This means that with just a small nugget of information to begin with, I could read the poem based around this information and make more sense of it. But doesn't this also mean that I was reading the poem in a different context? Rather than reading it with no pre-conceptions, a kind of reader bias is introduced, because I base most of my assumptions around the context that I am using (consciously or unconsciously).
I found this effect again just last week, as I was rereading "An Octopus" for my Analytical essay rough draft. I jotted down a bunch of quotes about nature that I found interesting, and eventually discovered a pattern in the way that Moore was presenting the poem. I wrote down an experimental thesis for my essay, and then re-read all the poem. All of a sudden, the poem was full of evidence for my claims, and I felt like I was beginning to make sense of all the quotations and natural metaphors that she employed in the poem.
But the insight that I suddenly gained was really a byproduct of my thesis: I was reading the poem in a new context, under a new perspective. In a way, by assuming that my thesis made sense, I was biased as I re-read the poem, looking for evidence and examples of my ideas.
This just goes to show that there are many ways to read a poem, and that the sometimes abstract nature of poetry leads us generate meaning that isn't really there (or, at least, was not consciously placed there by the author).
3 comments:
I experience a similar feeling when I read poems. It just seems to me that the individual sentences and information doesn't tie together into a whole. I think we experience this because we don't have something for us to focus on. I find that reading poetry, especially, is like looking at a piece of white paper. When we are given a blank piece of paper, our eyes wander around the paper and don't focus on anything, but if we're given a piece of paper with a black dot in the middle, then our eyes focus on the dot. This is exactly what Alistair was talking about with the poems. If we don't have something to focus on then the whole poem just doesn't make really sense.
I completely agree with you, and in fact I took the exact same approach to writing my essay about Moore and nature. I highlighted a bunch of quotes and slowly interpretations started coming up and I understood the poem a little better. I don't know about you but I eventually had 3 categories of quotes, each matching a slightly different representation of nature... I got really confused and eventually had to just pick one-two representations and connect them and them make sense of the work. I was them able to re-evaluate my initial interpretations and ideas about the poem and connect them and make more sense of the poem... i think I still have a long way to go, but I have a good base to start with.
Anyway, I comepletely understand what you are talking about because i felt the same way about the waste land, and then took the same approach with moore.
I really like the class discussions (which is probably why I talk to much) because when everyone voices their opinion on the poetry, I find I understand the poetry much better than if I was to read it alone. I think my problem is that when I first read the poem I form an opinion of it, that, usually incorrect, is hard to shake off later. But when I hear others' perspectives on poetry it broadens my own perspective. Although I often have to sit down and try to interpret a poem by myself, it's much more enjoyable and productive when analyzed through group discussion.
Post a Comment