Interpretation of Lit 3

Frosts "Out, Out"

Frost depicts human relationships as fragile. Though, I interpreted the play's use of nature differently than you did. At the beginning of the poem, we can see that the boy is using a saw to most likely cut through wood, which proves to be very difficult. This is shown when the text states "And the saw snarled and rattled, snarled and rattled/ As it ran light, or had to bear a load" (736). This use of sounds to describe how the saw works show that it is taking a lot of effort to cut the wood, as opposed to the boy's hand, which is fragile. When the boy cut his hand, almost instantly half of it was cut off, as the text states "As he swung toward them holding up the hand/ Half in appeal, but half as if to keep/ the life from spilling" (736). To me, this was comparing the toughness of nature to the fragility of humans. Though I can see how you interpreted the use of nature, as it is not affected by the events of humans, and at the end of the play when the boy dies, nature will continue to go on. Though, the way I look at it, the boy was so easy to get hurt and then die, whereas nature is difficult to destroy and kill. As the posts above have highlighted, the poem suggests the ultimate indifference of humans toward the suffering of others, "since they / Were not the one dead" (33-34). (This idea plays a key role in the thread on Auden in this unit, as well.) Nature, in the form of the "mountain ranges" (5) and "sunset" (6) is also distant and removed from the personal suffering of the young boy. the boy's experiences serve to emphasize human mortality. I think that as you stated the ending lines "And they since they Were not the one dead, turned to their affairs" (736). This almost shows us just how common the occurrence is of someone dying from their work, as the family didn't really seem to be that affected by it. It sort of seems like the family looked at the incident like it was inevitable and was expected to happen at some point in time. This just puts more emphasis on the fact that humans are fragile, and that in the end, it is expected that everyone will die. This could then possibly be tied back to the nature aspect of the poem, going with that if something in nature dies, everything around it will continue to grow and move on, acting as though nothing had happened to begin with. not only does the family keep on moving, but nature keeps on moving as well. If the family members don't continue on with their daily work, then they will be the next ones to die. Life is continual and nothing can stop it, just like the saw didn't stop cutting when it encounters the hand "He must have given the hand. However it was, / Neither refused the meeting. But the hand!" (17-18), the family can't dwell on the past either and keep on buzzing along with their daily lives. Without work, the family has no money and no food and then will perish as well.

Poe's "The Raven" and Shakespeare's "Like as the waves make towards the pebbled shore"

Shakespeare's poem is in iambic pentameter, while Poe's poem is in trochaic octameter. This is shown all throughout the poem, but the line I'm going to use is the first line, which states "Once upon a midnight dreary, while I pondered, weak and weary." Putting this in terms of the trochaic octameter, it would look like "ONCE u/PON a/ MIDnight/ DREARy/ WHILE i/ PONdered/ WEAK and/ WEARy." This follows the trochaic octameter pattern because it is sectioned into eight units of two syllables each, the first syllable being emphasized, while the second is not. This comes from octameter, which is different than pentameter with only five sections. All of the lines have these sections of eight, except for the last line in each stanza which has four, half of the octameter. This is like in line 6, which states "Only this, and nothing more." This would be broken down in the same way, just with fewer sections, as "ONly/ THIS and/ NOTHing/ MORE." some lines from Shakespeare's poem, you have given a great example. The very first line states "Like as the waves make towards the pebbled shore." Putting this in terms of iambic pentameter, it would look like "Like AS/ the WAVES/ make TOWARDS/ the PEB/bled SHORE." This is split up into five different sections, which is why it is a pentameter and not an octameter like Poe's poem. Whereas in Poe's poem the first syllable in each section is emphasized, Shakespeare's poem emphasizes the second syllable in each section. For another example, I will use the second line which states "So do our minutes hasten to their end." When this is split up, it looks like "So DO/ our MIN/utes HAS/ten TO/ their END." Once you understand how iambic pentameter splits up and emphasizes certain parts of Shakespeare's poem, you will have an easier time understanding what the poem is trying to get across and which parts are more important than others. So just to end this week's discussion of meter, I'm going to add a summary to be sure that everyone is on the right track as we prepare for the last test in a couple of weeks. See the posts above about trochaic octameter in Poe and iambic pentameter in Shakespeare, and be sure that you understand what these terms mean: Trochaic refers to a type of meter in which the basic unit is a stressed syllable followed by an unstressed syllable. Octameter refers to the fact that the line repeats that pattern eight times. That means that a line of trochaic octameter has a total of sixteen syllables--stressed/unstressed repeated eight times. Iambic refers to a type of meter in which the basic unit is an unstressed syllable followed by a stressed syllable (the opposite of trochaic). Pentameter refers to the fact that the line repeats that pattern five times. That means that a line of iambic pentameter has a total of ten syllables--unstressed/stressed repeated five times. Now I feel better. :)

Wheatley's "On Being Brought from Africa to America"

the narrator expressed hope and that she was grateful she found Christianity. I think that this poem is showing how even though some people receive more hate than others, in particular African Americans, that they are not hated by God, but instead loved by him. The narrator is saying that even though the slaves are not treated equally or with any care at all, they will still go to heaven and will be treated well there and that they can be saved. I think this is best shown in the poem on lines 3 and 5 when it states "That there's a God, that there's a Saviour too" and "Some view our sable race with scornful eye" (741). I believe that these lines show that the narrator felt a sense of hope with Christianity and that she would be treated equally in God's eye even though people in the real world treat her and people of her race with such hate and disrespect. I believe that this poem is showing that even though people get treated differently and so negatively, they still have hope and have a reason to live and believe in someone who would treat them equally so that they can get through such difficult times. the author believes more in criticizing beliefs more than the people who hold them. I think she gets this idea because of the hatred that her race is getting, so she understands more what it is like to be hated for who you are. The poem states in lines 5 and 7 that "Some view our race with scornful eye" and then goes into the statement that everyone can "join th' angelic train." So, going off of this, it seems like the reason she feels everyone should be treated equally and not criticized by who they are, it is because they are used to feeling the hate that everyone else can give. Going back to some of Professor Howard's thoughts, and how the narrator could have practiced religion in Africa, it just would not have been Christianity, but instead a more Pagan religion. This is shown in lines 1 and when the poem states "Twas mercy brought me from my Pagan land, Taught my benighted soul to understand." I possibly think that when comparing these lines to the last ones, the narrator could feel like the more Pagan beliefs of Africa do not view or treat everyone equally, unlike Christianity which does in her mind. So, maybe the narrator feels a single God will treat everyone equally, but multiple ones will find different ways to judge people.

"The Twenty-Third psalm" and Donne's "Batter my Heart, three-personed God"

the speaker in "The Twenty-Third Psalm" is a strong follower of God, whereas the speaker in "Batter my heart, three-personed God" is more disconnected from God. The speaker in the first poem appears to be a devout follower of God and views god as their savior. This is shown in line 3 of the poem when it states "He restoreth my soul: he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name's sakes." This speaker shows that God has given them the strength to concur all and to continue living in his name. It would almost appear as though God has saved them and is the reason they are still living today. In line 6 the poem states "Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house of the Lord for ever." This seems like the speaker has found salvation in God and believes that God will always be there for them, especially in death. As for "Batter my heart, three-personed God," it almost seems like the speaker has an unsure relationship with God. Whereas the speaker in the first poem was sure about their relationship with God, the speaker in the second poem seems contradicted by their relationship. The speaker in Donne's poem seems to view God's wishes as more brutal than what the first poem's speaker did. In lines 2-4 the poem states "As yet but knock, breathe, shine, and seek to mend; That I may rise and stand, o'erthrow me, and bend Your force, to break, blow, burn, and make me new." This seems like this speaker focuses more on what it takes to be saved by God and turned into a new person, whereas the speaker in "The Twenty-Third Psalm" just focuses on how good it was after they were saved. Donne's poem focuses more on what must be sacrificed and changed in order to be saved by God but still talks about God's redemption and how God can save people, which seems to be the focus of both poems. In the 23rd Psalm, the metaphor is the relationship between a shepherd and his flock, which the speaker of the poem uses to explain what the relationship between God and humans is like. Remember that the historical context of this poem (which comes from the ancient Hebrews) meant that most everyone would understand the job of a shepherd, so all of the issues we've mentioned in this thread (protection, care, etc.) would then be applied to the non-herding relationship of God and human beings. For Donne, I'd like everyone to think a bit more about the contradiction bit. The speaker in this poem is indeed asking God to make him into a new person, with violence if necessary. He expresses this desire through paradoxes: knock me down so that I can stand up, ravish me so that I can be chaste, etc. The metaphors (again, comparisons between two seemingly unlike things) establish a parallel between physical violence (as in being burnt up) and the speaker's spiritual state. The reason that the speaker focuses on paradoxes is that he sees spiritual destruction as necessary for spiritual rebirth (in much the same way that physical destruction--fire, for example--leads to renewal). Notice that Donne also includes a simile in line 5, when he uses the word "like" to compare himself to a town taken over by the enemy. The difference between a metaphor and a simile is that a metaphor is implicit and a simile is explicit (due to the use of comparing words such as "like" and "as").

Shakespeare "That time of year thou mayst in me behold"

the speaker in the poem is growing older as the poem goes on. With this, the metaphors are placed in the way they are in order of how the events would happen chronologically. In lines 1 and 2, the poem states "That time of year thou mayst in me behold When yellow leaves, or none, or few, do hang." I believe that this is placed in the beginning to shed light on what the poem is about, as it is talking about autumn coming along, and with this, trees are dying. This brings the first instance of death and its inevitability into the poem. Almost all of the lines in the poem have something to do with objects fading away, which can be related back to the speaker fading away and coming closer to death. This would be like the leaves falling, day fading, ashes from a log fading, and many other references. I also like how you point out that the speaker does not seem bothered by his near coming death, but is taking in his last moments peacefully and fully observing everything. There is nothing that jumps out saying that the speaker is sad, but rather that he is taking in his last moments. This is almost shown in lines 13-14 when the poem states "This thou perceiv'st, which makes thy love more strong, To love that well which thou must leave ere long." To me, it almost seems like this is saying that instead of being sad about death, it makes people realize that they need to show and give love to the special people in their lives. think that the idea that life can pass by fast, and that the stages of nearing death are abrupt sort of go hand-in-hand. I think that Shakespeare was trying to imply that life passes by fast, and with this quick pace, death creeps in even quicker. I also think that he was trying to get the point across rather quickly that seasons change in cycles, as seasons change to seasons, and days change to nights, and that life goes on in nature seemingly forever. Whereas, humans experience this change, but as you grow older you will not all of a sudden cycle back to your youth. Humans grow almost in a straight line, from youth to old age, and nature is constantly changing and dying and them coming back to life the next season. So, the reason that Shakespeare speeds up metaphors is to show all of the instances that turn in cycles like seasons and days, but when he gets to the fire going out, he could be talking about himself. You cannot relight a fire once it has gone out if there is no more log left. This goes with lines 10 and 11, which state "That on the ashes of his youth doth lie, As the deathbed whereon it must expire." Shakespeare is trying to show that once humans run out of fuel, or life, as fire runs out when it is out of wood, people will die, and seasons will continue to go on in cycles. The form of this poem is a Shakespearean sonnet (more on this after Thanksgiving!), in which the "moral of the story" is often in the last two lines.

Arnold's "Dover Beach"

the speaker's observations and descriptions of his surroundings reflect the peace in the environment that he is in. Though, there seems to be a lot of sadness and misery in the way he speaks, which seems to also be how he views the world. I think this is best shown in lines 21-25 when the poem states "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." This, to me, almost makes it seem like the narrator thinks that at one point, the world was bright and great, but now seems to think otherwise. It seems now like the narrator views his surroundings and the world as sad and upsetting. One thing I disagree with you about is the narrator's message to the auditor. You said that it seems like the narrator is in love with the auditor, but I believe the narrator is trying to transfer his pain to the auditor. At the ending of the poem in lines 33-37, it states "Hath really neither joy, nor love, nor light/ Nor certitude, nor peace, nor help for pain/ And we are here as on a darkling plain/ Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight/ Where ignorant armies clash by night." This seems more like the narrator is trying to describe their pain and like how nothing in life works out to the auditor, rather than professing their love to the auditor. Though, at the beginning of the poem, it would seem this way as everything is described nicely. This change from the calm descriptions in the beginning, to the harsh view on the world, in the end, could show that the narrator feels like things in life change quickly, and in their case, changed for the worse and caused pain and sadness to ensue in their life. that the speaker describes his views of the world as calm and tranquil, while also expressing his concerns for the future. At first, I did not think that the narrator was in love with the auditor, but after rereading the poem a couple of times, I now think he is. In lines 10-14 the poem states "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." I believe that this shows the narrator is trying to communicate to the auditor that life comes with ups and downs, and sometimes you can be unsure of your future and that with the lows can come to a lot of sadness. I think the narrator is trying to show his loved one that it is without a doubt they will go through their difficult times together, but eventually, they will come back from it, and be happy and at a high point again. This is shown again with lines 25-28 when the poem states "Its melancholy, long, withdrawing roar, Retreating, to the breath Of the night-wind, down the vast edges drear And naked shingles of the world." I think that this emphasis on sadness and misery in the second half of the poem is put in place to contrast the calm and tranquility of the beginning, meaning to represent life and relationships, as they have their peaceful moments and their treacherous moments. interpretation that this poem could represent a common conversation between couples about whether or not they have a future together. I also like your take about how the beginning of the poem is actually just small talk between the pair, while also hinting at the conversation that is to come. In lines 12-14 the poem states "Begin, and cease, and then again begin, With tremulous cadence slow, and bring The eternal note of sadness in." This, looking at it like it is small talk between the pair, is also showing a hint into what the conversation that happens in the second half will talk about. This then goes into lines 15-18 which states "Sophocles long ago Heard it on the Aegean and it brought Into his mind the turbid ebb and flow Of human misery." This reference to Sophocles indicates that this conversation between partners in a relationship has been occurring for such a long time and that if it ends in the pair splitting up, it can cause each party involved to be in misery. It almost seems like the narrator is trying to convince himself that this is a natural conversation to have as ones like it have been happening for such long times. Though, as you stated, it seems that at the end of the conversation, the pair may not end up together forever. This is almost finalized at the end of the poem, as lines 35-37 state "And we are here as on a darkling plain Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight, Where ignorant armies clash by night." the speaker says that the couple should "be true / To one another" (29-30), because "the world" (30) is horrible, and they don't have anything/anyone else (33-37). The poem idealizes love in the face of adversity, so the broad references to loss of faith, war, etc. end up having personal implications, as the posts so far in this thread have emphasized

Kinnell's "Blackberry Eating"

these onomatopoetic words, like "squinch" and "splurge" (12), are in a way just extreme versions of the general poetic method of using sound to reinforce meaning. Look, for example, at the last two lines: "the silent, startled, icy, black language / of blackberry-eating in late September" (13-14). What sounds repeat in these two lines, and how might the pattern of sound repetition reinforce the poem's meaning and effect? (See the terms for poetic sounds on p. 901.) the narrator creates an interesting linguistic experience. Yes, it is apparent that he is describing how the berry feels and tastes in his mouth, but he is also using language to connect different parts of his life to the berry. In lines 8-11 the poem states "fall almost unbidden to my tongue, as words sometimes do, certain peculiar words like strengths or squinched, many lettered, one syllabled lumps." To me, it seems like the narrator is trying to relate speaking and how naturally it comes, to eating the blackberry, and the way that he uses syllables and letters, is almost like the depiction of an actually blackberry. The narrator is trying to say that speaking comes easily and naturally and sometimes rolls off of the tongue, just like eating a blackberry. This is like as you and Alexis have stated that speaking could be seen as something playful and enjoyable to the speaker, just as eating a blackberry is in autumn. Just as eating blackberries is a sort of luxury that only comes in the fall months, the narrator is very thankful for this, and very much enjoys it, just as he does speaking. I think that he is both trying to explain what it is like to eat blackberries and that he is using blackberries to illustrate what it's like to form powerful words. To me, it almost seems like he is relating the two together. He is connecting his love for eating blackberries to his love for speaking. In lines 2-4 the poem states "among the fat, overripe, icy, black blackberries to eat blackberries for breakfast, the stalks very prickly, a penalty." This gives the indication that he does not bring the berries home to eat, but rather eats them straight after being picked, and almost enjoys how they prickle his mouth and gets deep sensory enjoyment from it. He is describing how the berries move in his mouth and how naturally eating them comes to him. In lines 8-10 the poem states "fall almost unbidden to my tongue, as words sometimes do, certain peculiar words like strength or squinched." By mentioning this, the narrator is able to connect eating to enunciating words. This poem relates eating blackberries and the way that the mouth moves to speak, and how the mouth moves in similar ways. Like he has an appetite for blackberries, he also has an appetite for speaking and using words. It is almost like the narrator's deep enjoyment of blackberries and the way that they make his mouth move reminds him of his enjoyment of speaking and how that makes his mouth move in similar ways, relating the two together. To answer this question, I believe Kinnell uses this specific division (an analogy) to link the two events based on the enjoyment he partakes in both of them. From the beginning of the poem, we read about a detailed, sensory experience the speaker is having for breakfast. As stated in a previous forum, the speaker also undergoes pain from the "prickly" stalks in order to receive his breakfast (Kinnell 4). His fondness for his breakfast is further shown with the detail, "I love to go out in late September/ among the fat, overripe, icy, black blackberries" (Kinnell 1-2). Aside from the speaker's clearly stated love for the blackberries, his over-emphasized description of them also serves as proof. The first 8 lines are dedicated to the speaker's admiration for eating blackberries, while the remainder of the poem serves to make a connection between this act and enunciating words. By describing the likeness between the two acts, the speaker is not only commenting on his enjoyment for the two but also the similarities they hold as experiences. For instance, the speaker shares, "many-lettered, one syllabled lumps,/ which I squeeze, squinch open, and splurge well" (Kinnell 11-12). Here, the ripened berries are associated with difficult words so much that eating blackberries almost becomes identical to pronouncing difficult, "lumpy" words.

Annas, Axelrod, and Narbeshuber

I believe that all three authors had good arguments, but contradictory to some of you, I thought that Annas' "From a Disturbance in Mirrors: The Poetry of Sylvia Plath" had one of the best arguments. In her text, Annas states "In "Daddy," father, husband, and a larger patriarchal and competitive authority structure, which the speaker of the poem sees as having been responsible for the various imperialisms of the twentieth century, all melt together and become demonic" (1117). In the first half of Plath's poem, the speaker constantly talks about how she was treated by her father and almost has the tone that she was the reason that everything bad was happening, though this is changed in the ending when the speaker realizes that nothing was her fault. Annas' analysis says things like how the speaker's world was taken over by and "bounded by his scattered pieces" (1118). The word "his" would be referring to the speaker's father, and this to me seems relatively true, as even when the speaker gets married, she relates her husband back to her father and it seems like reminders of her father are always around and holding her back. I think that Annas made the best argument in terms of explaining why the speaker was so bound by her past, though it lacks in some aspects. Axelrod seems to me to make the second-best argument, as he focuses on Plath as a person, as well as what led her to make her poetry the way that she did, giving the poem some background. Axelrod states "her preface asserts that the poem concerns a young woman's paralyzing self-division, which she can defeat only through allegorical representation" (1119). When this is put with later information about Plath's split with Hughes, we are able to get a better understanding of how Plath was feeling when she wrote this poem, and how it almost appears that she voiced her own feelings of silence and loneliness. This is shown when Axelrod states "She wrote "Daddy" to demonstrate the existence of her voice, which had been silent or subservient for so long" (1120). On the macro level, Annas interprets "Daddy" as being a challenge to male power, but she expands this concept to entail "a larger patriarchal and competitive authority structure, which the speaker of the poem sees as having been responsible for the various imperialisms of the twentieth century" (1117). Annas's discussion of the poem's imagery therefore focuses on the parallels between the figure of the vampire and Plath's father, but also "World War II imagery and its exploitation and victimization and on another level . . . her images of a bureaucratic, fragmented, and dead—in the sense of numbed and unaware—society" (1118). Axelrod sees Plath's poetry more specifically as an attempt to battle against the masculine literary tradition or "daddy-poetry," by which he means "the female poet's anxiety of authorship" (1119). In this view of the poem, the force against which the speaker is struggling is patriarchal authority, but specifically male control of the role of author, which is why she "symbolically assaults a father figure who is identified with male control of language" (1124). Like Axelrod, Narbeshuber sees Plath as critiquing "the absence, especially for women, of a public space, indeed a language for debate," but she emphasizes Plath's rebellion against this absence through her poetic speakers "bring[ing] their private selves into the public realm" (1125). Specifically, Narbeshuber views "Daddy" as "framing personal, family conflicts within larger cultural processes (language, homogenization, technology, politics)" (1128). I also found that Annas' interpretation of "Daddy" was the best one, though they all made good points. Something that really stuck with me though was from Narbeshuber's interpretation. Narbeshuber states "Plath's personae expose both the contemporary social organization and themselves as constructed, rather than simply given or natural. Their identities, therefore, have the potential to be countered and reconfigured" (1129). This is basically saying that someone's life is changed by their social standings and who they are around, and as that changes, personalities can also change. To me, this seems almost like the ending of Plath's "Daddy," as in the beginning she felt confined and restricted by her father, but when he died she started to realize her worth and that he was not right about anything. The speaker's mindset changed throughout the poem as her surroundings also changed. In this sense, Narbeshuber has a really great interpretation, as it fits the ending, but I do not necessarily think it fits the poem as a whole. As for the whole poem, I think Annas has the best interpretation as it is able to pull Plath's personal feelings into a larger-scale and discuss Nazis and Jews, as they are used as a reference in the play, as you explained. To me, Annas sums up Plath's "Daddy" best when she states "Purity, which is what exorcism aims at, is for Plath an ambiguous concept. On the one hand it means integrity of self, wholeness rather than fragmentation, an unspoiled state of being...On the other hand, it also means absence, isolation, blindness, a kind of autism which shuts out the world" (1119). This pulls together all of the concepts in Plath's poem, from personal to larger subjects.

Jarell's "Death of the Ball Turret Gunner" and Owen's "Dulce et Decorum Est"

Jarrell's "The Death of the Ball Turret Gunner" and Owen's "Dulce et Decorum Est" both emphasize the demoralizing effects of war and the trauma that results. Jarrell's "The Death of the Ball Turret Gunner" describes the nature of death in war and depicts it as a cycle beginning with birth and leading to death. Jarell better describes this with, "From my mother's sleep I fell into the State" (1) and "I woke to black flak and the nightmare fighters" (4). The beginning of the poem starts with the speaker's dream of being in his mother's womb, which could be equated to the belly of a B-17 or B-24. The speaker then awakens to the actuality of war by the attacking fighters. The tone of the speaker is impersonal, most likely because he has already died and is now giving an account of the meaningless reality of war. This is similarly shown in Owen's "Dulce et Decorum Est". Owens depicts the service of soldiers as mundane and miserable with the detail, "Bent double, like old beggars under sacks, Knock-kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed through sludge" (1-2). Both poems portray soldiers who have little to no passion for serving. To comment on their differences, I interpreted Owen's "Dulce et Decorum Est" as an explanation of the trauma resulting from war, specifically the effects of a single death. We see the speaker's description of the war in several stages that eventually leads to death. Contrasting from this, Jarrell's "The Death of the Ball Turret Gunner" portrays the soldier's death as almost meaningless with no higher significance. Jarrell's poem also depicts the soldier's life as short lived with no ultimate impact. This differs greatly compared to Owen's "Dulce et Decorum Est," where readers learn of the trauma soldiers experience after the death of a fellow soldier. the metaphor about the mother is actually saying that the state or country took ownership of them. As for waking up and sleeping, being related to life and death, I believe that it is saying birth and death go hand-in-hand. I don't necessarily believe that the speaker is talking about literally being born, but relating the feeling of being up so high in the air, confined to the plane, and so vulnerable to that of being born and the vulnerability of a child. In lines 3 and 4 the poem states "Six miles from earth loosed from its dream of life, I woke to black flak and the nightmare fighters." I don't think that this means that he was dreaming, but almost in the war that it was all a haze and blended together in one big nightmare. Though, when the soldier got into the air and had to face the reality that he could die, he had to wake up to face reality. The last line could possibly mean an abortion, but I think it is meant to mean more of human life gone wrong, as the soldier died and did not make it back to land safely, where he would be safer from danger, and not confined to the small hole in a plane. the speaker in "The Death of the Ball Turret Gunner," ironically, has to wake up in order to face death. Whereas "Dulce et Decorum Est" has 28 lines and draws out the death of the soldier, Jarrell's poem includes only five and makes the death short. I believe that the point you made contributes even further to the shortness of this poem. The speaker "woke to black flak and the nightmare fighters" in line 4, and in line 5 he is suddenly dead. This shows that the soldier never really gets to live his life; by the time he gets to face reality, it is time for him to perish and be washed "out of the turret with a hose" (5). This is much different from Owen's poem, where all of the soldiers seem to be very much awake and alive the whole time, and remember the death of the fighter in detail. these poems highlight the toll that war takes on people and the trauma that it creates for them. The first poem almost highlights the insignificance of human life when it comes to wars, as in line 5 the poem states "When I died they washed me out of the turret with a hose." This, to me, shows that this must have been a common act, and for this to be said with little thought behind it, shows that it was just a task that had to be done with no meaning behind it. There is nothing put into the death except that the person who died must be washed away in order for someone else to use the plane and for the war to continue on. Jarrell only really gives one instance of death and makes it quick as if it happened in an instant. Owen's poem, on the other hand, does talk about death but doesn't make it as quick as Jarrell did. Owen's poem seems to highlight more than just death as a horror of war. In lines 6-8, the poem states "But limped on, blood-shod. All went lame; all blind; Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots Of disappointed shells that dropped behind." This almost seems to highlight how the soldiers have been desensitized to horrific events like bombings and act as though it is just a casual occurrence. The soldiers seem to be unaffected by their surroundings and just keep marching on because that is what they were ordered to do. The last line is as you stated, supposed to mean "it is sweet and good to die for one's country." This though does not seem to transfer to the speaker, as they have actually faced the tragedy and horrors of war. The narrator also hints at the fact that the horrors never leave you, as lines 15 and 16 state "In all my dreams, before my helpless sight, He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning." To me, it is unclear as to if he was having these dreams during the war, after the war, or both, but it does show that the thought of death never left your mind and that it was and forever will be traumatizing to the people involved. By mentioning the desire of young soldiers to earn glory (26), "Dulce et Decorum Est" contrasts the ideal of war with its grim reality. To show the idealized vision of war--what Owen calls the "Lie" (27), Owen uses Latin, a language traditionally associated with scholarship and elevated principles. (Also notice the poem by Jessie Pope on pp. 912-13. Pope was the poet to whom Owen directed "Dulce et Decorum Est.") Contrast the sounds of the Latin words with the rougher textures of Owen's descriptions of war--like "cursed through sludge" (2) and "gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs" (22). The meaning of the Latin phrase is different from the harsh reality of war, but the sound effects of the words also contribute to the contrast--melodious Latin for the pretty (and false) picture of war and rougher English words for the reality. I hope that you all noticed in reading Owen's biographical material in the optional web resources that Owen himself died in combat during World War I.

Cullen's "Yet Do I Marvel" Hughes' "The Weary Blues" and McKay's "The White House"

The onomatopoeia's that you stated all add to the rhetorical feeling of the poem. These words like "Droning" (1), "mellow croon" (2), "moan with melody" (10), and "rickety stool" (12) all allow for the speaker to get across his personal feelings. These words all help to convey the suffering and strong feelings of African Americans. These words all help to give the feeling that the song is actually crying out in agony and pain. When combined with the lyrics of the song, such as "Ain't got nobody in all this world, Ain't got nobody but ma self. I's gwine to quit ma frownin' And put ma troubles on the shelf," it shows that the song and the onomatopoeia's that are used truly exemplify the feeling of pain in this poem. Then, in line 15 when the poem states "Coming from a black man's soul," it shows that the feelings being expressed are tied exclusively to African Americans and their struggles in a racially unjust world. Similies are also being used in this poem, such as in line 35 when the poem states "He slept like a rock or a man that's dead." This quite literally just means that the man is sleeping peacefully and that he is very tired, but when put with the context of the whole poem, it shows that singing blues with such emotion, and living in such a racially divided world is very tiring and exhausting. ffect of onomatopoeia on "The Weary Blues." To add onto your post, another aspect that I noticed was that Hughes uses line length to separate the speaker's thoughts from the singer's words. The speaker's thoughts are often written in long lines such as, "Droning a drowsy syncopated tune, / Rocking back and forth to a mellow croon" (1-2). In contrast, the singer's lines are much shorter, as seen in "'I got the Weary Blues / And I can't be satisfied'" (25-26). Because of the informal pattern of the poem and the short lines of the man's song, the reader can easily distinguish the singing from the observations. This tactic would not work with the strict rhythms of the sonnets. I believe that this contributes to the blues and jazz aspects of this poem because it shares the singer's message, it includes the spectator's observations, and it is easy to tell the difference. Hughes also replicates the feeling of blues songs through his use of intense emotion and the way that he dwells on loneliness. This is like in lines 19 and 20 when the poem states "Ain't got nobody in all this world, Ain't got nobody in all this world, Ain't got nobody but ma self." Hughes has lines like this all throughout his poem, which show extreme loneliness and lots of emotion, which is very typical of blues or jazz music. I think another example of the AAB pattern is shown in lines 6 to 8 when the poem states "He did a lazy sway.../ He did a lazy sway.../To the tune o' those Weary Blues." In typical blues fashion, these are two lines that repeat themselves followed by one line that is worded differently but also similar. Adding to the quote that you used, I think the AAB pattern includes the whole section of lines 25-30 instead of just 25,27, and 29. So, this would then be "I got the Weary Blues/ And I can't be satisfied/ Got the Weary Blues/ And can't be satisfied/ I ain't happy no mo'/ And I wish that I had died" (25-30). Either way, it would be in AAB pattern, but, I feel like it was meant to have all of the lines included, as the first four repeat themselves and the last two are different. All: remember that it's customary in poetic notation to use lower case letters (abab) to signify rhyming sounds and upper case letters (ABAB) to signify repeated words or phrases. Two words that rhyme (aa) have similar endings, as in "cat" and "hat." Two words that repeat (AA) are the same, as in "cat" and "cat." In "The Weary Blues," one major instance of the AAB pattern requires looking at more than one line at a time. Molly has pointed out repetition of the same phrase in lines 25-26 (that would be an A) and lines 27-28 (that would be another A), followed by a similar rhythm (though with different words) in lines 29-30 (that would be B). In addition to these structural issues, the rhythms of the poem are also "syncopated" (1), just like blues and jazz. Read out loud, for example, line 16: "In a deep song voice with a melancholy tone." Do you hear the complicated rhythms? We might mark stresses in this line as something like this: "In a DEEP / SONG VOICE / with a MEL / anCHOL / y TONE" (16).

Waller's "Song" Parker's "One Perfect Rose" and Blake's "The Sick Rose"

believe that the symbol of the rose is everchanging throughout the different poems. Waller goes about using the rose, as you have stated, as almost the typical symbol of love. It is almost like he is using the rose to communicate to the woman he loves that she is worth loving and that he deserves her love. This is shown in lines 1-5 when the poem states "Go, lovely rose! Tell her that wastes her time and me That now she knows, When I resemble her to thee, How sweet and fair she seems to be." These lines quite literally show that the speaker is telling the rose to go off and do his work, showing that he sees it as a symbol of love and affection. Parker goes about using the rose as at first sweet but then changes into saying it is overused. To me, it seems like Parker understands the typical meaning of a rose, that it is meant to be "Deep-hearted, pure, with scented dew still wet," but she almost feels that the rose is overused and is more focused on other things a person could give to her (3-4). In lines 11 and 12 the poem states "Ah no, it's always just my luck to get One perfect rose." It seems like these lines are said with so much sarcasm, and while she is appreciative of getting a rose, she wishes that instead, she would get something else, something that is not so overly used as a symbol of love. Finally, I believe that Blake goes about using the rose as yes, a symbol of love, but more specifically a symbol that love is sick. In lines 7 and 8, the poem states "And his dark secret love Does they life destroy." This shows that the rose is about love, but the "invisible worm" that takes over is a form of, as you stated, sexual desire, but also almost hints at sexual shame (2). I believe that Blake was trying to join together both of these concepts to show the secretive tendencies of both shame and pleasure that we find in our culture. In Waller's "Song," the ultimate goal of using the rose as a symbol of love is to emphasize the temporary nature of beauty: "How small a part of time they share / That are so wondrous sweet and fair!" (19-20). This is a very traditional use of rose symbolism (which should remind you of "To His Coy Mistress"). If the rose's beauty is short-lived, just like the woman's beauty is short-lived, how does this commonality highlight the point the poem's speaker is making about the potential romantic relationship with his auditor? While Waller associates love with fleeting beauty/pleasure, Blake associates love with guilt and shame the speaker in Parker's poem asking for more abnormal gifts. Like Alexis stated, Blake and Waller almost go about writing as though woman are conquests, and that their relationships would only last as long as the woman's beauty does. Parker, on the other hand, speaks as though she knows what men want and how they could only possibly see her as an object, and so I believe she is proclaiming how she wants more than just something unmeaningful. She wants a relationship that will last, even when her beauty fades. In lines 5-8 the poem states "I knew the language of the floweret; "My fragile leaves," it said, "his heart enclose." Love long has taken for his amulet One perfect rose." I believe that this shows the speaker understands what a rose means and what it has been used for, and especially how fragile it is. With this, she knows that the rose does not last a long time, which in return means her relationship may not either. So, when she asks for a limousine, she is asking for a more lavish gift, but also something that could be used and last for a long time, as she wants her relationship to last that long.

Rich's "Aunt Jennifer's Tiger"

"Aunt Jennifer's Tigers," we can assume that she felt trapped in her marriage and almost burdened by it. I think this is best shown when the poem states "The massive weight of Uncle's wedding band Sits heavily upon Aunt Jennifer's hand" (834). This shows that Aunt Jennifer's marriage felt like a burden to her. As for the tigers, I agree with you in thinking that it shows the oppression of women in marriages. I think this also shows how insignificant women felt in the relationship, especially Aunt Jennifer. This is shown when the poem states "The tigers in the panel that she made Will go on prancing, proud and unafraid" (834). To me, this shows that even when she dies, the tigers and work that she completed for her husband will continue to move on without her, showing that she almost had no importance in making them. In "Aunt Jennifer's Tigers," there's a great deal of distance between the narrator and the reality of the poem. Note the excerpt from Rich after the poem, in which she says, "It was important to me that Aunt Jennifer was a person as distinct from myself as possible" (qtd. in Mays 834). She suggests that she was writing about her own experiences, but treating them as if they weren't her own. The speaker (the niece) is separated from Aunt Jennifer, and Aunt Jennifer is separated from her imaginary creations (the tigers). It's as if only the tigers know what Jennifer is really supposed to be like. the tigers represent Aunt Jennifer's freedom. A piece of evidence that I can add is that the tigers are "will go on prancing, proud and unafraid" (12). Many believe that death brings freedom and that means that the tigers/ her freedom can go on without threat. The tigers also act as a contrast. Where Jennifer is locked down by her marriage the tigers, "Do not fear the men beneath the tree" (3). They seem to almost be what she wishes her freedom to be. As I said before the tigers would go on unafraid while her, "terrified hands will lie" in her death (9).

Hughes' "The Negro Speaks of Rivers" and "I, Too"

Adding to this conversation, I too believe that these poems emphasize the perseverance and contributions that African Americans have had on the new world. Hughes' "The Negro Speaks" seems to relate African existence from the beginning of civilization to the present times. This is like in lines 2 and 3 the poem states "I've known rivers ancient as the world and older than the flow of human blood in human veins. My soul has grown deep like the rivers." This seems to indicate that African Americans have been around for a long time, and the poem continues on like this, almost seeming to play out like a story. This poem highlights many events that indicate African Americans have been around for forever, and that them being where they are today did not come without hard work. In Hughes' "I, Too," there is a large emphasis on perseverance, with the speaker almost demanding that they get equality. In lines 2-4, the poem states "I am the darker brother. They send me to eat in the kitchen When company comes." This highlights one of the racial differences that the speaker in the poem has, but then, later on, it shows how he wants to persevere and gain that equality. This is like in lines 8-14 when the poem states "Tomorrow, I'll sit at the table. When company comes Nobody'll dare Say to me, Eat in the kitchen." This assertion is the speaker saying that they are just as much a part of America as white people are, so therefore they deserve the same treatment. Both of these poems are trying to get across that African Americans are and always were an asset to any community they are in, and that eventually people will realize that and they will be treated as they should. I agree with you and many others that the rivers in the poem have a large cultural significance in that it shows their heritage and culture was spread across the world. I believe that all three rivers given in the poem have great significance, as they all represent different things. They indicate that African Americans have been helping out and a part of society almost since the beginning of time, and that they have both witnessed and helped out with these key moments in history. It is showing that no matter how much African Americans are overlooked and taken advantage of, they are able to persevere and lay down roots. It implies that they have been helping to shape and guide different civilizations throughout the world. In lines 5 and 6, the poem states "I built my hut near the Congo and it lulled me to sleep. I looked upon the Nile and raised the pyramids above it." This shows just how important all of the rivers being spoken about are, as they are there to show that African Americans have helped out globally, all throughout time, and that no matter where they are, they lay down their cultural roots, and they will always be there. Even though the Euphrates river is in a different part of the world than the Congo and Nile, they all have the same importance, as they all play a part in African History and are a key as to who they are today. This poem shows that there is a great depth to how African Americans are tied to world history and how they have been here through it all. the fact that rivers are a main point of comparison in discussing African-American and African cultures and histories appears important in how, besides allowing for discussion of certain qualities like depth as you'd mentioned, they reference how they have borne witness to history on a very wide scale. Quotes like "Ancient, dusky rivers," (Hughes 9) and "My soul has grown deep like the rivers," (Hughes 7) allude to the age, yet nonphysical nature of this progression and presence- those cultural roots and associations you had mentioned have manifested in a sort of ubiquitous identity in a manner very similar to recurring important landforms.

Waite's "The Kind of Man I am at the DMV"

As for "The kind of man I Am at the DMV," I think that it is not the narrator who struggles with a conflict of his identity, but rather the people who are surrounding him. In lines 7-11 the poem states "because, yes that man is a girl. I, materm-8n, am a girl. I am the kind of man who is a girl and because the kind of man I am is patient with children I try not to hear the meanness in his voice, his boy voice that sounds like a girl's voice." I believe that this shows that the narrator quite confidently knows who they are, and his understanding of the people around, as they may not know everything there is to life yet. I believe that the mother is uncomfortable with her son's observations because she herself is unsure of what to think or say to him. In lines 16-18 the poem states "His mother snatches his finger from the air, of course, he's not, she says, pulling him back to his seat, what number does it say we are?" This shows that the mother does not explain the situation to her son, but rather diverts his attention to another subject. I think this indicated the mother does not know exactly what gender the narrator is, and to avoid controversy, she does not say too much at all.

Dickinson's "Because I could not stop for Death"

At first, I did not see the poem like this, but now after rereading it multiple times I see where this is true. The way that the narrator depicts death, is as you stated, supposed to be a process that is relaxing. This poem almost makes it seem like death is accommodating to different situations. In lines, 9-13 the poem states "We passed the School, where Children strove At Recess- in the Ring- We passed in the Fields of Gazing Grain- We passed the Setting Sun- Or rather-He passed Us." This almost implies that death is slow, but none the less a process, and it takes its time to make sure it is accommodating to whomever it is going after. It would seem that death is in no hurry, and is trying to make the narrator as comfortable as possible during the drive. This poem also implies that death is kind, as in lines 6-8 the poem states "And I had put away My labor and my leisure too, For His Civility." I think that because death knows that it is inevitable to others, it wants to be as caring as it possibly can to make a person's transition easier. I find it sort of ironic that it would matter what the girl was wearing at all. Technically speaking, if the girl is dead, how would she be able to even feel the "Dews drew quivering and chill" (14)? With this in mind, I think that the tone at this point in the story is taking a turn towards the more sinister side. I think that at first, the woman was happy and felt peace with death, but now she is realizing that quite literally death is cold and long and she will feel like this for almost an eternity. Because the woman is dressed in such thin fabrics, this could possibly represent her finally realizing that death is not all peaceful, but is actually quite frightening. In lines 21-24, I think it solidifies this point perfectly as they state "Since then-'tis Centuries- and yet Feels shorter than the Day I first surmised the Horses' Heads Were toward Eternity." This shows the woman's realization that came and grew stronger as the sun sets and she got cold. I think that the tone of the poem starts to change at line 14. Prior to this point, the diction had been mostly positive, like "kindly" (2), "no haste" (5), "Civility" (8), and the depictions of beautiful scenery outside the carriage (9-12). At line 14, it starts going downhill, with "quivering and chill" (14), "Swelling" (18), and "scarcely" (19), as well as the descriptions of the speaker's unfit clothing (15-16). Once she realizes the eternity of death, she feels cold and exposed to the elements.

Shelley's "Ode to the West Wind"

Continuing on with this conversation, I agree that the first three sections of the poem serve to symbolize the abilities of the west wind, while the last two sections serve to show the wind as a force of death and how it brings a rebirth. In lines 7-9, the poem states "The winged seeds, where they lie cold and low, Each like a corpse within its grave, until Thine azure sister of the Spring shall blow." These lines seem to be saying that the west wind is only good for spreading seeds and blowing things away, and does not seem to like it very much. He seems to be much more appreciative of Spring, where things are able to grow. He sees the west wind as a force of death and whenever it comes things start to die and go away until Spring and Summer. Though, with this wind and its ability to spread things, the narrator seems to hope that he can be apart of this cycle. In lines 52-56 the poem states "As thus with thee in prayer in my sore need. Oh, lift me as a wave, a leaf, a cloud! I fall upon the thorns of life! I bleed! A heavy weight of hours has chained and bowed One too like thee: tameless, and swift, and proud." This makes it seem like the man is pleading with the west wind to carry him with it, or at least his thoughts to spread to mankind because he realizes he has a limited amount of time on earth, but the west wind will always continue to come back each year. This is shown in line 63, which states "drive my dead thoughts over the universe." Where the narrator used to only see the west wind with death, he now sees that it can be used to carry on his story as he dies, just like it carries on the seeds of trees when they die every year in order to make new. I too found it interesting how the narrator used instruments in different ways. He was referring to both musical instruments and him as an instrument. It is almost like the man wants the wind to use him as an instrument to spread his words, and connects him to music by saying that it will help him connect all of the pieces of his life together in one big harmony. In lines 59-62 the poem states "The tumult of thy mighty harmonies Will take from both a deep, autumnal tone, Sweet though in sadness. Be thou, Spirit fierce, My spirit! Be thou me, impetuous one!" To me, this almost makes it seem like the man is saying that the wind can carry his words and life story on in one big harmony, just as it does the leaves and the sounds that they make. Then, in lines 69 and 70, the poem states "The trumpet of prophecy! O Wind, If Winter comes, can Spring be far behind." Technically speaking, with winter comes the death of trees, and with spring comes the life of new plants, then the narrator is connecting the two together. By dying, the narrator is able to have his words spread forever by the wind, which will go on forever, as this is a never-ending cycle. I believe that the trumpet is just meant to symbolize that as that instrument carries on sound, the wind will be able to carry on his words, almost in a musical way.

Donne's "The Sun Rising" and Richardson's "Late Aubade"

both Donne and Richardson's poems use the morning to symbolize departure. In lines 7-10 the poem states "Go tell court-huntsmen that the kind will ride, Call country ants to harvest offices: Love, all alike, no season knows, nor clime, Nor hours, days, months, which are the rags of time." I believe that this is saying that without the sun, and the mornings, no one would be able to tell when to leave to go do their jobs. This poem, at least I believe, is basically saying that it is the sun's job to tell others when to go to their jobs, so with this, mornings stand for the departure of other people, and without mornings they would not know any time, and would not know when to do what. This poem indicates that time is important, and is a key aspect in life and seeing other people. In contrast to this, Richardson's poem focuses more on how time is almost irrelevant or is unimportant and insignificant in life. In lines 13-16 the poem states "If I get up a little reluctantly, tapping my wallet, keys, tickets, I'm giving you time to say Stay, it's a dream that you're old-no one notices-years never happened- but I see you have already given me all that you can." I believe that this shows that the narrator wants to do more with his life, but already feels they have lived enough and is almost afraid to do more. The two poems have different situations surrounding time, as one seems to look forward to moving on and living life, and the other seems to focus on how they have already lived enough and time is not as important anymore, as they are afraid of what could happen the kind of person the narrator is speaking to is himself and life in general. Though this is difficult to tell, as the narrator presents himself as both young and old all at the same time. To me, it is almost like the narrator is saying that he is old, but yet life is older, and that time and love will continue to go on even when he is dead. In lines 17-20 the poem states "Those clear eyes are ancient; you've done this with billions of others, but you are my first life, Life. I feel helplessly young. I'm a kid checking mail, a kid on his cell with his questions: are we in love, Life, are we exclusive, are we forever?" To me, I see these lines as the narrator speaking to life itself and asking if his life is significant, while also contemplating the fact that although he may be old and continuing to get older, life will always be the oldest of them all. After reading this poem several times, I do not believe that his love affair is with a person, but with life. He thinks he has lived a long life and has done a lot, but in retrospect of things, he believes that life is mocking him because he isn't nearly as old as time and all that time has seen. So, even though he has done a lot, life and time will always be able to do more, as eventually the narrator will run out of time and life will continue on with others.

Cummings' "I(a" and Herbert's "Easter Wings" and

both of the poems have serious themes. The first poem definitely has a feeling of absence or quite literally loneliness that only occurs as the leaf is falling. As you two have both stated, this could represent death both in a person and for the tree. When leaves fall, it signifies the transition into a new season, and with that, the trees die, and "a leaf falls" (1-6). The way that this poem is spaced out and set up allows the reader to also get a visual representation of what the leaf falling looks like. The fact that "a leaf falls" is in parenthesis makes it feel secluded, which adds to the feeling of loneliness (1-6). So, in this sense, this poem is both a visual gimmick and something serious. As for Herbert's poem, I believe that it has the same effect. As you have stated, the rising and falling of the words represent the rising and falling of the narrator's relationship with God. In lines 1-5, the poem states "Lord, who createdst man in wealth and store, Though foolishly he lost the same, Decaying more and more Till he became Most poor." I believe that this could be referring to Adam or more generally humankind, as God created them, and then we acted foolishly, which is a low with God and his relationship with us. This is why the poem goes down when talking about this section. In lines 6-10, the poem states "With thee O let me rise As larks, harmoniously, And sing this day thy victories: Then shall the fall further the flight in me." The speaker is saying that he wants to rise above the foolishness of Adam and mankind and wants his relationship with God to grow for the better, which is why the lines are rising in this part. The poem marks the low parts with lower indents, and higher parts with rising lines, symbolizing the ups and downs of the narrator's relationship with God. the shape of Herbert's poem is important not only for its wing shape, but also because of the lengths of the lines. The first line describes creation, and then the human condition undergoes "[d]ecaying more and more" (3) until man is "[m]ost poor" (5)--the thinnest part of the wings. Then the poem widens as the speaker asks God to help him "rise / As larks" (7-8). In short, the wings help him to fly, as in line 10. Think about how the poem's title causes this image of flight to make even more sense. I also initially thought that the separation of the leaf falling from the word "loneliness" is to even further emphasize the loneliness found in the poem (1-8). Going along with this, I think that the way the words are so spread out is to yes, show the motion of a leave falling, but by separating everything, it further emphasizes the feeling of loneliness. The way that the words are not placed together, but are instead drug out almost makes it feel like when the leaves do fall, they fall by themselves and not all together at once, therefore the use of loneliness. The serious theme behind this is as you and many others have stated, loneliness, with leaves falling just being a mere example of this. Though, the visual effect of the poem and the spacing of the words further help to solidify this theme and give greater emphasis to the feeling of loneliness. Personally, I found both Cummings' "l(a" and Herbert's "Easter Wings" to be effective in conveying their overall themes, especially because of their appearance on the page. For Cummings' "l(a", we can see the stand-alone word "loneliness"(Cummings 1-9) and then the phrase "a leaf falls" (Cummings 1-6) within parenthesis. Cummings uses specific, visual imagery to portray the intense feeling of loneliness through the falling of a leaf. On the page, the poem's words appear to shift left and right as the poem continues, which could alternatively represent the swaying back and forth of a leaf as it travels to the ground. Only a singular leaf is mentioned to be falling, so this strengthens the loneliness theme while also hinting at a larger meaning. The leaf falling may signify death, more specifically death experienced by oneself, because the leaf's "season" has come to an end. For these reasons, I do believe this poem is serious in its description of death and solitude. Focusing on Herbert's "Easter Wings", we can also find significance in the poem's visual appearance. The poem's lines are shaped into a pair of bird's wings, which is symbolizing the speaker's rising and falling in his relationship with God. This is further explained with the detail, "With thee/ O let me rise/ As larks, harmoniously,/ And sing this day thy victories:/ Then shall the fall further the flight in me" (Herbert 6-10). The presented simile compares the speaker to a bird that can fly above human sufffering and the world's darkness. The increased length of the lines are presenting the speaker's hopefulness(rising), while the shorter lines are discussing the more pessimistic tone of the speaker(falling). Knowing that the appearance of the poem highlights the speaker's experiences, I would argue that this poem is serious and more than a mere, visual gimmick.

Cofer's "The Challenging"

he two poems show the author's conflict with their gender identity, and with this, it becomes apparent as to how the narrator's parents feel about this. In lines 21-23 the poem states "She was not amused by my transformations, sternly forbidding me from sitting down with them as a man." This indicated that the narrator's mother was not happy with her behavior and frowned upon it, showing that the mother feels one should not step out of their own gender role. I believe that this poem could be indicating that, as professor Howard stated, women are supposed to take on a gentler and quiet role, while the men take on the more violent and loud roles, and that those roles should not be reversed. Though, in terms of this poem, it seems like the mother is more serious about these roles than the father. This is shown in lines 18-20 when the poem states "He would listen with a smile to my tales of battles and brotherhood until Mother called us to dinner." So, instead of getting angry at the narrator for role-playing, he almost saw it as humorous, as opposed to the mother who was furious. I think this could also show that men find it humorous when women think that they can take on the roles that they have, which is why the father was smiling in the first place. really like and agree with your interpretation of the two poems. The idea is, as you stated, that the girl does not just want to be a boy, but she wants to rid her of all of the things that come with being feminine. I believe that this transformation could have something to do with the distribution of power in gender roles. It seems as though the men have more freedom and power while the women are there to serve the needs of others. I think the girl could possibly want to transform into something more powerful and as someone who has the free will to do whatever they want. It also seems like the girl is constantly reminded of this role and her inability to change it because of society's standards by the way her mother speaks to her. In lines 26-29 the poem states "to braid my hair furiously with blind hands, and to return invisible, as myself, to the real world of her kitchen." I think that this not only shows how much the girl envies to be seen by others, it also shows that her mother almost wants her to be invisible. I think one thing to look into is how the father was amused by his daughter dressing up as a male, possibly showing that he did not take her seriously, which could indicate that this is how men in society would view her if she would try to take on more masculine roles. It could be possible that her mother is only trying to protect her, while all the girl wants is to feel more power, and to not feel invisible

Kumin's "Woodchucks"

in "Woodchucks," the woodchucks were meant to highlight the conflict within the women and that in "Aunt Jennifer's Tigers," the tigers symbolized Aunt Jennifer's dreams of freedom. I also like your thinking for "Woodchucks" about how humanity has an evil side, especially when trying to control something out of their capabilities. With this thinking, I also believe that this evil side makes people feel the need to justify their actions, no matter how inhumane or wrong they are. This is like when the women in the poem are talking about gassing the woodchucks and how it didn't work out. It is almost like the women compare themselves to the woodchucks, as the poem states "Next morning they turned up again, no worse for the cyanide than we for our cigarettes and state-store Scotch, all of us up to scratch" (833). When this is put together with your thinking that the woodchucks are meant to resemble a human family, it would seem that their reasoning to kill this family would be no greater than what they themselves are doing, but because humans have this evil side, they do it anyways. It didn't seem like they had too much of a reason to feel the need to kill them when they were doing some similar things to what the women were doing. I agree with you in thinking that the narrator hadn't opted to use a gun because it was easier to use store-bought remedies. Though I disagree with you in thinking that the narrator did not care how violent they were when killing the woodchucks. I think that the very beginning and ending of the poem show this best. Lines 1-3 and 29 states "Gassing the woodchucks didn't turn out right. The knockout bomb from the Feed and Grain Exchange as featured as merciful, quick at the bone" and "If only they'd all consented to die unseen gassed underground the quiet Nazi way." I think that this shows that initially, the narrator had wanted to kill the woodchucks in a more humane and not violent way, but when that didn't work out they turned to more violent options. Though, the last two lines almost make it seem like the narrator is regretful and wished that the gassing would've worked so that they did not have to resort to more violent options. In addition to this, I also think that the woodchucks are more closely related to the narrator than what one might think. As you mentioned, the woodchucks are just doing what they see as a necessity to survive, but by the narrator trying to kill the woodchucks to preserve her food, isn't she technically doing the same thing? In this sense, I think the woodchucks and the narrator have the same goal in mind of survival, though the narrator feels her need to live and survive more than the woodchucks.

Plath's "Daddy"

overall, the poem is about a larger subject, but unlike you, I also feel that it is very personal and might relate to her own life. I believe that this poem has the overall theme of oppression and that the oppression comes from the speaker's childhood. Though, I feel like Plath is generalizing this and relating this to a larger crowd than just herself. In some parts of the poem, Plath appears to be talking about memories of her father, but in other parts, it seems like she is talking about men in general, or how her dad made her realize how men were. In lines 51-56, the poem states "You stand at the blackboard, daddy, In the picture I have of you, A cleft in your chin instead of your foot But no less a devil for that, no not Any less the black man who Bit my pretty red heart in two." These lines show that the speaker views her father as very patriarchal and has broken her, almost teaching her that she is nothing. In general, Plath is indicating that men have control over women in society and that they are oppressing them, just as her father did to her, making this poem personal. Though, at the end of the poem, it appears that the speaker begins to find her worth, just as other women do in society when they get out of abusive relationships. In lines 76-80, the poem states "There's a stake in your fat black heart And the villagers never liked you. They are dancing and stamping on you. They always knew it was you. Daddy, daddy, you bastard, I'm through." By using the word "villagers," Plath is able to generalize this statement with other females in the world and is basically saying that once women know and acknowledge their abuse, they are able to move on and get stronger and realize that they never like that person in the first place. I think that by making the poem personal, Plath was able to convey larger themes. I can see where literary critics would get upset because technically Plath is writing confessional poetry more than anything else but she is also trying to make a point. In lines 31-35, the poem states "An engine, an engine Chuffing me off like a Jew. A Jew to Dachau, Auschwitz, Belsen. I began to talk like a Jew. I think I may well be a Jew." By comparing herself and her childhood to that of a Jew she is trying to get the reader to understand the trials and tribulations in her life at this time were similar to the oppression that Jews had from the Nazis. Even though these are drastically different circumstances, I believe that Plath was trying to get her point across in a drastic way. By comparing her life to something so controversial and widely talked about, she is able to draw attention to it, and further bring forth the experiences that many women have had. Great discussion so far, everyone. What I'm hearing is that many of you see the poem as partly autobiographical in its reflection of the details of Plath's experiences with her father and her husband, but also that Plath draws parallels between the experiences of the poem's narrator and common experiences of oppression based on gender and/or political tyranny. One way in which Plath addresses these broad experiences is through the creation of a speaker whose experiences don't match the details of Plath's life--including the speaker's reference to her father as a Nazi and herself as a Jew. There are a couple of ways of viewing the Nazi imagery in the poem (and these might overlap, so we don't have to pick just one): Plath compares her father to a Nazi and compares herself to a Jew to clarify the nature of their relationship. In this way of looking at it, these metaphors are there to strengthen the poem's powerful depiction of Plath's own personal life (in spirit if not in terms of factual events). Plath compares her own relationships to the Holocaust to suggest a parallel between various types of suffering. In this way of looking at it, the poem is about oppression on a broader level, so the poem's speaker (whether it's Plath herself or a fictional character) connects individual suffering to the suffering of groups (women, victims of violence and warfare, etc.).

Auden's "Musee des Beaux Arts"

people and animals are immune to the events around them. In addition to the quotes you used, I also think that lines 12-13 fit in with this thought very well as they state "Where the dogs go on with their doggy life and the torturer's horse Scratches its innocent behind on a tree" (1131). This shows that the animals are not affected by their owner's actions, just as the owners are not affected by their animal's actions. This theme fits in with the tone of the stanzas, as the first one, as you stated, focuses on suffering. I also believe that the poem focuses on not only the suffering of people and the oblivion but the indifferent thoughts that go along with it. This is like when the poem states "For the miraculous birth, there always must be Children who did not specially want it to happen" (1131). To me, this makes it seem like the fascination that the older people might have with, what I believe they are talking about is Jesus's birth, the younger people are not happy about it as they feel they will be forgotten and will suffer and be forgotten about with his coming. This means that they have indifferent opinions on the situation, but still that the situation has to do with suffering. The second part of the poem has the same feeling that life will still go on even with events occurring around them. This is like when the poem states "the plowman may Have heard the splash, the forsaken cry, But for him, it was not an important failure" and "Had somewhere to get to and sailed calmly on" (1132). To me, it seems that in the first part and the second part, there were events that could change someone's life and disrupt what they were doing, but instead they continued on their own paths and were almost oblivious to what was happening around them. Relating this back to the indifference of people, the characters in the second half and first half, were unconcerned with their events happening around them and had different necessitates to attend to, which took them away from paying attention to what was around them I believe that it focuses more on them caring about what affects them. At the beginning, Auden writes, "For the miraculous birth, there must always be / Children who did not specially want it to happen" (6-7). The children are disappointed with the birth because it impacts the attention given to them. In contrast, the horse is not affected by its owner's actions, so it is neutral on whatever is happening in the owner's life. However, if something was happening to the horse, the owner would have to take a stance because he probably relies on the horse for transportation or labor. the theme of this poem is based on human indifference. Going off of your thoughts on time I think that this has a lot to do with how sudden or slow suffering can happen. I think that time can also have something to do with how people around and events can pass by as time goes on and not focus too much on other people's sufferings. This is like in lines 14-17 when the poem states "In Brughel's Icarus, for instance: how everything turns away Quite leisurely from the disaster: the plowman may Have heard the splash, the forsaken cry, But for him, it was not an important failure." I think that these lines show that time passes as people continue to do their daily tasks and jobs, and are not necessarily concerned with other people's sufferings. I think the poem is trying to say that even though people may be aware of others' sufferings, they have their own lives to deal with, and are more concerned with themselves than with others.

Donne's "The Flea" and Marvell's "To His Coy Mistress"

that "To His Coy Mistress" is more respectful than "The Flea," and in that sense is more persuasive. The name of the poem "The Flea," almost gives the poem away, as fleas are pestering insects, and that is exactly how the man is acting. In lines 16-18, the poem states "Though use make you apt to kill me, let not to that, self-murder added be, And sacrilege, three sins in killing three." The man almost seems to be putting all of the blame for his problems and not being liked on his partner, and sort of pesters and bothers her to figure out why. If you were looking at this from another aspect, lines 14 and 15 could be looked at as her parents do not like the man, as they see how much he bothers her and is almost like an annoying insect to both them and their child. As for "To His Coy Mistress," the man is more understanding and embracing towards his partner instead of pestering her and constantly questioning her. To me, this is made clear right off the back in lines 1-4 when the poem states "Had we but world enough, and time, This coyness, lady, were no crime. E would sit down, and think which way To walk, and pass our long love's day." To me, this shows that the man is not upset about his partner's reluctance, and is understanding enough to sit down and talk with her about it. Just right there without going on, it is clear to see the difference in character, and how "To His Coy Mistress" is way more persuasive than "The Flea" just in the sense of respectability. When continuing to read on, it is clear to see that the man in "To His Coy Mistress" is not concerned about time and is willing to wait as long as needed to get his partner. This is shown in lines 37-40 when the poem states "Now let us sport us while we may, And now, like am'rous birds of prey, Rather at once our time devour Than languish in his slow-chapped pow'r." , I not only think that "To His Coy Mistress" was more convincing, but I also think it was sincerer and more caring. In "The Flea," the narrator has no concerns for anyone but himself and does not consider other people's values, especially his partner's. The narrator constantly pesters his partner in trying to convince her to fulfill his wants and does not care what her values are, and almost acts like she is being prude because of them. In lines 19-22 the poem states "Cruel and sudden, hast thou since Purpled thy nail in blood of innocence? Wherein could this flea guilty be, Except in that drop which it sucked from thee?" I interpret this as the narrator trying to convince his partner to do something she does not want to do by justifying it by saying that it does not really matter because it is something that everyone does, or that it is not a big deal. Whereas in "To His Coy Mistress," the narrator is much more caring and accommodating to his partner and cares about her values and how she feels. Instead of constantly criticizing his partner and pestering her, he is understanding. In lines 11-14 the poem states "My vegetable love should grow Vaster than empires, and more slow; An hundred years should go to praise Thine eyes, and on thy forehead gaze." This shows that this narrator is in no rush to fulfill his wants, but is focused on sincerely loving his partner and making her feel like more than just a mistress. Instead of rushing his loved one into something like the narrator of "The Flea," the narrator in "To His Coy Mistress" is focused on explaining the limited amount of time they have together in a caring, non-pestering way. "The Flea" is more forceful, but technically both poems are just trying to convince the auditor to have sex with them. "The Flea" just seems more forceful because the narrator is so pestering towards his partner, and is constantly trying to convince his partner to have relations with him. Whereas, "To His Coy Mistress" is more respectable in how the narrator presents the situation but is still being pushy by saying that the pair has a limited amount of time together. In lines 28-32 the poem states "That long preserved virginity, And your quaint honor turn to dust, And into ashes all my lust: The grave's a fine and private place, But none, I think, do there embrace." So, yes, at the beginning of the poem the narrator is saying how he will always love his partner for as long as they are alive, but when continuing to read on and read the poem over and over, you can begin to see how this narrator is pushy as well. In the quote I mentioned above, you can see how the narrator is almost contradicting himself by at first saying it is okay to be a virgin and wait, and then turns around and says that she can't be a virgin forever because he would not be able to have sex with her when they are dead. This in itself seems pushy, and even though it is more respectful than the words of the narrator in "The Flea," it is still forceful in that the narrator is only focused on his wants and obtaining his sexual desires

Hardy's "The Ruined Maid"

the conversation between the two women gives off a sense of jealousy. Though, I do not think jealousy is the only thing playing a part in this conversation. I also think there is a touch of anger as well. While I do think the other speaker is exasperating her jealousy towards Amelia's newfound life, I also think she is a little hurt at the way Amelia is acting. I think this is best shown when the poem states "You left us in tatters, without shoes or socks, Tired of digging potatoes, and spudding up clocks; And now you've gay bracelets and bright feathers three" (737). This shows that when Amelia went to go find her new life, she was leaving behind the other speaker to do all of the hard work by herself. So, I think that the jealousy that the other speaker has for Amelia comes from the fact that Amelia was able to just up and leave the other speaker behind to get a better life, while the other speaker is stuck at home, doing the extra work that Amelia left behind. I also think that the other speaker is upset at the fact that Amelia is almost acting all high and mighty in her new lifestyle, almost putting disrespect on the lifestyle she left, and the other speaker still has. That is where I think the sense of anger comes into play. the other speaker is not fond of Amelia's newfound proper speech and life. The other speaker also states "you used to call home-life a hag-ridden dream, and you'd sigh, and you'd sock; but at present you seem to know not of megrims or melancholy" (737). Even though this is what Amelia used to refer to as her home-life, it gives an insight into how she refers to it now, and also into her new life. In Amelia's old life, she almost saw home as a burden and did not like to be there because she was stressed. She also talked badly about her old life, but now she likes her new life and her new home, as she does not seem to know sadness or stress there. The poem then states "True. One's pretty lively when ruined" (737). This shows that Amelia feels better about herself and is less stressed and sad with her new life, and with this, she uses different language towards things. The other speaker, however, is still living the old lifestyle so she could find it hurtful with how she used to describe it as compared to her new and extravagant life now. One reason for the confusion about what's really going on in this poem is that dramatic poetry (see the definition on p. 737) lacks narration. In this case, the only words in the poem that come from a narrator (and that therefore aren't dialogue from one of the characters) are "said she" (repeated at the end of each stanza). Without a narrator to describe the situation and setting, it's often difficult for readers to know what's happening--since understanding the poem's events involves interpreting dialogue only. In this case, we have to piece together from the characters' statements that Amelia is lording it over her poorer country friend because of the advantages she's gained from her supposedly immoral lifestyle (and I saw "supposedly" because Amelia doesn't care much about others' moral judgments).

Locke's "The New Negro" and Fisher's "The Caucasian Storms Harlem"

the literature of the Harlem Renaissance is important because it points out a lot of struggles that African Americans faced at the time. The Harlem Renaissance is not something that was just founded by someone, but it happened "as the needs and desires of African American intellectual sand artists became manifest" (1065). This was a product of the long-term effects of slavery and the desire of African Americans to produce their own distinctive American cultures, as well as a larger national culture. The Harlem Renaissance allowed for the African American people to voice their creativity and represent a powerful assertion of their full humanity. In Locke's excerpt, he states "The intelligent Negro of today is resolved not to make discrimination an extenuation for his shortcomings in performance, individual or collective; eh is trying to hold himself at par, neither inflated by sentimental allowances nor depreciated by current social discounts" (1081). This helps to show the African Americans wanted to express themselves in ways that they never had gotten the chance to before, and they wanted to show their pain and suffering from the past. They did this all while not stooping so low to be at the same level as their discriminators but to rise above them and build their own characters and become stronger. The Harlem Renaissance allowed African Americans to grow stronger by letting them express themselves truly, and not lessen their abilities as they had experienced in the past. In Fisher's text, he states "Some think it's just a fad. White people have always more or less sought Negro entertainment as a diversion. The old shows of the early nineteen hundreds, Williams and Walker and Cole and Johnson, are brought to mind as an example" (1087). This shows that even when the African Americans were trying to overcome their past hardships and trying to create a new identity for themselves, white Americans still saw them as a joke and just found more ways to discriminate against them and discredit them. Though, this hate did not stop them. They continued to grow stronger and used this time to flourish and further their own identity and own culture in America. This power dynamic also led to driving out black regulars of jazz clubs in more overt ways. In the 1920s, some Harlem jazz clubs were predominantly white in clientele or predominantly black in clientele in an unofficial sense, but many of the most prominent clubs were strictly segregated as a matter of policy: "The Cotton Club was part of a bizarre tradition in Harlem that included other fancy clubs such as Connie's Inn and Small's Paradise. These clubs, though operating in the heart of black Harlem, catered exclusively to white customers. Yet, in their shows and decor they still promoted an idealized but wholly inaccurate black lifestyle similar to those in minstrel shows. Menacing bouncers were stationed at the doors to make sure no black faces were admitted to the establishments, located on the same blocks where these black men and women lived. Eleven such segregated clubs were listed in Variety, but the most famous and popular of the group was the Cotton Club, the largest, fanciest, highest-priced, which featured the most extravagant shows." (See here for the full NPR article from which I've taken this quote.) in the 20th century, there were new opportunities that began arising for African Americans. Though, with these new opportunities came new discriminations and ways that whites found to make African Americans' lives harder. With the Harlem Renaissance, came new chances for African Americans to begin doing their own things, but with this, white Americans found chances to take advantage of this. Locke states "To all of this the New Negro is keenly responsive as an augury of a new democracy in American culture. He is contributing his share to the new social understanding. But the desire to be understood would never in itself have been sufficient to have opened so completely the protectively closed portals of the thinking Negro's mind" (1082). This is showing that the African Americans of the Harlem Renaissance started to be able to see a new future where they would have their own cultures separate from white Americans. Though, Fisher shows that this did not come without trouble and almost some mockery. Fisher states "Some think it's just a fad. White people have always more or less sought Negro entertainment as a diversion" (1087). This shows that some white Americans did not believe that the Harlem Renaissance would be happening for a long time and that the African Americans trying to create their own culture was not serious. Fisher focused on how white Americans believed that the Harlem Renaissance and music being created was meant to make them happy, while Locke focuses on how the Harlem Renaissance arose in order for African Americans to create a new culture for themselves.

Collins' "Lies" and William's "The Red Wheelbarrow"

the unique word choices of the poems give them layers to be deciphered or interpreted. Also, in agreeance with you, I believe that the poem "Lies" comes off as a sort of rant. I believe that Collins' poem though is more of a puzzle than Williams' poem is. It is almost like each time the word "lie" or "lay" is used, it has different meanings or is used for different things, almost in contradictive ways. In lines 7-10 the poem states "lyrics, lines, what if you say dear sister when you have no sister, what if you say guns when you saw no guns, though you know they're there?" This comes after the quote that you used, and in this sense, I believe that it would be going along with the average definition of "lie" which would typically mean to deceive. Those lines ask a rhetorical question, and when looking at the next lines 10-11, which states "She laid down her arm; she lay down, her arms by her sides," it is describing the action of "lay." When looking at this, and putting it with Collins' play on words and the lines above, I think it is possible that the girl is not laying down her arms, but another word for arms, which is guns. This would go with the thinking of she did not say there were guns, but it was implied that they are there, which goes with the rhetorical question lines above. This poem is almost all over the place, and makes no sense at all, while also making sense at the same time due to how Collins played with words. As for "The Red Wheelbarrow," it is almost the opposite. Williams uses words in a more simplistic way than Collins did, but was still able to give a lot of detail. Instead of creating a contradictive piece, Williams was able to create a cohesive one that depicted "a red wheelbarrow," that is assumed to be on a farm. Williams uses little detail to describe what she is creating a picture for, but in doing this, she can intrigue the reader to create their own picture and see more than what was given with the poem.

Shakespeare's "My mistress' eyes are nothing like the sun" and Millay's "I, being born a woman and distressed"

these two poems allow the poets to make statements through pairs of lines. The setup also allows for comparisons to be made in each poem. Both poems seem to portray some form of dislike or odd feeling for their partners or internal feelings. In lines 9 and 10 of Shakespeare's poem, it states "I love to hear her speak, yet well I know That music hath a far more pleasing sound." This shows that while Shakespeare loves her and loves to hear her talk, he thinks that music sounds much more appealing than her. This is also like in lines 7 and 8 when it states "And in some perfumes is there more delight Than in the breath that from my mistress reeks." This shows that he believes his mistress has bad breath, but instead of hating her, he still loves her and looks over her imperfections. In lines 8-10 of Millay's poem, it states "And leave me once again undone, possessed. Think not for this, however, the poor treason Of my stout blood against my staggering brain." This makes it seem like the speaker is sort of possessed by her lust and does not see the need for a passionate or physical connection. Then, in lines 13 and 14 the poem states "I find this frenzy insufficient reason For conversation when we meet again." This shows that the woman finds no meaningful connection in her meeting with a lover, and finds her lust to be more important than a love connection. Even though both poems find different problems either within themselves or with their significant other, one shows that love overcomes and wins, while the other shows that passion and lust are not a good thing and that physical desire is more important than a connection. As the posts above suggest, the first step in recognizing a sonnet (besides your instructor telling you to analyze sonnet form) is that the poem is a single stanza of fourteen lines, primarily in iambic pentameter. (Feel free to mark the meter of some of the lines of these poems to explore the iambic pattern and some important violations of it. I hope we can talk about the very first foot--the first two syllables--in Millay's poem in some future posts.) Internal divisions in a sonnet are based on the separation of the poem into sections within the single stanza, usually marked by end punctuation like periods. See the posts above about the 4-4-4-2 divisions in Shakespeare and Millay's use of an 8-6 (octave-sestet) structure. One of the other primary ways to identify the type of sonnet is rhyme scheme (abab cdcd efef gg for the English sonnet and abbaabba followed by some variation of cdecde--note that this Millay sonnet is actually cdcdcd—for the Italian sonnet). Look at the final sounds at the ends of the lines to mark rhyme patterns. In Millay's Italian sonnet, the first eight lines (the octave) describe the speaker's feelings of lust for the man to whom she's speaking, lust that has functioned to "[c]larify the pulse and cloud the mind" (7). The last six lines (the sestet) provide the second part of the story, which is her feeling of "scorn" (12) for him, in spite of her lust: "I find this frenzy insufficient reason / For conversation when we meet again" (13-14). The first line of the sestet in an Italian sonnet often contains a logical shift word (like because, therefore, thus, etc.). In this case, the logical shift word is "however" (9). This "turn" in logic is often called a volta. In Shakespeare's English sonnet, there are three 4-line sections (each ending with a period) in which the speaker says what his lover isn't like. As with most English sonnets, though, the "moral of the story" is in the rhyming couplet at the end: the fact that the speaker loves better than poets who tell lies about the women they're supposed to love—by suggesting that they're perfect (13-14). Notice that the different sonnet forms—Italian vs. English—lend themselves to different kinds of "arguments." The English sonnet works well for a multi-part argument with a punchline at the end (in the rhyming couplet). Remember Shakespeare's "[That time of year thou mayst in me behold]"? Three metaphors plus the moral of the story in the last two lines? The Italian sonnet works well for a two-part argument: a principle followed by an example, a point followed by a counter-point, etc. This pause adds emphasis to the first two syllables instead of just the second one, in typical fashion. As from an example you gave, line 6 would be emphasized as "so SUBT/ly IS/ the FUME/ of LIFE/ designed." Whereas, the first line is emphasized as "I, BE/ing BORN/ a WOM/an AND/ distressed." In this way, the first section is different from the typical fashion, as both the first and second syllables are being emphasized, instead of just the second syllable being emphasized. After the first section, the emphasis goes back to normal, with the second syllable being emphasized while the first is not. By splitting up the line, and putting extra emphasis on the word I, the reader is able to know that the poem is about the narrator, and explicitly describing her feelings and views. This makes it so that right from the beginning there is no question who the poem is about, or where the feelings are coming from. It is clear they come from the narrator. Further, the pattern of stressed and unstressed syllables in the quote "so subtly is the fume of life designed," (6) as compared to "I, being born a woman and distressed," (1) besides making sure the fact that these are the thoughts of the speaker within the pattern of stressed and unstressed syllables in line one that you had mentioned, it ensures that the contents of line 6 are emphasized as well. This emphasis, considering that the contents are related to a bigger picture with the phrasing of "of life", suggests a universal application that cannot be helped, specifically on the topic of lust. With the contrast between particular and universal, the perspective of the speaker is doubly emphasized as it is her taking a stance on the universal. Notice, then, that the speaker in Shakespeare's poem isn't just comparing his lover to beautiful elements of nature; he's also comparing his lover to other women memorialized in sonnets. One way to think about this issue is that poets are often in dialogue with one another about both form and content. Sonnets originated in the late Middle Ages (in Italy and France), where poets like Petrarch wrote about the depth of their speakers' emotion to perfect lovers who were unattainable. (If you're interested in the Italian sonnet tradition, here's a short collection of some sonnets by Petrarch.) Shakespeare not only altered the form of the Italian sonnet, but also challenged/responded to its idealism. The last two lines of this Shakespearean sonnet contrast the love that the speaker feels for his lover with the overstated love that other poets depict in their sonnets. The tradition of the sonnet (especially Italian/Petrarchan sonnets) was to idealize women through saying that their eyes were like the sun, their cheeks were like roses, etc. The speaker here says that none of those hyperbolic comparisons apply to his lover, but he still thinks she's "as rare" (13) as women who are "belied with false" (14), meaning women about whom poets tell lies. In this way, Shakespeare's sonnet is a response to previous poets--and the tradition of over-idealizing lovers--as much as a love poem about the woman the speaker loves.