexts and formats, changing the poem's direction, either slightly or completely. I appreciate this shuffling of ideas and creating a space that isn't chronological. I do think, however, that some of Berrigan's pieces should have simply been drafts to get from one piece to the next. When some of the phrases were being used so much, the meaning and originality of the words diminished. It's similar to how a musical artist knows they have a great line, so they repeat it over and over until you are able to sing along with it and not even realize how incredible it is. I could see Berrigan doing this on purpose as a kind of critique but I think reading the book as a whole was too repetitive.

By cutting and pasting the Shakespearean sonnets, I also got to see how context and repetition change the poem's tone. The connection between the exercise and Berrigan's poems was very obvious. It was cool to be able to see the sort of method he may have used. With pieces like Berrigan's sonnets, the process can become more interesting than the poem itself.

Sonnets Cont.

Does anyone else find this incredibly frustrating? Especially while reading Queneau's poems, I was getting so very confused. I do see the art in poetry, but I do find it sometimes I find it to be too much. It is overbearing, especially when using certain lingo that I am unfamiliar with, like Shakespeare's pieces.

Another thing that came to mind while reading Queneau's sonnets was whether or not the poems got sort of lost through the translation. Just like pieces of text, they can sometimes loose part of themselves while being translated. As poetry is such a particular piece of work, wouldn't the translation potentially take away so much from it?

Sonnets

After Monday's class, I feel I have a better appreciation for the poetry and sonnets as a type of literary form. Looking at Berrigan again, I find it really interesting that he was able to incorporate Shakespearean aspects, while still maintaining his own style by turning it into a more modern approach to poetry. Like Berrigan, Quenaeu's 100,000,000,000 poems is also very contemporary. I found it really cool innovative and imaginative that he was able to transform this old type of poetry into an interactive art form. Joseph Harris talks about forwarding in his chapter. One of the aspects he brings up is the idea of academic conversation being a way of conversation. It is a conversation because you are taking in that writer's words and by delving into them, you start to interpret them in your own way and come out of it with your own perspective. This allows us to better understand the critical writing and allows an easier approach because we look at it in a less formal way.

Sonnets cont.

I found Raymond Queneau’s 100,000,000,000 Sonnets interesting and fun to play with by rearranging the lines. I noticed that no matter which line was chosen, the rhyme scheme was still the same. Like the Shakespearean sonnets, it also contained 14 lines but the style is clearly different. In the reading by William Carlos Williams he talks about how poetry today has lost its measure. The verses and how they are written have changed. He mentions how the poems today focus more about what is being said rather than the structure in which it is written. We have come to settle for what is convenient and simple to read and understand. And by reading the sonnets by Queneau, Shakespeare, and Barrigan it comes to show us the measure and prose that Williams talks about.

After Monday's class I still am not a big fan of poetry, but I also have a much better understanding of what we are supposed to be looking for in these poems. In the readings for this class I found that they were interesting because of the spacing in some of the sonnets. I don't really understand what the deal is with spacing them all weird and I'm hoping to figure this out tomorrow in class. When reading through these sonnets I kind of felt they were like a story in some ways because of the overlapping themes and sometimes even names in the different sonnets. I still am not a fan of this week, but I'm finding some of these poems interesting in the ways of interpretation of them.

Tradition and Innovation

The concept of Queneau's 100,000,000,000 poems is a very contemporary approach to an incredibly traditional poetic format. He was able to take the idea of what a sonnet was and reinvent it as an art form. I find it hard as it is writing one poem and keeping everything cohesive; I can’t imagine writing a bunch of different lines to make a hundred billion poems and still have everything understandable. Like Queneua, Berrigan also renovated the sonnet in a different way. Taking a modern approach on a Shakespearean idea, Berrigan was able to incorporate those traditional ideas of a sonnet while still contemporizing it.
An idea I liked that Harris introduces in this chapter of Rewriting is that academic write is comparable to a conversation. Essentially, you are hearing another’s ideas, interpreting those ideas, and commenting on them along with your own commentary. Thinking of essays in this sense makes them much more approachable, rather than this highly structured, formal way of writing.

I found it interesting to read William Carlos Willams because I feel like I've read a lot about him through other poems. Ted Berrigan as well as Alan Ginsberg both talk about him. I thought his ideas were interesting. You do find that after a new style of writing, whether it be in poems or literature, it often gets regenerated and distorted into what someone's new interpretation of this new idea. People should be looking for new ways to go about writing poems, it makes for new and interesting way of going about things. I thought that the 100,000,000 poem's were interesting. I thought it was kind of cool how you would go to a new one and see some of the same lines you've read before but yet there's still a new line that you haven't seen yet.

After Monday's class I got a much better understanding of what sonnets are consisted of. Because of that, I thought reading the poems were a lot more interesting. Instead of just trying to interpret what the poem was trying to say, I focused some of my time on how all the lines are 14, and really focusing on the volta. It was interesting to read the poems with the class, to see how they interpreted the poems. In class my group focused a lot on 11. We all thought it was about reproduction and how life is very valuable. I have a greater appreciation of what sonnets are trying to convey.

Sonnets

After this week's in class discussions and various readings I feel that I am much more educated on Sonnets and everything they stand for. Previously, I had never really given sonnets any time. Now I have to admit that I am disappointed I did not develop this appreciation for sonnets at an earlier time in my life. I feel that sonnets are a great way to tell a story or express emotion through a rhythmic and mysterious template. I enjoy how every sonnet has the same basic structure, but still gives room for the reader to take away their own meaning from the poem. Like we learned in class, it is now much easier for me as a casual reader to be able to pick out a sonnet. My eyes have adapted to the standard fourteen lines. I find that it is often times easier for myself to understand the sonnet if I look for the volta in the sonnet and then determine what is actually creating the division within the poem. This way I can take away the final point of the poem, but still leave room for self realization when it comes to the poems true meaning.

Sonnets

After reading Shakespeare’s poems more closely in class and talking about their sequence and progression, Berrigan’s poems made more sense to me. Even though Berrigan reused many of the lines in his poems, where he places them gave them a different meaning. I saw the second set of poems progressing through “Dear Chris” to almost a strange plea for sanity. The repetition of lines gave me the feeling that Berrigan was stuck in a moment with all these feelings circling around him. “100,000,000,000 Sonnets” made me think about “Rewriting’s” idea about using others’ ideas and making them your own. This led me to think about Berrigan’s method. The lines he chose to repeat had to be solid to be so reuseable without seeming old and reused. The ‘rediscovering’ of these lines in different poems gave me a sort of déjà vu feeling.
William Carlos William’s take on form is interesting. He sees the lack of form in modern poetry and argues for a return to some sort of form before poets go completely wild. It reminds me of the saying “there is a method to his madness.” Berrigan had some sort of method to writing poems, but can anyone other than him make complete sense of this method? This made me think about if Berrigan actually wrote these poems to be published, or if they were just an experiment in his method.

Sonnets

This week I found it very interesting when comparing both Shakespeare and Berrigan. I especially liked that we were given a background on each one. Personally I find it extremely helpful to know a little bit more about the author of the piece I'm reading, it helps me to understand where they are coming from and what they draw some of their inspirations from. As some of the other blogs I have read stated I also found it helpful to go over exactly what a sonnet was composed of. In middle school you get the very basic ABAB format and don't really realize that there is so much more that goes into the composing of a sonnet. Learning new vocabulary was something I really hadn't expected when we started to discuss sonnet's however, I was wrong. Learning things like what a Volta was and why it is placed in between lines 8 and 9 really forced me to read the pieces more carefully and take a look at how the sonnet's were "turning" or changing direction in their language or subject matter. I personally find it extremely difficult to analyze poetry especially when they are by authors such as Shakespeare. I find Berrigan's work hard to read, however his work also interests me at the same time.

Ted Berrigan and William Carlos Williams (with reflections from Shakespeare)

In William Carlos William’s “On Measure: a letter to Cid Corman” he speaks of an abandonment of previous and “old” styles of writing through the disregard of the correct definition of measure, verse and count. A fine example of this exile of traditional way is Ted Berrigan’s sonnets. When compared to Shakespeare’s sonnets Ted Berrigan’s are feeble and uneducated versions, lacking of rhyme scheme, verse structure, and pentameter. Shakespeare’s older more traditional sonnets show the true form of writing and form, and are what should serve as the basis for proper writing, not the search for a new measure as William Carlos Williams mentions towards the end of his text.

Sonnets

This week, it was interesting comparing the sonnets between Shakespeare and Ted Berrigan. Today in class, we learned that a sonnet is a rhyming scheme. When in grade school, I also learned that most sonnets have an ABAB pattern; this is the way that I was taught to write sonnets. I don’t really understand poetry very often because I haven’t learned much about it. I do like reading Shakespeare’s sonnets but it is sometimes hard to understand what he is trying to say. I really liked reading Ted Berrigan’s sonnets because it was almost like reading a story and they all connected throughout them all. This week’s talk about sonnets and poetry will be hard because it isn’t my favorite thing in the world and it is hard for me to understand.

Sonnets

I would most certainly not call myself a great poetry writer, however I do enjoy reading a fair share of poems here and there. I had a creative writing class that I took in high school and in it we spent a good amount of our time reviewing poetry. When assigned to read the definition of a sonnet on D2L, I was some what familiar with what was stated. Personally I think that this is a very interesting style of poetry. To have such a specific criteria for a sonnet, I think, makes it difficult to compose. It must consist of fourteen lines, be written in an iambic pentameter, and follow a strict number of syllables in each line. Shakespeare seems to do so with magnificant ease. After reading just a few of his thousands of writings, I have concluded that William Shakespeare was a very brilliant man. I find it incredible how he is able to engage his readers with an absolutely stunning vocabulary, while still keeping the reader intrigued. In class, our group focused most specifically on sonnet number twelve. One may have a different interpretion but we decided that this poem was mainly elaborating the importance of producing offspring and how it helps us to achieve a great satifaction with life. I found many of his poems to be slightly difficult to fully understand, yet pleasant to absorb.

Sonnets

Since I'm an English major, I have taken a lot of poetry classes in the past. Everyone of those classes has of course included Shakespeare and his sonnets. For class, my group analyzed sonnets 11-16 and saw how Shakespeare emphasized a lot about breeding and reproduction. He liked to think that a way of being immortal is by passing on your genes and experience in life to your children. That way your memory and the memory of your ancestors is always alive.

My favorite line in one of the sonnets was in 11 where Shakespeare said,

"Let those whom Nature hath not made for store,

Harsh featureless and rude, barrenly perish"

I found this line kind of funny because he's basically saying, if your family doesn't cherish life or can't handle life that that blood line will eventually die and that family line will not live on immortally. Everyone should live life purely and kindly in order to be immortal. It's nice to see that especially when we live in a world of so much hate.

The Sonnet

While studying and writing poetry, I alway found the sonnet to be the most difficult. That said I appreciate the sonnet the most. It is amazing that writers can write so beautifully while adhering to such strict rules. It is no wonder that Shakespeare had a 30,000 word vocabulary, when most have a 6,000 word vocabulary; he most definitely needed the use of all of those words to make his awe-inspiring sonnets. It is very interesting to compare Ted Berrigan's sonnet's to Shakespeare's. Berrigan has a much more modern take to the sonnet that makes his sonnets easier for a modern reader to relate to and to grasp his meaning. However, I believe that it is easy for a modern reader to get caught up in Shakespeare's language and not see the comedy or further meaning in his sonnets. The pair's styles differ but each has an amazing way with both words and the sonnet form, working within the strict rules of the medium to create beauty.

Sonnets

To me a sonnet could be defined as "a strict form of poetry that limits your creativity and frustrates you to read and write." I enjoy and appreciate Shakespeare's sonnets but I see the form as a stale and constricting format. I think the language Shakespeare uses is very rich but I feel like you can only do so much with the sonnet. However, Ted Berrigan's use of the sonnet gave me a fresh outlook on a tired format. I appreciate his method and the creativity he brings to something that could only have so much life left in it before Berrigan's take on it. Although I feel Shakespeare's diction is better than Berrigan's, Berrigan's restructing of a classic format appeals to me more.

Week 3 Blog

It was interesting to see two interpretations of a sonnet. When someone says sonnnet, we usually envision Shakespeare or at least Shakespearen language. Berrigans poems wrenannice departure from the stereotypical sonnet. He shows that although the structure is well known, the content can still be contemporary. Berigan is really able to exercise his creativity within the constraints of the sonnet. Perhaps constraint is the wrong word. Form is probably a better choice, for structure does not have to be limiting. It can challenge a writer to consider different methods, different words. Berrigan is able to use the form to his ad advantage.

Berrigan and Shakespeare

Poetry is a very interesting form of literature. I respect its versatility and uniqueness. In The Sonnets, I liked how Berrigan incorporated a couple of different poetry styles. However, since poetry restricts extensive explanation, I can’t quite grasp what Berrigan or Shakespeare is actually trying to say, and in turn I fail to understand their overall purposes. Also, their language is far beyond my vocabulary and I’m confused at least every other line. I believe the purpose of poetry is to allow the reader to perceive these delicately picked words in their own way, but because of the language, I have a hard time doing so.

Sonnets

So i've never really gotten poetry before other than knowing that it usually rhymes. I didn't know what to expect from these and I was a bit nervous because poetry is not quite my cup of tea. Also I was nervous because usually poetry is written in english that is hard to understand and in my opinion a very dry read. After reading through the first few sonnets I thought about why we were reading these and to my understanding I assumed that this is to broaden our reading throughout this course and to maybe interest some people in the class. I personally am not a fan of this kind of old english language and poetry so this week is probably going to be hard for me, but I'm hoping with talking through the poems and discussing them with the other students i will get a better understanding of them and maybe even learn to like poetry.

Sonnets

I love poetry, but I seem to have a slight problem with strict poetry. I find that forms ,like sonnets, can really restrict what poet is trying to say. It's hard to keep a rhyme creative and fresh when it's so easy to fall into cliche words. I can however respect any poet that does have a mastery over language and has the ability to write poems that are clever and new. That's why I can enjoy Shakespeare, he was able to create amazing works, but he never was redundant. The only task that comes to mind while reading anything by Shakespeare is the language that he used. It's outdated and at times may be hard to understand. Which is why someone like Berrigan is great to read. His work is more accessible to the modern reader. He is giving off that Shakespearean vibe, but maintains simpler language. It's nice to read through a sonnet and have it be straight forward and you can take something from it.

Sonnets

While cozied up to pages of the most romantic of poetry is both an ironic and slightly depressing way to spend Valentine's Day, I really enjoyed the change of pace for this weeks readings. Poetry in general has always been much more appealing to me than most works of prose, despite it generally being much more difficult to decipher.

Shakespeare's works always seem to discourage people from poetry. Throughout my experiences with his work in high school, the mere mentioning of the name "Shakespeare" is immediately followed by an upheaval of defeated and disgusted sighs. On the surface, his Old English gives his poetry a further level of meaning to dig through. The way he writes gives the romanticized illusion of elegance and beauty. I often found myself reading one the sonnets thinking "Oh, how nice and pretty", and then I'd read it again and realize "Oh wait. He's talking about 'making copies' of myself but only if I'm attractive". There is, undoubtedly, a great deal of romance when dealing with Shakespeare, with his comparisons of women to summer's days and the proclamations of how life means nothing without the woman he loves.

Berrigan's poetry seems to be a more relatable version of Shakespeare's work. Since we don't have to dig through this extra layer of understanding his language, it's much easier to follow. Berrigan's sonnet's did have that feeling of romanticism, but he seemed to use his poetry to trace his journey through life and love rather than as a vessel of proclamation for his love.

Sonnets

With both Ted Berrigan and Shakespeare, the sonnets hold to a form. Shakespeare’s form is much more strict, so the ideas in each line have to surrender to the formula. I think this is responsible for some of the best lines he wrote. Like in more modern forms of writing, putting regulations on a piece can force new thought processes that couldn’t be conjured up in free form. It’s hard to tell what parts of Shakespeare’s sonnets are awkwardly phrased and which flow normally because the language used then has evolved so much, that most all of it is a bit foreign. With Berrigan, the guidelines are less strict but also promote interesting, fresh phrasing. I appreciate how Berrigan doesn’t tell a chronological story necessarily. His language is thoughtful and thought-provoking. I understand how both poets influenced much of what came afterwards.

Sonnets

This was a dramatic change in pace for the weekly readings for me. I found it rather difficult to maintain my focus through some of the sonnets. Sometimes I felt like I wasn't using enough imagination, and other times I felt like I was thinking too hard and letting my imagination get the best of me. I do however, enjoy how sometimes you feel like you're being dragged along until the very end when all of the sudden the very last part ties you in and it all makes sense. I felt like that with a lot of the sonnets in Ted Berrigan's book. I found those to be much easier to relate to and a little easier to read than the Shakespeare ones. I liked the edge that a lot of the Ted Berrigan sonnets had, it is not something that I am used to be assigned to read. I like that this is acceptable.

Sonnets

I love this week's readings. Poems are awesome and sonnets, as well as alliteration, are some of my favorites. Every time I read a poem or listen to them I get jealous because I wish I could write as beautifully as these people do. Reading sonnets are awesome because you kind of get into this groove, although it's usually a short groove, it's a groove none the less. I thought that Shakespeare's sonnets were beautiful, as well as Ted Berrigan's. I love their use of language, both stay true to their time. You obviously tell what time period they were writing in. Most everyone can tell when it's a Shakespeare poem, it has such a distinctive sound and feel to it. With Berrigan he has that destincitive 60's feel to it, some of the words he uses, and people he mentions like Marylin Monroe and William Carlos Williams. Great readings.

Sonnets

After reading the sonnets, I am left wondering the exact meaning of any particular sonnet. I understand that the obscurity of Shakespeare's and Berrigan's sonnets are what make them so great. However, I feel if there was some sort of context given before reading the sonnets it would give the reader a better understanding of the text, thus enabling us to get more out of the work. I feel that to the average reader, most of these would just look like jumbled words thrown haphazardly on a page. I feel that it is our job as literary students to find relation to these sonnets in our own lives. Personally Berrigan's sonnet XXIX had the most impact on me. After much pondering I have come to the conclusion that this sonnet stood out to me the most because of word placement, and how it comes before sonnet XXX. "Now she guards her chalice in a temple of fear" is a powerful sentence being used in both of these sonnets in two completely different ways. It had such a personal impact on me because of the way the context of the statement has been changed in such a minute way, but still creates fresh and new meaning.

Sonnets

Throughout my English Courses in High School and College, I have had to a good share of poetry. Poetry is one thing about English that gives me a lot of interest. I love how there are many types and forms of it and because of that there are different ways to express yourself. I have had to do some Shakespeare reading from my past courses, so getting this assignment was nice because it was a familiarity. However, with reading his poems, I always found it rather difficult to fully understand what he is saying. I do get a general idea, but because of the old English, it definitely makes it more time consuming.
The difference between Shakespeare's poems to Berrigan's poems was that Berrigans didn't have as much flow and Shakespeare's. However, I thought that Berrigan's was a lot easier to understand and I liked how in some of his poems he was repetitive. It gave a immense difference in poetry after reading Shakespeare's.

Sonnets

I really enjoyed reading the sonnets for today. I would much rather read poems than a boring twenty page paper. I have always liked reading and writing poetry. Shakespeare is the master of all poets. It's astounding to me how his words are so deep and meaningful and they flow so well. Although I really like Shakespeare's sonnets, they do have a tendency to be difficult to understand because of the language. The way people spoke during those times is very different from now. There are lots of words I couldn't understand, but I did get the general gist of what he was trying to say. The rhythmic flow of his sonnet's combined with the rhyme scheme definitely makes Shakespeare's sonnets some of the best. Berrigan's sonnets were different from Shakespeare's in that there really was no formal structure. In some circumstances the sonnets seemed choppy and unorganized although they were much easier to understand. One aspect of Berrigan's sonnets that I liked was his repetition. Sometimes he repeated words or entire lines from other poems which, I think, made for a nice connection between the poems.

Shakespeares and Berrigan

I have always been interested in poetry. When I was younger I read and wrote quite a lot of poetry especially from Shakespeare. I really like the way that Shakespeare composes his sonnets. Everything is rhythmic and in perfect order. Even though his Sonnets are in this perfect and rhythmic order it still is rather difficult to comprehend exactly what Shakespeare is trying to get across in his poetry. Even though there is that language barrier I think that if someone where to try and translate Shakespeare's works into our modern day "speak" that the Sonnets would lose a great deal of their meaning. Berrigan on the other hand had no formal structure which after reading Shakespeare really was difficult to concentrate on. The language was easier to understand, however the way that he jumped around was slightly confusing as I read more of his works. Overall I did enjoy both of these writers and their very unique and interesting styles.

Berrigan and Shakespeares Sonnets

I never have been that interested in poetry, or any form of artistic writing for that matter. Therefore, the assigned readings specifically Ted Berrigan’s “The Sonnets,” were a bit difficult to get through. Although passion for poetry has never manifested itself in me, I still can appreciate the structure and scheme of quality writing. Shakespeare’s Sonnets were by far much better and far more ensnaring then Berrigan’s. Due to his lackluster or nonexistent structure, it only confused and hindered me from comprehending any meaning. In sonnets such as XV where the lines must be read first, last, second, second-last etc. it was not only an obstacle to enjoying writing, but an unnecessary transformation. The rearrangement of the lines may have seemed clever at the time, but serves no purpose –artistic or otherwise- when conveying such an art form.

Shakespeare and Berrigan

For the readings this week we had to take a look at two different sonnet writers, Shakespeare and Berrigan. Having read many of Shakespeare's sonnets in past English courses I was used to his style and the way he uses rhyming within the text. It is still a little hard to fully comprehend the full significance of what he is trying to say though, because we are not used to speaking that type of English anymore. While Shakespeare's sonnets were formal, flowed together and had a clear meaning behind it, Berrigan's were a little harder to follow. Berrigan seems to weave together elements from Shakespeare's traditional way of writing sonnets, but also taking a more modern approach, that seems to push the limits of what people are used to when they read sonnets. Whereas Shakespeare sticks with the rhyme scheme, Berrigan's writing often seemed to be all over the place and sometimes without a clear meaning behind what his sonnet was saying. Berrigan also repeated lines in different sonnets, this got me thinking that maybe this is a more modern approach to looking at sonnets, because it ties his pieces together, kind of like when artists use the same symbol or brush stroke on their piece. Overall, both pieces had sonnets that talked about life and love, because everyone can relate to those topics, no matter if you lived during Shakespeare's time or Berrigan's, we still feel emotions for each of those subjects.

Shakespeare and Ted Berrigan

This week, we had to read a few sonnets. I found it hard to understand the sonnets by Shakespeare because of the language and the words he was using. It wasn’t complete English like we use now but was almost written like they used to speak. The sonnets by Ted Berrigan, seemed to be repeated throughout his book. Many of them were repeated in the same words but sometimes Berrigan added or took away a few words but either way, it conveyed the same message to me. I thought it was weird because when I was younger and we wrote sonnets, we were taught to make them rhyme at the end of the sentences. An example of this would be, the cat jumped over the dog, the dog jumped over the hog. His sonnets were written in a way of telling a story, almost life like. He wrote about his past, and then talked about now, and then talked about the future.

Shakespeare and Berrigan

I liked reading Shakespeare’s and Berrigan’s poems. While they were both written as sonnets, and about fairly similar subjects, they were very different. It seemed to show the evolution of the sonnet. It was originally very formal, but then poets started to play with its form to push it to its limits. I also saw in the sonnets a reflection of the time that they were written in. Shakespeare’s were very formal and used the kind of language that was expected of poetry at that time. Shakespeare also really stuck to the rhyme scheme. Berrigan used less formal language, and did not really stick to a formal rhyme scheme. Shakespeare’s poems were very formal and flowed, while Berrigan’s were informal and almost choppy. Berrigan’s sonnets had a very surrealist feel to me. They jumped all over the place within a poem, but there were connections between the separate poems. Berrigan repeated words or entire lines from one poem to another. The introduction to “The Sonnets” mentioned that Berrigan had a ‘method’ to writing his poems. This made his poems seem very mechanical, like the age he was living in. Shakespeare’s poems were very flowery and ornate like the age he lived in. While reading Berrigan’s poems I did find them a bit difficult to understand. The words gave off a lot of emotion, but I could not really figure out exactly what he was talking about. This made me think about if art actually has to have a solid meaning. Can an emotional piece of art be accepted as widely by the public as one with a clear meaning?

Sonnets

I thought both assigned sonnet readings were interesting. They both had a distinct form to how it was written. I noticed that the sonnets by Ted Berrigan were less conventional. In many of his sonnets, the same lines were repeated only to differ in location. Unlike Shakespeare’s sonnets, Berrigan’s sonnets did not have a rhyme scheme. His sonnets were as the Introduction of the The Sonnets explains, presented simultaneously whereas Shakespeare’s were chronologically. The Introduction also mentions that the sonnets are told in a time sequence unfolding the past, present, and future. However, I was not able to get that from Berrigan’s sonnets. A question that I had after reading the sonnets was why did he choose to write it the way he did? What is the message or meaning behind the repeated verses and rearrangement of lines?
Shakespeare’s sonnets however, were deep in thought but I found it hard to fully comprehend what he was saying maybe because we don’t speak like that anymore. Similarly, both writers spoke of life and love. These are themes in which I believe all writers write about because it evokes emotions and appeals to readers.

"Ways of Seeing" and Coming to Terms

In John Berger's "Ways of Seeing" he reemphasizes is ideas on the reproduction on art and the loss of meaning in a reproduction. An idea he introduces in this essay is one on the effect of words and art and the relationship between the two. For a piece of art to have great effect, it needs to be able to stand on its own. Captions should be optional and, in most cases, unnecessary. Having only the visual, aesthetic interpretation of a piece of art is essential to understanding its true meaning. In Rashomon, the scenes with silence hold as much if not greater importance than those with dialogue. Returning back to the idea of replication, Berger talks about how an original holds a different place and meaning than that of a reproduction. A greater connection is lost between audience and creator in a replication as the audience isn't experiencing the exact gestures and meanings as intended by the original.

Coming to Terms/Ways of Seeing

The idea put forth in Ways of Seeing seemed to be primarily that the interpretation of a piece of art greatly changes once mass production alters the context of it; That a painting is not just a visual recreation or a symbolic representation, but also a physical, singular construct that has its own background and history. Seeing a painting as an object with an understanding of why it was created/commissioned and the story of how/when/why it has changed hands gives the viewer perspective.

That said, I take issue with the overlooked fact that this belief in itself is a single outlook. It's a scholarly outlook, but also self-serving to the importance of critical studies and condescending to "the masses" (sarcastic quotation functioning as projection of intent of point of argument from Ways of Seeing as suggested in Rewriting (Harris, 2006, Utah State University Press)). Ways of Seeing suggests that mass production has altered the possible interpretations of a work of art. It suggests this, but implies that these new interpretations are sub-par in comparison. I argue that my underwhelmed reaction to seeing an authentic Van Gogh at the London Art Museum--when compared to my greater, emotionally-invested reaction at an authentic Manet in the next room--is not less valid because each is available to view at the click of a button nor because I'm unfamiliar with the paintings' backgrounds. Neither is the reaction of someone looking at one of these painting via a grainy, reproduced photograph less valid. Solipsistic as it may be, my purely aesthetic response to an artist's ability to capture the impression of light on canvas holds far more value for me than an art scholar dismissing the same painting because the style is too similar to the artist's predecessor.

Ways of Seeing/Coming to Terms

The idea in "Ways of Seeing" that there is a duality of every perspective is interesting to think about in terms of the movie, "Roshamon" because with the camera, the actor does not have the opportunity to view the audience. In other words, an actor only performs for a camera, but we think that actor is performing for us. The actor and the viewer have a different perspective on the same reality, much like placing a reproduction outside a museum changes the meaning of the painting. A picture because something entirely different outside of its intended realm. Therefore, the value of a work of art may differ greatly depending on the viewer, or the location of that piece of art.

Ways of Seeing & Coming to Terms

The readings that we were assigned to this week really fit in very well with the discussions we had in class about Rashomon. While reading Berger there was one line that really stuck out to me "When we see a landscape, we situate ourselves in it." I think this really speaks to why the influence of film is so important. It's great to read a book and be able to visualize the scenes, and characters but it really adds a new and interesting dimension when that book is turned into a movie and you can compare what you saw in your head to what is being portrayed on the screen. The main idea of Coming to Terms was all about perspective, each person has a different perspective when viewing art or reading a book. Every person's perspective depends on how they were raised or where they have been in their life. It's so interesting to think that even if you ask two people to tell you about one event, the descriptions of the same event could be completely different.

Ways of Seeing & Coming To Terms

I actually very much enjoyed the readings for today. In “Ways of Seeing” Berger reminded me a lot of the piece we read from Walter Benjamin. In part of Benjamin’s essay he explained how people have had a hard time considering photography and film works of art. Berger more thoroughly explains this: he describes how photography and film change the original copy of art, specifically paintings, because the perspective of the spectator is influenced by the environment in which they are viewing it and their knowledge of the original piece from which the copy was made. In “Coming to Terms” Harris explains how the meaning of literature is influenced by the perspective in which the reader is reading it; your life and environment impacts the way you interpret the meaning of what you’re reading. I think it is interesting that if we consider literature art, we must, as Berger explains, take into account how a copy of the original writing impacts the way we perceive the meaning/importance.

Ways of Seeing and Coming to Terms

I enjoyed these pieces, it really added to the discussions we were having on Monday in class. The way pieces of art (in terms of paintings, a sculpture, etc.) work in terms of limits, is very different than a piece of literature. And the idea of film having limits is also very different. Our group discussed Rashomon as a play, film, or even the screenplay. If someone were to read the screenplay of Rashomon, it was be so confusing. Film and being able to see it live, would be able to fill those gaps that a piece of literature just doesn't have the ability to do. Then we talked about if Rashomon was turned into a play, that would also be confusing because of all the flashbacks that can be portrayed well in film. With the ability of camera angles and other things that can be done in editing, a film can make up for things that literature and a play cannot.

Ways of Seeing and Coming to Terms

After reading these two texts for this class I found myself thinking a lot about the way people perceive different things. In one of my other classes we are talking about race and how there is no biological proof that race exists and that it is only a social construction. I relate this to the fact that race is basically a perception of one person seeing the different color of skin on another person. The way that we see pictures, art, and literature differs from person to person and this is what makes the world unique. I am interested to learn how others in class 'saw' the texts and how their perception of it differs or is similar to my own.

"Ways of Seeing" and "Coming to Terms"

I found “Ways of Seeing” by John Berger to be much easier to understand than Benjamin’s piece. It really hit home the point that all works of art, photos, paintings, sculptures, and film, are all greatly influenced by perspective. I also saw this theme running through the chapter in “Rewriting.” There it is mentioned that in refuting a point, the essay writer should take biases into account. It helped me to make the connection between biases in literature and perspective in art. Both are essentially the same thing. Then I started thinking about how bias/perspective was used in “Rashomon.” Perspective can be seen through the retelling of the samari’s murder, or suicide. Each character in the film saw the event with their own biases from their station in society or gender. But what was the director trying to say about perspective? A major theme in the film seemed to be hope in humanity. How does perspective enter into that?

Ways Of Seeing/ Coming To Terms

I found it interesting in "Ways of Seeing" when he was discussing the difference between an original piece of art compared to a replica, or re-print. When it comes to film it's usually the case that the original is far superior to the remake. As for painted pieces it's harder to tell. With a re-print you get the same feeling of the painting but I do believe there is a different feeling when you see the original. I also found it interesting how he described the camera as being able to portray multiple perspectives. I guess I always new paintings and drawings just show one perspective but I didn't really realize it fully. In the chapter "Coming To Terms" Harris talks about when we write we want to pick out the most vital parts of the reading at hand but still summarize what the author was trying to say concisely.

Coming to Terms & Ways of Seeing

After reading Berger's 'Ways of Seeing', I found a new understanding of the actual importance of real artistic work. This essay reminded me of an introductory journalism class I took a few semesters ago. From the beginning of my Journalism course the professor spoke about how the introduction of the camera, and later the video camera greatly depreciated the value of artistic work. I think this touches directly on what Berger was saying in his essay. He argues that by being able to simple reproduce a classic painting or drawing causes the original piece to lose its value. This is because no longer does the spectator have to travel to the artwork, but rather the artwork can come to them in a slightly depreciated way. Not being able to see an original Davinci in it's true glory takes away from the impact the painting is supposed to have on the person viewing it. One cannot fully appreciate such an artwork when they can not even see the distinct brush strokes and color choices the artist has made, up close.

Ways of Seeing & Coming to Terms

In the first chapter of Coming to Terms, Harris talks about the importance of understanding and interpreting text. He says that most people just read the text the way the writer wrote it. When a reader just reads the text though, they may not understand. Harris suggests reading the text closer and in more depth to give us a better interpretation. Reading closer may involve re-reading. I find myself having to do this very often when I read. If I don't understand what I'm reading, then what's the point?
John Berger's piece reminded me a lot of Benjamin's from Monday's reading. He talks about how art changes society, both present and future. Berger also commented that reproducing art distorts the original meaning. I would say I have to agree with that. A copy or reproduction of a sculpture, painting, or even film is rarely better than the original.

"Ways of Seeing"/"Coming to Terms"

In Chapter 1 of Joseph Harris’ book, he talks about how we read a text just the way the writer wrote it. Some people will read the text and not understand what they just read. Personally when I read, I read the text and then if I didn’t understand it I will re-read the text. Several people involuntary read just the text and not understand it but say they read it. The other reading we had to read was, “Ways of seeing.” The author talked about how art has changed over time. Art is changing the way society used to be and the future of it. Berger talks about how we interpret things and how it’s different from other people. This was a lot like what we read last week and how the development of reproduction and how that has changed the way everyone sees art. Everyone sees and interprets art in different ways.

"Ways of Seeing" and "Coming to Terms

"Ways of Seeing" by John Berger and Benjamin's piece is ultimately about the same thing-reproduction. They both talk about how reproduction changed how we see art. Benjamin stated that the reproduction of art was made for the mass culture and Berger makes it clear that because of how art is made now, it had taken away from it's original meaning.
From what I took in from the first chapter of "Coming to Terms," was that many writers, like myself, tend to just read something, but doesn't fully understand the true meaning of it or have an explanation why they used a particular piece. He then goes on to mention how we, as readers, need to read closer to comprehend the full effect of the piece. And as a result, we will get a better interpretation of the work.

Ways of Seeing and Coming To Terms

John Berger certainly has a strong opinion on how art is viewed and treated in his writing “Ways of Seeing”, which stood out to me, and serves as the focus of this entry. He claims that by reproducing a work of art and viewing it in a situation other then its environment, it is being distorted and no longer holds its true meaning. I find this ridiculous and foolish, moving a piece of art does not disrupt anything about it unless it is not properly taken care of. If his belief were true then all art would need to remain wherever it was created, and such places as museums would cease to exist. Reproducing a form of art serves only to make it more available, and is not done in disrespect to the subject.

"Ways of Seeing," and "Coming to Terms"

John Berger's piece "Ways of Seeing," reiterated some points that Benjamin made in his piece from Monday. He brings up reproduction and explains that the way we are able to see art has changed dramatically. Just like Benjamin mentioned about reproduced art being more readily available to mass culture instead of the elite high culture it was at originally, Berger adds that reproduced art has in fact taken away from its original meaning and has instead put a synthetic value on these once authentic amazing works of art.
In chapter 1 of Joseph Harris' book, he talks about how we were programed in a way to just read what a writer wrote, but not fully understand the meaning behind it. Therefore, in this chapter he describes the necessity of close reading in order to interpret that writer's work, while presenting our own side to it, instead of just copying. By doing so, we will have a better understanding of critical writing, because we've taken the time to fully interpret the words.

"Coming to Terms" and Ways of Seeing

From reading chapter one “Coming to Terms” from the book Rewriting and the first chapter of Ways of Seeing by John Berger, I found a lot of truth to what they were saying. In the chapter, “Coming to Terms”, Harris mentions that good writers not only attempt to understand another writer’s work and reiterate it, but also interprets the work and is able to present his or her own way of seeing the text. I also found value to Harris’s words when he talks about the use of quotations. Sometimes writers, including me, fall guilty of simply just using quotes not really having a reason or explanation for their use.
For that matter, Berger goes into speaking about our ways of seeing and interpreting the things we see. Similar to the article we read last week, he also talks about the development of reproduction and how that has changed the way we see art. What makes a price of art unique and for some holds a religious meaning has now been “enveloped in an atmosphere of entirely bogus religiosity” because of how reproduction in our modern society has taken away this sense of amazement from its authenticity.

Rashomon and Walter Benjamin

In Benjamin's essay, he talks about how actors are always portraying themselves in someway or another in every character they portray. In the opening scene we find the first three characters (the woodcutter, priest, and commoner) sitting at a completely broken temple. When this movie was made, it was after the destruction of two bombs. The actors in this film had to watch their lives and loved ones torn apart. I believe that the actors could use this painful experience in their acting. The woodcutter goes on to tell the horrible story he saw in the woods. The bandit's crazy performance could have been influenced especially by past experiences in Japan. I agree with Benjamin's perception on actors in this way.

Rashomon; very different from what I would typically choose to watch, however I thought it kept me interested only briefly. I think that the movie broadened my sense of how much technology has changed. Which then leads me to the reading by Walter Benjamin. He goes to explain how a reproduction of anything alters the original, and in a way makes it less meaningful. Also, the fact that the movie obviously had to be translated from japenese to english made me wonder if that factor took away from what was being brought to the audience. However, I do enjoy the fact that the movie was still in japenese. I think that if the movie were to be made today, with the english language, a lot of meaning would be taken away from it.

Rashomon and Walter Benjamin

I was really surprised at how much I enjoyed Rashomon. I was a little hesitant at first, not knowing what to expect. After watching it, one can defiantly understand how Rashomon can be considered a piece of literature, with its use of symbolism and multiple perspective. As much as I appreciated the literary qualities of the film, I am still very curious as to how this will fully relate to what we have been discussing in class. Walter Benjamin takes a look at art and how art has changed with the advent of mechanical reproduction. It is because of mechanical reproduction that most of us have access to art. My copy of the DVD Rashomon is a mechanical reproduction of the original, for example. The idea of what is art changes with technology, as the modes of mechanical reproduction change as technology changes and the modes of mechanical reproduction make art available to be appreciated. A factor is what is considered art is that people have access to it.

Rashomon and Walter Benjamin

Walter Benjamin's description of reproduction posed some great points. The idea that reproduction, because it inevitably strays from the original in some way, is less meaningful. He says that reproductions like photographs or films are just a way for the audience to try and get closer to the art, or the art's imitation. I think that the ability to own a film or to buy a print of a famous painting makes art mean something much more than if you'd seen a Picasso painting in a New York museum once. I understand that the original piece is charged with genuine emotion because it is the actual product of the artist, but to be able to enjoy the essence of that art whenever you'd like makes the art more important, i think.

Benjamin explains that film depends on more than just one image, the original image. The single shots in film depend on the shots before it, and later are affected by the shots after it. In Rashomon, the story also takes this approach, by building the story based on how one situation affects the reality of the last or the one to follow. Each time a new scenario for the crime was shown, I already had preconceived notions about what could happen because I had experience with similar scenarios before.