For my first response, I read Charlie Grimes' post about Thirteen Ways of Looking At a Blackbird. I liked how he compared it to the quote, instead of just talking about the imagery of the poem and what the poet does or does not do. I also liked his point about how we don't see the simple beauties in life. I thought it was very true, and very plausible that that was what the poet was going for. I also like how he ended by comparing it to his own thoughts about art, which made the blog post more personal and kept me engaged and ended it well.
For my second response, I read Emily Cashman's post about the London poem. I agree with her in saying that art can share every emotion possible. I don't necessarily agree that it can be in a short time frame though. Sometimes I think it requires that you really look at it or take some time to think to get everything the artist is trying to say. Or the artist might have just been painting a cool picture, maybe they didn't mean anything by it. I do think that poetry can be a better tool for evoking emotion, like she shows how "London" did with comparing Milton to a star. I think that although poems sometimes take a little longer to read, I also think that the writer can make sure that all of the emotions are conveyed, unlike in art where the viewer might not look close enough to get everything out of it. Or might not take the time to look.
No comments:
Post a Comment