Last blog posting—by group

Final issues for discussion:

From the murders forward, Raskolnikov spins a web in which he is himself trapped. And he is, in his more lucid moments, well aware of the trap: he even says that he “turned spiteful…Then I hid in my corner like a spider.”*

Yet of all the characters, Porfiry is the one who seems most “spiderlike” as he skillfully maneuvers Raskolnikov during their encounters. Porfiry also has keen insight into Raskolnikov. When he finally confronts the young man (part six, chapter 2), Porfiry tells Rodya: “Do you know how I regard you? I regard you as one of those men who could have their guts cut out, and would stand and look at his torturers with a smile -- provided he’s found faith, or God”

Discuss what Porfiry means by this. Notice that he does not say “faith in God”, but “faith, or God” (part 6, ch. 2, 3 pages from the end of the chapter, 460 in P/V).

*Interesting…Svidrigaïlov (pages 289-290) poses this anti-metaphysical “spiders of eternity” notion to Raskolnikov:

“We keep imagining eternity as an idea that cannot be grasped, something vast, vast! Instead of all that, imagine suddenly that there will be one little room there, something like a village bathhouse, covered with soot, with spiders in every corner, and that's the whole of eternity? I sometimes fancy something of the sort.”

“But surely, surely you can imagine something more just and comforting than that!” Raskolnikov cried, with painful feeling.

“More just? Who knows, perhaps that is just—and, you know, if I had my way, it's certainly how I would do it!” Svidrigaïlov answered, smiling vaguely.

A sort of chill came over Raskolnikov at this hideous answer. Svidrigaïlov raised his head, looked at him intently, and suddenly burst out laughing.

“No, but realize,” he cried, “that half an hour ago we had never even seen each other, we’re supposed to be enemies, there is unfinished business between us; so we've dropped the business, and look where we've gone sailing into! Well, wasn't it true when I said that we were birds of a feather?”

• • • • • •

In Heart of Darkness, Marlow’s descriptions of Kurtz include the following: “a wandering and tormented thing”, someone whose words were like “phrases spoken in nightmares”, someone who “had no restraint, no faith”, whose “soul was mad”, someone who “struggled, struggled”. Think back to the nightmare-like atmosphere that suffused Heart of Darkness, then read again the description of Rodya’s last dream (6 pages from the end of the novel, p. 547 P/V version, paragraph beginning “He lay in the hospital all through the end of Lent…” and ending with “…had heard their words or voices.” Both Rodion and Kurtz engage in interior battles fought between their inner goodness and their desire to “step over”, to be “supermen”. Crime and Punishment, however, ends with a powerful feeling of hope and redemption, whereas Heart of Darkness ends with (naturally)…darkness. How can we better understand Raskolnikov’s redemption through the tragedy of Kurtz? (As always, support your opinions.)

The fascinating, enigmatic, repellant, magnetic, odious philanthropic…Svidrigailov!

Dostoevsky provided his protagonist Raskolnikov with a number of doubles and foils: Marmeladov is a sort of double, a “criminal” with the best of intentions; Razumikhin a foil, strong, generous and well-balanced where Rodya is self-absorbed erratic—but equally passionate and warm-hearted. Even the hypocritical, self-important Luzhin provides an ironic contrast to Raskolnikov when Luzhin mouths the radical theories that have attracted Rodya and shows how empty they are.

Svidrigailov is another sort of “double,” who like Rodya is haunted by his conscience through dreams and ghosts. “He’s mad,” is what Rodya correctly thinks of his mirror image—and of course Rodya is mad, too.

Look for the ways Svidrigailov provides a counterpoint to Raskolnikov in his actions, his rationalizations, his self-absorption, his egotism, his crimes, and his agony. To help you make the connection, I’m quoting Joseph Frank’s introduction of this serpent-like character below, in which he in his turn quotes the English Romantic poet Lord Byron:

One of Dostoevsky’s most strangely appealing characters, a sort of monster à la Quasimodo longing for redemption to normalcy, Svidrigailov is much less a melodramatic villain…His Byronic world-weariness signifies a certain spiritual depth, and the contradictions of his personality, which swing between the blackest evil and the most benevolent good, perhaps can best be understood in Byronic terms. Is he not similar to such a figure as Byron’s Lara, in the poem of the same name, “who at last confounded good and ill,” and whose supreme indifference to their distinction made him equally capable of both? One can well say of Svidrigailov:

Too high for common selfishness, he could
At times resign his own for other’s good,
But not in pity, not because he ought,
But in some strange perversity of thought,
That sway’d him onward with a secret pride
To do what few or more would do beside;
And thus some impulse would, in tempting time,
Mislead his spirit equally to crime.

Svidrigailov thus embodies the same mixture of moral-psychic opposites as Raskolnikov, but arranged in a different order of dominance. What rules within him is the conscious acceptance of an unrestrained egoism acting solely in the pursuit of personal and sensual pleasure; but his enjoyments are tarnished by self-disgust. What dominates in Raskolnikov are the pangs and power of conscience even in the midst of a fiercely egoistic struggle to maintain his freedom. Svidrigailov also resembles Raskolnikov in the sophistication and sharpness of his intellect; he is a brilliant and witty talker who does a great deal to enliven the final sections of the book.

(from pages 129-130 of Dostoevsky: The Miraculous Years, 1865-1871 by Joseph Frank. Princeton University Press, 1996.)

The Women of Crime & Punishment

Now that we have taken a look at Sonya, let's turn our attention to the other women of Dostoevsky's first great novel:

• Raskolnikov's sister Avdotya and his mother Pulcheria
• Marmeladov's wife Katherina Ivanovna
• The little girl, Katherina's daughter Polina
• The two sisters: Alyona (the louse) & Lizaveta (the idiot*)
• Svidrigailov's deceased wife, Marfa Petrovna
• The woman who attempts suicide in the canal
• The Marmeladov's landlady
• Anyone else you believe may be significant (though this is a complete list as far as I know)

*I've deliberately used the word that became the title of Dostoevsky's follow-up novel. Why? Because Prince Myshkin, the Idiot, is a saintly man—not really an idiot at all except that he is ill-equipped for the world of duplicity, corruption and twisted motives that receives him. Lizaveta is a saintly idiot of another sort, but there's a connection there… and that's all I have to say for now.

What strands connect Sonya to Lizaveta and to Katherina?

Dostoevsky treats his brother-pair as temperamental, even spiritual twins. How does he make this explicit (since Dunya is a far less completely drawn character, much can be found in the narrative and dialogue)?

As you look at Lizaveta, whose importance is clear through numerous associations and allusions (please identify as many as you can for Monday) don't shortchange Alyona. After all, she is the sacrificial victim that Raskolnikov selects.

Why does Dostoevsky bother to include the incident of the woman who attempts to drown herself?

Pulcheria's letter makes up a key segment of Part 1. How does she become a secondary victim of the Crime?There are lots of other questions I could ask. Mainly I want you to think, read, and prepare. Once again we will discuss and "post our comments" aloud in class. To get to everyones, let's start our group discussion immediately upon arrival. Don't wait for me to sound the whistle: just get together with those you worked with on Thursday and get going right away.

I'm looking forward to this. I thought Thursday was a good day.

JD

Sonya and the Lesson of Lazarus

Re-read (see, I'm giving you credit for reading it once already, though maybe you're still far away from this stage of the novel) Chapter 4 of Part V: Raskolnikov's weird mixture of argument, self-justification and confession to Sonya. Here the ideas outlined in the first meeting with Porfiry are passionately, if inconsistently, developed by our hero. What sides of himself does he show at this meeting. How complete is his confession?—does it include repentance and spiritual commitment?

Why does he choose Sonya as his confessor? Why not Porfiry, or Razumikhin?

Why also does he torment Sonya, as he does so terribly at their previous meeting?

Finally, how does the story of Lazarus work in this context? (It's featured in the essay I posted for you tonight, so you might take a look if time permits.)

George Gibian's essay on symbolism in C&P—read by Monday

Traditional Symbolism in Crime and Punishment -

Porfiry, long anticipated, appears—to what end?

Page 252: “Your things would not be lost in any event,” he [Porfiry Petrovich] went on calmly and coldly, “because I’ve been sitting here a long time waiting for you.”

From Part 2, Chapter 4, when Razumikhin first mentions the name to Raskolnikov, we hear with Rodya the name of Porfiry Petrovich (no last name ever is given, interestingly) at regular intervals. He is a police inspector and a lawyer. In chapter 7, Razumikhin tells Raskolnikov, "Porfiry…wants to make your acquaintance." (He repeats this, with emphasis, in chapter 6: "He wants very, very, very much to make your acquaintance."

There are other such moments, but we don't meet Porfiry until chapter 5 in Part III, when Raskolnikov enters laughing. Near the end of a long, tortuous and torturous conversation, Porfiry brings up Rodya's article "On Crime," written six months before when he left the university and began his isolation.

What do you think Porfiry's role in the drama we could call "Punishment" (since "Crime" only occupies the first hundred or so pages of the novel)? What is his attitude toward Raskolnikov? Does it change? Is he Raskolnikov's antagonist or nemesis?

By the way—it's 11:45 pm on Saturday. I beat my deadline…barely! So there's no refund, if you know what I mean.

Think and write well, and Tuesday we'll build a great discussion based on what you say here.

By the way, do you notice that Razumikhin is either related to or friends with just about everybody involved in the investigation? Any theories as to that remarkable fact?

The Superman or Übermensch

The Superman or übermensch -

Find passages that exemplify Rodya

The passage below is from pages 214-215 of Crime and Punishment. Accepting Razumikhin's assessment as accurate (which undoubtedly it is) find three good examples of Raskolnikov displaying his dual nature. Anything we discussed yesterday is fair game, but we need more.

Underline and note three in your book and come prepared to discuss them.

“Now then, Dmitri Prokofych, I should like very, very much to know…generally…how he looks at things now—that is, please understand me, how shall I put it—that is, better to say: what are his likes and dislikes? Is he always so irritable? What are his wishes and, so to speak, his dreams, if you can say? What precisely has a special influence on him now? In short, I should like...”

"Ah, mama, how can anyone answer so much all at once?" Dunya remarked.

“Ah, my God, but this is not at all, not at all how I expected to see him, Dmitri Prokofych.”

“That’s only natural.” Dmitri Prokofych replied. “I have no mother; but my uncle comes here every year, and almost every time fails to recognize me, even externally, and he is an intelligent man; well, and in the three years of your separation a lot of water has flowed under the bridge. What can I tell you? I’ve known Rodion for a year and a half: sullen, gloomy, proud; recently (and maybe much earlier) insecure and hypochondriac. Magnanimous and kind. Doesn’t like voicing his feelings, and would rather do something cruel than speak his heart out in words. At times, however, he’s not hypochondriac at all, but just inhuman, cold and callous, as if there really were two opposite characters in him, changing places with each other. At times he’s terribly taciturn! He’s always in a hurry, always too busy, yet he lies there doing nothing. Not given to mockery, and not because he lacks sharpness but as if he had no time for such trifles. Never hears people out to the end. Is never interested in what interests everyone else at a given moment. Sets a terribly high value on himself and. it seems, not without a certain justification. Well, what else?…It seems to me that your arrival will have a salutary effect on him.”

“Ah, God grant us that!” Pulcheria Alexandrovna cried out, tormented by Razumikhin’s assessment of her Rodya.

The Marmeladovs: a family representative of “the huddled masses” & human misery

Wednesday we’ll begin with Raskolnikov’s encounter with Marmeladov (and subsequently Marmeladov’s family), which introduces many of Dostoevsky’s distinctive techniques:

· role of confession

· role of environment

· the sort of despair that for want of a better word we can call “existential”

· the life of the social misfit

· poverty and desperate circumstances of those who suffer it

· the dead end of social determinism (via Lebezyatnikov)

· forgiveness and redemption

Then we will shift to setting in general, and Raskolnikov's environment in particular

The hell with the blog!

Why spoil a beautiful weekend with something that sounds as ugly as the word "blog"?

(That's a rhetorical question)

Barbie Doll + Qs — the old fashioned way

Barbie Doll

This girlchild was born as usual

and presented dolls that did pee-pee

and miniature GE stoves and irons

and wee lipsticks the color of cherry candy.

Then in the magic of puberty, a classmate said: 5

You have a great big nose and fat legs.

She was healthy, tested intelligent,

possessed strong arms and back,

abundant sexual drive and manual dexterity.

She went to and fro apologizing. 10

Everyone saw a fat nose on thick legs.

She was advised to play coy,

exhorted to come on hearty,

exercise, diet, smile and wheedle.

Her good nature wore out 15

like a fan belt.

So she cut off her nose and her legs

and offered them up.

In the casket displayed on satin she lay

with the undertaker's cosmetics painted on, 20

a turned-up putty nose,

dressed in a pink and white nightie.

Doesn't she look pretty? everyone said.

Consummation at last.

To every woman a happy ending. 25

—Marge Piercy

Questions:

1. In what ways is the girl described in this poem different from a Barbie doll? Discuss the poem’s contrast of the living girl, a human being with intelligence and healthy appetites, and the doll, an inanimate object.
2. The poem contains a surprising but apt simile: “Her good nature wore out / like a fan belt” (15-16). Why is the image of the fan belt appropriate here?
3. Why does the speaker mention the girl’s “strong arms and back” (8) and her “manual dexterity” (9)? How do these qualities contribute to her fate?
4. Discuss the verbal irony in the phrase “the magic of puberty” (5) and in the last three lines. What is the target of this satire?

Siren Song + Qs

Siren Song

This is the one song everyone

would like to learn: the song

that is irresistible:

the song that forces men

to leap overboard in squadrons 5

even though they see the beached skulls

the song nobody knows

because anyone who has heard it

is dead, and the others can't remember

Shall I tell you the secret 10

and if I do, will you get me

out of this bird suit?

I don't enjoy it here

squatting on this island

looking picturesque and mythical 15

with these two feathery maniacs,

I don't enjoy singing

this trio, fatal and valuable.

I will tell the secret to you,

to you, only to you. 20

Come closer. This song

is a cry for help: Help me!

Only you, only you can,

you are unique

At last. Alas 25

it is a boring song

but it works every time.

— Margaret Atwood, 1976

1. What are the various meanings for the word “siren”? Look for illustrations or descriptions of sirens and record the most significant information. Does a knowledge of how a siren might have appeared (& where dwelt) contribute to your apprehension of some of the language of this poem?

2. What is a “siren song”—does this term also have several meanings? Spell them out.

3. What form does this poem take: is it a dialogue, an apostrophe…or what?

4. What imagery is evoked in the second “paragraph” (lines 4-6)? How does it fit with the import of the poem

5. a) What is the tone of this poem? Where does a shift occur, and how?
b) Is the speaker in control of the import of the poem, or is the poet? How so?a) What is the speaker’s tone? What things do we learn from the speaker?
b) Does the speaker control the meaning of the poem, or does the poet. How so?

Special on Poems by the Pair—Government Approved for Essays!

Dear Mouseketeers,

At the bottom of this post are the thematic pairings from which you can choose for a comparative essay of three or more (full) pages.

To keep everyone equal, requirements are: Times New Roman 12 point double-spaced, with one inch margins all around.

Leaf through the chapter entitled "Writing About Poetry" and scan the sample essays to give yourself a sense of good critical writing.

("Guide to Feet Complete with Helpful Reminder" courtesy of T.R. Hot-sun, Esq., DNA, OBE, Etc.)

And now…the Pairs!—

1. Barbie Doll (Marge Piercy) + Siren Song (Margaret Atwood)
2. Dover Beach (Matthew Arnold) + Church Going (Philip Larkin)
3. Ulysses (Tennyson) + Curiosity (Alastair Reid)
4. To His Coy Mistress (Marvell) + The Flea (Donne)
5. The World is too much with us (Wordsworth) + God’s Grandeur (Hopkins)
6. A Valediction Forbidding Mourning + The Sun Rising (both John
   Donne)
7. The Broken Heart (Donne) + Farewell to Love (Michael Drayton)
8. To Autumn (Keats) + After Apple Picking (Frost)

And don't forget those feet!!

God’s Grandeur + Qs -

"The Waking" + Questions

The Waking + Questions -

The Waking & God's Grandeur

The "music" of each poem is what's at question here. How does it influence tone and meaning? What is the tone, do you think, and what is the essential meaning or message, of each poem?

Comments, questions, comparisons for "Dover Beach" & "Churchgoing"

We've been taking poems two at a time lately, each pair thematically linked. How about Arnold's poem and Larkin's poem? Do they reflect the same outlook? What are they "about"? What do you think the tone of each poem is, and how does it influence interpretation?

Church Going

Once I am sure there's nothing going on

I step inside, letting the door thud shut.

Another church: matting, seats, and stone,

And little books; sprawlings of flowers, cut

For Sunday, brownish now; some brass and stuff

Up at the holy end; the small neat organ;

And a tense, musty, unignorable silence,

Brewed God knows how long. Hatless, I take off

My cycle-clips in awkward reverence,

Move forward, run my hand around the font.

From where I stand, the roof looks almost new —

Cleaned, or restored? Someone would know: I don't.

Mounting the lectern, I peruse a few

Hectoring large-scale verses, and pronounce

"Here endeth" much more loudly than I'd meant.

The echoes snigger briefly. Back at the door

I sign the book, donate an Irish sixpence,

Reflect the place was not worth stopping for.

Yet stop I did: in fact I often do,

And always end much at a loss like this,

Wondering what to look for, wondering, too,

When churches will fall completely out of use

What we shall turn them into, if we shall keep

A few cathedrals chronically on show,

Their parchment, plate and pyx in locked cases,

And let the rest rent-free to rain and sheep.

Shall we avoid them as unlucky places?

Or, after dark, will dubious women come

To make their children touch a particular stone;

Pick simples for a cancer; or on some

Advised night see walking a dead one?

Power of some sort will go on

In games, in riddles, seemingly at random;

But superstition, like belief, must die,

And what remains when disbelief has gone?

Grass, weedy pavement, brambles, buttress, sky,

A shape less recognisable each week,

A purpose more obscure. I wonder who

Will be the last, the very last, to seek

This place for what it was; one of the crew

That tap and jot and know what rood-lofts were?

Some ruin-bibber, randy for antique,

Or Christmas-addict, counting on a whiff

Of gown-and-bands and organ-pipes and myrrh?

Or will he be my representative,

Bored, uninformed, knowing the ghostly silt

Dispersed, yet tending to this cross of ground

Through suburb scrub because it held unspilt

So long and equably what since is found

Only in separation - marriage, and birth,

And death, and thoughts of these — for which was built

This special shell? For, though I've no idea

What this accoutred frowsty barn is worth,

It pleases me to stand in silence here;

A serious house on serious earth it is,

In whose blent air all our compulsions meet,

Are recognized, and robed as destinies.

And that much never can be obsolete,

Since someone will forever be surprising

A hunger in himself to be more serious,

And gravitating with it to this ground,

Which, he once heard, was proper to grow wise in,

If only that so many dead lie round.

— Philip Larkin

Dover Beach

The sea is calm tonight.

The tide is full, the moon lies fair

Upon the straits;—on the French coast the light

Gleams and is gone; the cliffs of England stand,

Glimmering and vast, out in the tranquil bay.

Come to the window, sweet is the night air!

Only, from the long line of spray

Where the sea meets the moon-blanched land,

Listen! you hear the grating roar

Of pebbles which the waves draw back, and fling,

At their return, up the high strand,

Begin, and cease, and then again begin,

With tremulous cadence slow, and bring

The eternal note of sadness in.

Sophocles long ago

Heard it on the Aegean, and it brought

Into his mind the turbid ebb and flow

Of human misery; we

Find also in the sound a thought,

Hearing it by this distant northern sea.

The Sea of Faith

Was once, too, at the full, and round earth's shore

Lay like the folds of a bright girdle furled.

But now I only hear

Its melancholy, long, withdrawing roar,

Retreating, to the breath

Of the night-wind, down the vast edges drear

And naked shingles of the world.

Ah, love, let us be true

To one another! for the world, which seems

To lie before us like a land of dreams,

So various, so beautiful, so new,

Hath really neither joy, nor love, nor light,

Nor certitude, nor peace, nor help for pain;

And we here as on a darkling plain

Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight,

Where ignorant armies clash by night.

—Matthew Arnold

A doggone blog foul-up

Somehow the questions for "Curiosity" and the comment posting went up on last year's blog. I realized that when I saw J-Li's complaint.

Well, we're going to discuss all that stuff anyway tomorrow. I apologize for the screw-up.

J.D.

Hash over your ideas with your fellow poetry aficionados

Here I invite you to discuss questions, ask questions, make comments and exchange ideas with your colleagues. For "Ulysses" especially I think you need to do this—it's a very dense poem that makes of the familiar figure of Ulysses a symbol…of what?

We'll discuss at the top of class and attempt to deepen and broaden your responses.

Questions for "Curiosity"

1. On the surface, this poem is a dissertation on cats. What deeper comments does the speaker make or imply? Of what are cats and dogs—in this poem at least—symbols?
2. In what different senses are the words death, die, and dying here used?
3. Compare and contrast this poem in meaning and manner with “Ulysses.”

Alastair Reid's "Curiosity"

Curiosity

may have killed the cat; more likely

the cat was just unlucky, or else curious

to see what death was like, having no cause

to go on licking paws, or fathering

litter on litter of kittens, predictably.

Nevertheless, to be curious

is dangerous enough. To distrust

what is always said, what seems,

to ask odd questions, interfere in dreams,

leave home, smell rats, have hunches

do not endear cats to those doggy circles

where well-smelt baskets, suitable wives, good lunches

are the order of things, and where prevails

much wagging of incurious heads and tails.

Face it. Curiosity

will not cause us to die—

only lack of it will.

Never to want to see

the other side of the hill

or that improbable country

where living is an idyll

(although a probable hell)

would kill us all.

Only the curious

have, if they live, a tale

worth telling at all.

Dogs say cats love too much, are irresponsible,

are changeable, marry too many wives,

desert their children, chill all dinner tables

with tales of their nine lives.

Well, they are lucky. Let them be

nine-lived and contradictory,

curious enough to change, prepared to pay

the cat price, which is to die

and die again and again,

each time with no less pain.

A cat minority of one

is all that can be counted on

to tell the truth. And what cats have to tell

on each return from hell

is this: that dying is what the living do,

that dying is what the loving do,

and that dead dogs are those who do not know

that dying is what, to live, each has to do.

I'll be at school Wednesday

If you leave your essay on "The Broken Heart" at the front desk with Merrilee or on my desk in lower north, I'll pick it up on Wednesday when I'm in to work on the Prowl. Between 11 and about 3 you can find me in N131, the publications room.

A Valediction for all you Valedictorians

Dear class,

Don't forget to read & complete the Sound & Sense questions. They're important to do so you'll get a grip on John Donne's "Valediction forbidding mourning." We'll discuss the poem and the questions in class Tuesday. I hate to be a pest, but I'll be checking to see that you did your work. Then, depending on the course the discussion takes, you can keep your responses to emend, then turn in a final copy on Thursday.

At this point, anything we've studied so far is worth looking at: diction (including connotation & multiple denotations), imagery, figures of speech…plus anything else you think deserves notice.

Poems coming up: Tennyson's "Ulysses," Auden's "The Unknown Citizen," and others I'll list later, when I have my plans in front of me.

Blessings of the Muse Erato* upon you,

JD

*You can see her near center in Mantegna's "Parnassus" above, dancing with her eight sisters.

Keats & his poem

"Those Winter Sundays" & "To Autumn"

Blog prompt: Read/work "Those Winter Sundays". What kind of imagery is central to the poem? How does that imagery work to reveal the theme of the poem—its emotional issues, as Sound & Sense puts it. And it is a help to recognize the speaker's present perspective, as question 4 would ask of you.

And be sure that you are aware of the meaning of the word "offices" as Hayden uses it.

Homework:

(a) To turn in: Answer the questions that accompany "To Autumn" ~ pay particular attention to numbers three and five. Poems that deal with the seasons frequently make metaphorical use of their place in the cycle of life. The times of day likewise often serve as metaphors.

(b) Read sections I-VII in Part 2 of the text: "Writing about poetry"

Sylvia Plath's "Spinster"

Here are the questions for the poem "Spinster." Don't blog them—answer them on your own and bring the work to class Friday.

I know I said I'd try to get the blog up early today, but this is the soonest I was able to clear the time and write up the questions. If you are in the musical and need extra time, e-mail me.

1. What are the various meanings of the word “spinster?” How does it work as a title to this poem?
2. Explore the multiple denotations and/or connotations attached to these words: particular, ceremonious, suitor, struck, litter, rank, sloven, austere, motley.
3. Compare the poet’s choice of these words to possible synonyms: racket or turmoil rather than tumult; hubbub rather than babel; flourishing rather than burgeoning; rebellious rather than insurgent; spike rather than barb; disobedient rather than mutinous.
4. What sort of pattern, if any, do you perceive in this poem? Is it as pronounced as in “Pathedy of Manners”? Is it unpredictable or erratic? Is there a rhyme scheme?
5. What, expressed in one or two sentences, is this poem about?