Analysis of Ars Poetica by Archibald Macliesh

Archibald Macleish in “Ars Poetica” uses paradoxical imagery to potray that a poem should evoke a part of human experience by tapping into our senses rather than trying to answer some philosophical question or have a deeper meaning. The first line, “a poem should be palpable” says that the purpose of a poem should be obvious and easily perceived by the senses or the mind. The reader should just be able to get it when he or she reads the poem. This suggests that poems should aim to be simple and direct without complexities that could cause the meaning to be misinterpreted and maybe that the reader should aim to find paradoxical simplicity within any complexities of a poem. Also, a poem should be interpreted through the senses by which we experience life. This understanding should be evident like “globed fruit” as no one needs to explain the taste of fruit to someone for them to be able perceive the flavors. Taste is also something that can be innately sensed.  The meaning of the poem should also be nourishing and natural like the taste of a fruit. Additionally, they should be “Dumb as old medallion to the thumb” which is contradictory as medallions are items that awarded for past accomplishments and thus have vivid memories attached to them. “Silent as the sleeve-worn stone of casement ledges” evokes the sense of touch.  Poems also should be “silent” or “wordless” which is contradictory as poems are comprised of words. However by being wordless, it implies that a poem is instead comprised of parts of human experience that influenced it rather than just by words and thus the meaning of the poem should be easily understood with any explanation.  “A poem should be motionless in time” and convey a universal meaning that will be applicable throughout time like the moon which can be seen no matter where in the world you are. Like the changing stages of the moon, poetry should also changes from one era to the next so that it always retains relevance.  In doing so, a poem “releases twig by twig the light-entangled trees” and sheds light on parts of life that otherwise would have been shrouded in night like darkness.  Similarly, the title of the poem means the Art of Poetry in Latin which is a dead yet relevant language that even today influences many of the world’s languages today. However the speaker states that “A poem should be equal to: Not true” and thus isn’t searching for truth, but instead is simply trying to capture the essence of human experience such as grief which he portrays as an empty doorway or a maple leaf or love. A poem is a representation of a certain part of life.  The poem ends with the lines that “a poem should not mean but be” suggesting that a poem should not seek to have a hidden meaning that the reader much search for or try to decipher within the text, but should  represent that meaning in way that the reader simply grasps it as he or she reads the poem.

Analysis of Ellen Olenksa

Ellen Olenska is a cultural hybrid who was influenced by French culture during her marriage with the Count but has returned to America where the social customs are very different.  French society is driven by experience and understanding while the Old New York society remains in a perpetual state of innocence which is most prominent among the women. The Old New York society is driven by old fashioned customs that society blindly obeys without understanding why or questioning them, “inexorable conventions that tied things together and bound people down to the old pattern”. The lack of understanding leads to a very superficial society. This disgusts Ellen Olenska who asks “Does no one want to know the truth here, Mr. Archer? The real loneliness is living among all these kind people who only ask one to pretend!”. Because Ms.Olenska moved away with the Count, she was not conditioned to forever remain in a state of innocence like her fellow American women as Mr. Archer states, “the Polish Count must have robbed her of her fortune as well as her illusions”. As a result she is able to see parts of the society that the other women have to been taught to remain blind too. This difference as she states is the reason for her loneliness. Newland Archer also sees through the “illusions” of the American social system.  Like Countess Olenska, he is “sick of the hypocrisy that would bury alive a woman of her age if her husband were to live with harlots”. He believes “women ought to be free – as free as we are”; an unconventional viewpoint that Countess Olenska embodies in many ways.  She doesn’t need to be constantly accompanied by a man. For example, she ended a conversation with a gentlemen even though “etiquette required that she should wait, immovable as an idol, while the men who wished to converse with her succeeded each other at her side.” However she doesn’t purposely going against the customs, she was “unaware of having broken any rule”. Because of this, Newland Archer and Countess Olenska have a special bond, “there are only two people here who make me feel as if they understood what I mean and could explain things to me: you and Mr. Beaufort”. The contrast between a society based on experience(the French) and  a society of innocence(The Old New York society) is highlighted by the contrast of Countess Olenska and May Welland who are foils of each other.  Mr. Archer is fascinated with the Countess who represents the realism that is lacking in the superficial Old New York Society. In fact, when thinking of his fiancée,  Mr. Archer is “discouraged by the thought that all this frankness and innocence were only an artificial product”. However with Countess Olenska he knows she will say what’s on her mind and won’t be “oppressed by his creation of factitious purity, so cunningly manufactured by a conspiracy of mothers and aunts and grandmothers and longdead ancentresses”. Through the countess, Mr.Archer identifies the “illusions” that everyone else is blinded to and he says she is “opening my eyes to things I’d looked at so long that I’d cease to see them”.

William Blake's Songs of Innocence and Experience

William Blake contrasts the innocent  Lamb in “Little lamb” with the dangerous tiger in “The Tyger” and asks the question, “Did he who made the lamb make thee?”. Aspects of both the lamb and the tiger can be seen in humanity and the world in the general.

“Little Lamb” begins with a child questioning the origin of the lamb, “Dost thou know who made thee?”. The seemingly obvious answer would be some god or deity. The lamb here represents innocence and purity as it has “clothing of delight”, “softest clothing” a “tender voice”. Now in the second stanza, the child answers the questions that he just previously asked the lamb. He reveals that the one who created the lamb also “calls himself a lamb”. However this time the connotation of a lamb refers not to the creation but to the creator, Jesus Christ. By referring to both the creation and the creator as a lamb, the creation is shown to be a reflection, or mirror image of the creator. The poem ends with the line, “Little Lamb God bless thee”, however to whom the lamb refers to remains ambiguous as it could refer to the creation or the creator.

While the lamb that is described in “Little Lamb” represent innocence and purity, the tiger in “The Tyger” is characterized by violence and terror. The tiger represents an investigation into the existence of evil in the world. It raises the question, would the same God who made the innocent lamb also create the dangerous tiger? Throughout the work the speakers asks a series of questions about the origin of the tiger. The poem begins with the contrasting description of a “Tyger burning bright” and “the forest of the night”. Burning has the connotations of energy, power, and danger which differs from the placidity of the night. And though the tiger is evil, it has “fearful symmetry” and thus is beautiful. The fact that the tiger’s creator must “twist the sinews of thy heart” implies the corruption that exists inside the tiger but not in the lamb. The poem continues with the portrayal of forging the tiger to create it which seems like an unnatural method to create life, like victor when he created the creature in Frankenstein.  The speaker asks the question, “Did he who made the Lamb make thee?”. The lamb represents the goodness in world and the tiger represents the evil in it. This leaves the unanswered question that did the same god who made all things good in the world also make all the evil things in it as well. The first and last stanza of the poem are the same except for the last line of each and it changes; It changes form “What immortal hand or eye/Could frame thy fearful symmetry” to “Dare frame thy fearful symmetry”.  This one word change shifts the meaning from is possible to would God venture to do so. And if the creation is a reflection of the creator as suggested by “Little Lamb”, is the evil that the tiger represents present in our creator?