In my high-school English classes, poetry was a main topic of discussion and took up a large part of each year. Weeks were devoted to reading poetry aloud in class. Thirty minute intervals of discussion commenced after the reading, which also included personal self-reflection, and the rest of the time was usually devoted to a class analysis. Poetry might not be my favorite subject to discuss, but I did enjoy reading the various forms of poetry in the literary world-that is, up until my sophomore year in high-school. The repetitive, in-depth analysis of the poetry that started that year picked the poem apart, losing the interest of not only myself, but many students. I understand that iambic-pentameter is rather important when characterizing the meter of a specific line, but is it really necessary to draw conclusions from the rhythm of how someone says a line, or for that matter, pronunciates the most mundane word? I have a hard time believing that some authors really went to that much trouble when trying to convey a message or portray a theme. After all, no one truly knows what the author’s intent is anyway because sometimes poetry is too subjective. My most frustrating moment was at the end of a class analysis when the teacher agreed to end the discussion on the fact that a clear message wasn’t available from the work. I was left even more confused about the work and I had felt like I wasted my time. Maybe I’m a little defensive on this topic because I was the one who could never understand the concept of meter or how, for example, shifting the stress on a word regarding intonation would completely change sentence flow. However, I do understand and recognize the fact that analysis is meant to spark the creative juices, get ideas flowing, and maybe make some connection to the your life. I just don’t think beating a poem to death does anyone good-some things are left up to question or best left alone. Poetry should be read at your pleasure. Whatever inferences or connections you make to it are up to you and are for your own benefit. A strict, exhaustive breakdown of a poem isn’t essential in order to get the most out of what the author has created.
Thanks, Jill, for your very detailed account of your academic experience with poetry analysis. Your writing really drew me in, and I sympathized with your feelings of frustration over analyzing the poem to death. I was glad to see that it didn't kill your drive to continue to read poetry for pure enjoyment.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your analysis of poetry. I like guessing what the author is trying to say, but not too in-depth to the point where I feel like I am taking away from the mysterious nature of most poetry. I like looking at what the author might be saying, but not what the author is saying. To this day, I still do not know how to spot iambic pentameter and unstressed syllables v. stressed syllables.
ReplyDeleteDon't worry Jill, I hated high school poetry also. I too had to contend with endless analysis year after year like you and not once did I find it enjoyable. I thought that when we analyzed a poem it lost its characteristic flow altogether. Not to mention I still harbor the belief that what a poet wrote several centuries ago when he was likely stoned out of his mind didn't necessarily make much sense then, let alone now.
ReplyDeleteI couldn't agree with you more. High school teaches you to pick things apart to an extreme degree and after doing so with every piece you simply loose interest in the poems. It is much more fun to read them for enjoyment and just find your own personal meanings that can make the poem really relate to your life.
ReplyDelete