Analysing Poetry: Good or Bad?

[eliselovesmusic]

Ok, so I will admit to 'analysing' alot of the awesome stuff that gets posted on here (seriously guys, I'm always really impressed haha)

HOWEVER, I have always stuck to the idea that poetry/lyrics/books - even films - should be taken personally rather than picking it apart to try and find a meaning. That you should associate the writing with a personal experience rather than trying to figure out the author's thought processes.

I always cringe when English teachers try to make you analyse a piece of work, and demolish it until all abiguity, all raw emotion is lost: until you can't even remember your initial reaction to the writing.

I may be being immature about this but what do you guys think? Is it better to just let great pieces of writing be, or do you think that possibly the purpose of writing (and reading) is to have it analysed?

[fishingthe_sky]

I think that if something is truly going to affect you, no amount of analysis is going to make you feel less powerfully about a work. There shouldn't be a disconnect between dissecting a novel/poem/lyric/film and having a visceral from it. Analysis lets you discover the meat and bones of what you like. A lame analogy, but it's like the difference between lust and love. You can enjoy someone on a surface level and have strong reactions from it, but it takes a good amount of "analysis" to discover what that person's about. If analyzing a work ruins it for you, it was never a piece that was meant to affect you, because as you explore its inner workings you should become more excited about it and more engrossed in it. It's like your favorite songs: we all like a ton of songs upon our first listens to it, but it's the songs that continually reveal their mystery to us that become the ones we consider our favorites.

[eliselovesmusic]

I think that if something is truly going to affect you, no amount of analysis is going to make you feel less powerfully about a work. There shouldn't be a disconnect between dissecting a novel/poem/lyric/film and having a visceral from it. Analysis lets you discover the meat and bones of what you like. A lame analogy, but it's like the difference between lust and love. You can enjoy someone on a surface level and have strong reactions from it, but it takes a good amount of "analysis" to discover what that person's about. If analyzing a work ruins it for you, it was never a piece that was meant to affect you, because as you explore its inner workings you should become more excited about it and more engrossed in it. It's like your favorite songs: we all like a ton of songs upon our first listens to it, but it's the songs that continually reveal their mystery to us that become the ones we consider our favorites.


I totally see what you're saying, but I still think that just letting something grow on you is in alot of cases the way to go.



This is completely off the topic but do you have any idea how perceptive you are dude? You should take up psychology or something haha

[thespearkid]

This thread made me think of something that I have always noticed about myself. When it comes to music, I always enjoy an artist more of I know the background behind their work. All my favorite albums (...Is a Real Boy, Pinkerton, In the Aeroplane Over the Sea, and others) are all amazing works of art that I appreciate all the more because I have researched the backgrounds of the artists who recorded them and I know what they were going through when they wrote it. Analyzing songs and poetry make me love them even more because I understand them. Ambiguity is nice, to an extent (just take a look at Hills Like White Elephants or "Two-Headed Boy" by Neutral Milk Hotel). But combination of coming to my own conclusions and then trying to discover what the artist was saying is half the fun of art. On my profile under "Favorite bands" I wrote, "I like music with lyrics that make me wonder how the artist came up with something so incredible", or something along those lines. That really goes for poetry too, probably even more so. My favorite poem is Home Burial by Robert Frost. It's amazing and it's made even more amazing by my knowing about Robert Frost's personal struggles with the same problem the poem addresses.

It's really late at night and I'm probably rambling but, as an English major, I can't imagine reading a poem and then not wanting to understand why the artist used certain phrases as opposed to others or why s/he wrote the poem in the first place.

[eliselovesmusic]

This thread made me think of something that I have always noticed about myself. When it comes to music, I always enjoy an artist more of I know the background behind their work. All my favorite albums (...Is a Real Boy, Pinkerton, In the Aeroplane Over the Sea, and others) are all amazing works of art that I appreciate all the more because I have researched the backgrounds of the artists who recorded them and I know what they were going through when they wrote it. Analyzing songs and poetry make me love them even more because I understand them. Ambiguity is nice, to an extent (just take a look at Hills Like White Elephants or "Two-Headed Boy" by Neutral Milk Hotel). But combination of coming to my own conclusions and then trying to discover what the artist was saying is half the fun of art. On my profile under "Favorite bands" I wrote, "I like music with lyrics that make me wonder how the artist came up with something so incredible", or something along those lines. That really goes for poetry too, probably even more so. My favorite poem is Home Burial by Robert Frost. It's amazing and it's made even more amazing by my knowing about Robert Frost's personal struggles with the same problem the poem addresses.

It's really late at night and I'm probably rambling but, as an English major, I can't imagine reading a poem and then not wanting to understand why the artist used certain phrases as opposed to others or why s/he wrote the poem in the first place.


Yeah when I hear (or rather read) you say that about music I totally see what you mean - I'm always looking up the band and what they were going through at the time BUT there was this one site I once stumbled across when I was looking up the lyrics to Dance, Dance by Fall Out Boy.

It was this random dude saying "This song means....... It is a fact that Pete Wentz is talking about...." or something along those lines.

I was mortified. I thought that me thinking that the lyrics meant something else was wrong - that my thought processes about the song had failed me. The thing that's probably bugging me is when people say that what they think a poem/lyric means is a fact, as in "I, Mrs English Teacher, say that Wilfred Owen wants you to think about blah blah blah so therefore that's a fact."
Maybe it's just the way that my English teachers have come across, or maybe I'm just being too cynical and precious about writing.

I don't have anything against English teachers but yeah this is just my experience and I've probably taken it too personally.

[fishingthe_sky]

Yeah when I hear (or rather read) you say that about music I totally see what you mean - I'm always looking up the band and what they were going through at the time BUT there was this one site I once stumbled across when I was looking up the lyrics to Dance, Dance by Fall Out Boy.

It was this random dude saying "This song means....... It is a fact that Pete Wentz is talking about...." or something along those lines.

I was mortified. I thought that me thinking that the lyrics meant something else was wrong - that my thought processes about the song had failed me. The thing that's probably bugging me is when people say that what they think a poem/lyric means is a fact, as in "I, Mrs English Teacher, say that Wilfred Owen wants you to think about blah blah blah so therefore that's a fact."
Maybe it's just the way that my English teachers have come across, or maybe I'm just being too cynical and precious about writing.

I don't have anything against English teachers but yeah this is just my experience and I've probably taken it too personally.
Haha, I think there might be a little cynicism there. You make an interesting point, one that requires a sort of double-sided answer. For the most part, trying to interpret the meaning of a poem/novel is never as clear-cut as it may sometimes seem; there's a good deal of wiggle room, and for good art, no definitive meaning, as multiple meanings can easily exist in a work (even in the case of an artist stating the meaning of the piece; this gets into a lot of complex literary theory, but basically once a piece of art is finished, the author ceases to have influence over the work itself, and while he may say that the work had a particular meaning, he cannot force his readers to take that as the final say). That being said, meanings have to be backed up by legitimate analysis/reason for them to be valid. You can't just say The Great Gatsby was not at all about the state of the American Dream, but rather about the plight of penguins in the face of global warming; that shit won't fly (like the penguins). In high school, you're taught in a sort of clear-cut manner because you're being taught the skills of perception, deduction, logic, etc... all the skills that go into literary interpretation. Once you reach higher levels of education, it becomes much clearer that these works of art operate on more than one plane of meaning.

Haha, thank you. I appreciate you thinking I'm perceptive. My dad's a professor of psychology and neurobiology, so I guess that sort of comes with the territory.

[eliselovesmusic]

Haha, I think there might be a little cynicism there. You make an interesting point, one that requires a sort of double-sided answer. For the most part, trying to interpret the meaning of a poem/novel is never as clear-cut as it may sometimes seem; there's a good deal of wiggle room, and for good art, no definitive meaning, as multiple meanings can easily exist in a work (even in the case of an artist stating the meaning of the piece; this gets into a lot of complex literary theory, but basically once a piece of art is finished, the author ceases to have influence over the work itself, and while he may say that the work had a particular meaning, he cannot force his readers to take that as the final say). That being said, meanings have to be backed up by legitimate analysis/reason for them to be valid. You can't just say The Great Gatsby was not at all about the state of the American Dream, but rather about the plight of penguins in the face of global warming; that shit won't fly (like the penguins). In high school, you're taught in a sort of clear-cut manner because you're being taught the skills of perception, deduction, logic, etc... all the skills that go into literary interpretation. Once you reach higher levels of education, it becomes much clearer that these works of art operate on more than one plane of meaning.

Haha, thank you. I appreciate you thinking I'm perceptive. My dad's a professor of psychology and neurobiology, so I guess that sort of comes with the territory.



Ahhhhh. I see now. Hmm. I think I owe more credit to my teachers. Damn I feel really mean now for dissing the crap out of Mrs English Teacher. Oops.

But I still think can't help but think that in an essay on, say, analysing a characters quotes to decipher what their personality is, that if I was to totally go against the grain of what we'd been taught in class I would fail. Although considering what you said above my originality in thought-provokingness might go appreciated...
I hope this isn't turning into me asking for study tips haha...

[The Personist]

My favorite poem is "The Waste Land." If I thought analyzing poetry was bad, I would have to pick a different favorite.

[fishingthe_sky]

Ahhhhh. I see now. Hmm. I think I owe more credit to my teachers. Damn I feel really mean now for dissing the crap out of Mrs English Teacher. Oops.

But I still think can't help but think that in an essay on, say, analysing a characters quotes to decipher what their personality is, that if I was to totally go against the grain of what we'd been taught in class I would fail. Although considering what you said above my originality in thought-provokingness might go appreciated...
I hope this isn't turning into me asking for study tips haha...
Well, you sort of run into the problem of "What do I need to do for a good grade." In high school, it's a lot more clear-cut what you need to do in order to get a passing grade. You're being taught the skills of a literary analyst, and so there's a certain level of conformity that goes into your interpretation. College is a different story; there, you can be totally wrong and as long as you've made a sufficient case for your argument, you won't fail. That's definitely been the case with me. Don't discount the sort of absolutism you're taught earlier on, though. It teaches you to reach definitive conclusions, and shows you the way to reach the strongest conclusions.

[eliselovesmusic]

My favorite poem is "The Waste Land." If I thought analyzing poetry was bad, I would have to pick a different favorite.


Hmm. Interesting. I love Dulce et Decorum Est - I read it once and was like @$#*& HELL YEAH!

But then we had to ananlyse it in class. I don't know if that affected what I thought of it - I would love it either way.

[fishingthe_sky]

My favorite poem is "The Waste Land." If I thought analyzing poetry was bad, I would have to pick a different favorite.
The man speaks the truth. My favorite poem is "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock." You have good taste.

[eliselovesmusic]

The man speaks the truth. My favorite poem is "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock." You have good taste.


Oh oh oh yeah gotta gree with ya there.... It's gorgeous (for want of a more poetic word haha) but I can never bring myself to believe it was written in 1917.... It always seems so ahead of it's time to me

Note to self: Look up poem "This Waste Land"

[The Personist]

The man speaks the truth. My favorite poem is "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock." You have good taste.

T. S. Eliot changed the way I look at poems. "Love Song" used to be my favorite poem, but one day "The Waste Land" and I had a conversation, and I suddenly just "got" it, for lack of a better word.

I've been reading a lot of Wallace Stevens lately. His style and subject matter fascinates me to no end.

[The Personist]

Oh oh oh yeah gotta gree with ya there.... It's gorgeous (for want of a more poetic word haha) but I can never bring myself to believe it was written in 1917.... It always seems so ahead of it's time to me

Note to self: Look up poem "This Waste Land"

"The* Waste Land", not "This".

And good luck. It is really, really tough to get through, but it is perhaps the most incredible experience you'll ever have when you finally connect with it.

[Meenaghey Aym]

It's like your favorite songs: we all like a ton of songs upon our first listens to it, but it's the songs that continually reveal their mystery to us that become the ones we consider our favorites

that says everything that i wud hav to contribute to this...

[fishingthe_sky]

T. S. Eliot changed the way I look at poems. "Love Song" used to be my favorite poem, but one day "The Waste Land" and I had a conversation, and I suddenly just "got" it, for lack of a better word.

I've been reading a lot of Wallace Stevens lately. His style and subject matter fascinates me to no end.
Eliot's the reason I even bother write poetry. "The Waste Land" and I have had quite a few conversations, and it's definitely one of my favorites, albeit I get frustrated with his ridiculously obscure allusions (though not as much as Ezra Pound's do in The Cantos). Ever read "Four Quartets"?

Wallace Steven's is quite good. "Thirteen Ways of Looking at a Blackbird" is one of my favorite poem sequences ever.

[The Personist]

Eliot's the reason I even bother write poetry. "The Waste Land" and I have had quite a few conversations, and it's definitely one of my favorites, albeit I get frustrated with his ridiculously obscure allusions (though not as much as Ezra Pound's do in The Cantos). Ever read "Four Quartets"?

Wallace Steven's is quite good. "Thirteen Ways of Looking at a Blackbird" is one of my favorite poem sequences ever.

Eliot is definitely the reason I write, too, though my gateway poet was definitely Walt Whitman, who served as an effective counterbalance to the pretensions I had until I read him associated with poetry and the poet. It's kind of a long story as to how I came about that notion, but the long and short of it is, Walt Whitman destroyed it, and then I came to adore a man who could be seen to embody the academic pretenses that surround poetry. You should read his famous essay about how Hamlet is a bad play. It's brilliant, but incredibly pedantic.

For every ounce of talent he had in his body, Ezra pound had a gallon of conceit. He was a genius, but his poetry catered to such a small group of fellow learned folk that it took me until recently to fully appreciate it.

I've not read "Four Quartets," though I'll put it on my list of poems to read.

I think Stevens' verse is at times more thought provoking than Eliot or Pound. The fact that he never resolves his central question and reconciles reality with the imagination is just brilliant. "The Anecdote of the Jar" and "Disillusionment of Ten O'Clock" are two of my favorite poems.

[fishingthe_sky]

Eliot is definitely the reason I write, too, though my gateway poet was definitely Walt Whitman, who served as an effective counterbalance to the pretensions I had until I read him associated with poetry and the poet. It's kind of a long story as to how I came about that notion, but the long and short of it is, Walt Whitman destroyed it, and then I came to adore a man who could be seen to embody the academic pretenses that surround poetry. You should read his famous essay about how Hamlet is a bad play. It's brilliant, but incredibly pedantic.

For every ounce of talent he had in his body, Ezra pound had a gallon of conceit. He was a genius, but his poetry catered to such a small group of fellow learned folk that it took me until recently to fully appreciate it.

I've not read "Four Quartets," though I'll put it on my list of poems to read.

I think Stevens' verse is at times more thought provoking than Eliot or Pound. The fact that he never resolves his central question and reconciles reality with the imagination is just brilliant. "The Anecdote of the Jar" and "Disillusionment of Ten O'Clock" are two of my favorite poems.
Certainly both Pound and Eliot were big in the elitist category, but to some extent it's justified. I mean, you could build a pretty solid library just by having the works they allude to in their poetry. I personally like Pound as an editor more than a writer. I think he did great things for the Modernists, but he was not among the better poets of his circle.

I have read that essay. I've actually read most of his essays, believe it or not (lots of early American lit under my belt). The Poet and Nature stand to be some of the best essays ever written in English. Whitman is undoubtedly among my favorite poets. He quite literally has taken my breath away. I also wish I had the self editing skills he had; looking at the differences between the many published versions of Song of Myself is just mind-boggling.

I personally find William Carlos Williams to be more thought-provoking than Eliot or Pound, who tend to be more intelligence-provoking (that sounds horrible, but it's all I can think of right now). His work is a great contrast to them, and the history of the three makes it all the more interesting.

[The Personist]

Certainly both Pound and Eliot were big in the elitist category, but to some extent it's justified. I mean, you could build a pretty solid library just by having the works they allude to in their poetry. I personally like Pound as an editor more than a writer. I think he did great things for the Modernists, but he was not among the better poets of his circle.

I have read that essay. I've actually read most of his essays, believe it or not (lots of early American lit under my belt). The Poet and Nature stand to be some of the best essays ever written in English. Whitman is undoubtedly among my favorite poets. He quite literally has taken my breath away. I also wish I had the self editing skills he had; looking at the differences between the many published versions of Song of Myself is just mind-boggling.

I personally find William Carlos Williams to be more thought-provoking than Eliot or Pound, who tend to be more intelligence-provoking (that sounds horrible, but it's all I can think of right now). His work is a great contrast to them, and the history of the three makes it all the more interesting.

I agree with basically everything you said in this post.

I think Williams is absolutely correct in his criticism of Eliot, though I would argue in Eliot's defense that the poem manages to transcend its own density and speak to a reader even if the allusions don't fully connect at first read.

Walt Whitman's self-editing is admirable, and something I am trying to teach myself to do. The only issue is that Song Of Myself, in my opinion, got worse as it went on, because he ended up toning down some of the sexuality that I saw as being just as groundbreaking and important as the free verse in which Whitman wrote.

[fishingthe_sky]

I agree with basically everything you said in this post.

I think Williams is absolutely correct in his criticism of Eliot, though I would argue in Eliot's defense that the poem manages to transcend its own density and speak to a reader even if the allusions don't fully connect at first read.

Walt Whitman's self-editing is admirable, and something I am trying to teach myself to do. The only issue is that Song Of Myself, in my opinion, got worse as it went on, because he ended up toning down some of the sexuality that I saw as being just as groundbreaking and important as the free verse in which Whitman wrote.
I disagree that it got worse as it went on. You're totally right, the first publication is far more sexual, and it was ground-breaking in its time, but I think that in the 30 years he had between the first and last editions he put forth a great deal of work with sexuality at its core. I think that the last edition is the superior one for the way he constructed his lines (I find the 1855 edition to be a little bit much, though at some eras it improves the flow and has great parallelism), which set the model for all free verse we see now.

Woo for discussing poetics.

[eliselovesmusic]

I so wish I knew what you are talking about.

Damn my youth.

[fishingthe_sky]

I so wish I knew what you are talking about.

Damn my youth.
I would suggest looking at Eliot's "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" and Steven's "Thirteen Ways of Looking at a Blackbird." Both are two excellent examples of their style of poetry, will be easy to read (I say this because The Waste Land, Four Quartets, and The Cantos are all very complex poems that almost require a classroom to even get a hint of understanding) and are easily found online. I might get shit on by some of the older members for saying this, but the Eliot piece is kind of like the first "emo" thing ever written (which is probably why many bands in the scene, past and present, have made references to it), and a great example of how to write about love and inadequacy while avoiding cliche.

[diehtc0ke]

Eliot's the reason I even bother write poetry. "The Waste Land" and I have had quite a few conversations, and it's definitely one of my favorites, albeit I get frustrated with his ridiculously obscure allusions (though not as much as Ezra Pound's do in The Cantos). Ever read "Four Quartets"?

Wallace Steven's is quite good. "Thirteen Ways of Looking at a Blackbird" is one of my favorite poem sequences ever.
I think Blake is what first did it for me poetically. The Songs of Experience is still one of my favorite poetry volumes. Other than Williams and Yeats, I'm not so much into modernist poetry, though I do keep meaning to give it another shot. I'm much more interested in post-WWII poetry. Plath, Lowell and Ginsberg are my true inspirations.

oWqHlcAmBeA
This does it for me every time.

[The Personist]

Plath is very much hit or miss with me; I think she's maudlin at times.

[fishingthe_sky]

Plath is very much hit or miss with me; I think she's maudlin at times.
I concur.

[diehtc0ke]

Plath is very much hit or miss with me; I think she's maudlin at times.
Valid point. Her imagery made me feel like she was one of the first people who just really said what she wanted (that I had read, anyway).

"I have done it again.
One year in every ten
I manage it--

A sort of walking miracle, my skin
Bright as a Nazi lampshade,
My right foot

A paperweight,
My face a featureless, fine
Jew linen.

Peel off the napkin
O my enemy.
Do I terrify?--"

*shrug* "Bright as a Nazi lampshade"? When I first read "Lady Lazarus," I thought, who the hell says something like that?

[fishingthe_sky]

Valid point. Her imagery made me feel like she was one of the first people who just really said what she wanted (that I had read, anyway).

"I have done it again.
One year in every ten
I manage it--

A sort of walking miracle, my skin
Bright as a Nazi lampshade,
My right foot

A paperweight,
My face a featureless, fine
Jew linen.

Peel off the napkin
O my enemy.
Do I terrify?--"

*shrug* "Bright as a Nazi lampshade"? When I first read "Lady Lazarus," I thought, who the hell says something like that?
Someone who's not that sensitive to the Jews? I've never felt good reading that line, to be honest. Definitely overblown and unnecessary.

[diehtc0ke]

Someone who's not that sensitive to the Jews? I've never felt good reading that line, to be honest. Definitely overblown and unnecessary.
This isn't meant as a slight but I've always been fascinated with the fact that it's usually the gentiles that get bent out of shape about her imagery. *shrugs* I find it to be immensely powerful even if it is problematic.

[fishingthe_sky]

This isn't meant as a slight but I've always been fascinated with the fact that it's usually the gentiles that get bent out of shape about her imagery. *shrugs* I find it to be immensely powerful even if it is problematic.
I didn't used to be until I had a professor who served in WWII and explained why, though he loved Plath's work, he felt that part of Lady Lazarus was offensive. It struck a chord with me. It's no doubt a powerful image, but it just seems a misdirected way to go about it.