Love Is Not All
Love is not all; it is not meat nor drink
Nor slumber nor a roof against the rain;
Nor yet a floating spar to men that sink
And rise and sink and rise and sink again;
Love cannot fill the thickened lung with breath,
Nor clean the blood, nor set the fractured bone;
Yet many a man is making friends with death
Even as I speak, for lack of love alone.
It well may be that in a difficult hour,
Pinned down by pain and moaning for release
Or nagged by want past resolution's power,
I might be driven to sell your love for peace,
Or trade the memory of this night for food.
It well may be. I do not think I would.
This poem, like most sonnets, has a shift in tone. In the first section, the parallel structure within this poem contributes to a calm, logical tone. This "nor" section simply states logical arguments why the narrator, or anyone for that matter, shouldn't actually need love, creating an almost "convincing" or "persuading" tone. Because this section of the poem takes up six lines in only one sentence, the lengthy, elaborate syntax with parallel structure weaved throughout it creates a slow pace that ultimately reveals the narrator's tranquil tone of voice. Also, the meter of phrases like "And rise and sink and rise and sink" indicate steady, rhythmic tranquility. However, when compared to the rest of the poem, the tranquil and persuasive tone of section one seems contrived. This is because the second section reveals desparation and desire. First the author continues making logical statements- "I might be driven to sell your love for peace, Or trade the memory of this night for food.." The author has been using a purely logical tone to set us up for the last line- the "key." In the last line, the author's short, staccato sentences create an overwhelmed, irrational tone; thus, both in syntax and in tone, the last line contradicts the rest of the poem. While the majority of the poem tries to convey the unnecessary impracticality of love through contrived self-persuasion, the last line submits to the pure desire that keeps love alive within humanity, despite its irrationality.
Sunday, November 7, 2010
Sunday, October 10, 2010
My Personality :)
My results told me that I am ENFP -- 67% extraverted, 25% intuitive, 62% feeling, and 56% perceiving. I think it's interesting that these results came back as "distinctively" extraverted and feeling. That seems very accurate to me! For example, instead of thinking in words or pictures, I often think in a certain emotion that I make to represent a concept or idea, and the little "fact" I'm searching for at any given moment is under the catagory of that idea/emotion. Thus, sometimes it's hard for me to articulate what I'm thinking.
One type description said that I strive to please others on both a personal and humanitarian level. In other words, I want people to appreciate my presence in the social arena of life, as well as value my goals and ethics. As I thought about that, I found that it is very true of me! The type description also said that I have a lot of "zany charm" (people do indeed think me a little crazy), which sometimes causes "the more stodgy types" of people to be drawn to me, even though I am completely the opposite of "stodgy."
...I've always wondered why that was... :)
But one thing I realized by looking at the type description of myself was that I often appreciate fresh, new ideas in theory, but when they come along, I tend to reject them for one reason or another and stick to my own ways. It pointed out to me that sometimes I really do vary in theory and practice.
...so...yes I definitely agree with the results of my personality test. I think ENFP is a beautiful, four-letter summary of how I am. :)
One type description said that I strive to please others on both a personal and humanitarian level. In other words, I want people to appreciate my presence in the social arena of life, as well as value my goals and ethics. As I thought about that, I found that it is very true of me! The type description also said that I have a lot of "zany charm" (people do indeed think me a little crazy), which sometimes causes "the more stodgy types" of people to be drawn to me, even though I am completely the opposite of "stodgy."
...I've always wondered why that was... :)
But one thing I realized by looking at the type description of myself was that I often appreciate fresh, new ideas in theory, but when they come along, I tend to reject them for one reason or another and stick to my own ways. It pointed out to me that sometimes I really do vary in theory and practice.
...so...yes I definitely agree with the results of my personality test. I think ENFP is a beautiful, four-letter summary of how I am. :)
Sunday, September 12, 2010
"Crime and Punishment" Thought Piece #1
Paranoia. Obsession. Guilt. The three most terrifying words to live by; and, despite the fact that Raskolnikov considers himself too extraordinary, too 'far-above' them, his lofty attitude fails him after he murders two women, victimizing him to complete consumption by all three. Not long after his brutal bludgeoning, he wakes up to the imaginary sound of his landlady being beaten in the hallway outside his apartment. Shortly after this auditory nightmare, Nastasia explains, "'No-one has been here. That's the blood crying in your ears. when there's no outlet for it and it gets clotted, you start imagining things...'" (Dostoevsky 115). Now of course, naive little Nastasia is completely ignorant of the fact that Raskolnikov has prior taken the lives of two innocent human beings. She, like many of Raskolnikov's friends, is addressing his supposed 'physical illness,' which, in reality is his post-crime paranoia. Thus, Dostoevsky hides profound truth within these couple sentences, ultimately revealing the nature of man; especially the 'kind' of man society calls a "criminal."
Raskolnikov has "blood" in his ears. However, contrary to Nastasia's thinking it is not his own. Dostoevsky establishes blood as a symbol for the human lives that Raskolnikov has taken. When he murdered the two women with an axe, the author employed intense visual imagery, describing "pools of blood," and clothing "soaked with blood," in order to establish the connection between the appearance of blood and Raskolnikov's crime (Dostoevsky 78). Later, the criminal distresses over a spot of blood on his sock, and on the corner of his pants, and finally, as Nastasia mentions the "blood crying in [his] ears," the author's word choice of "crying" points to his inability to erase the stain of this figurative blood from his mind. In other words, he is haunted by the 'cries' of his victims, to the point where he hears the cry of his landlady, even though she does not call out. Dostoevsky thus conveys in this one sentence that Raskolnikov, though he is a mad man and a criminal with a stone-cold heart, is still a man, and, therefore, still subject to all-consuming guilt, which drives him to complete paranoia.
Nastasia continues to say that, without an "outlet," the blood "clogged" in his ears will cause his imagination to create unreal circumstances. For Raskolnikov, this "outlet" is the confession of his crime. With this sentence, Dostoevsky comments that a man who hides his crimes inside, never confessing them, is like a head filled with clogged blood, that creates hallucinations, and is ready to explode. With this comparison, the reader sees that man, in his weakness, cannot handle the paranoia, guilt, and obsession that come with trying to conceal a crime. Because of his human limitations, he will go insane. Regardless of how crazy, how cruel the criminal is, he cannot keep the crimson "blood" of his crime, "crying out in [his] ears" "clogged" inside the small cavern of his mind without arriving at a point of absolute insanity.
...Oh, how easy it is to look at Raskolnikov, contained by the blood-stained prison walls of his mind, and think, "What a crazy man! Surely the lunatic is one of a kind!" However, what a shame it would be for the reader to not identify with the man that is, quite intentionally, the main focus of Dostoevsky's novel. We are all guilt-ridden, obsessed, and paranoid. Simply because we are all guilty of something. Whether we are the cold-hearted criminal who cuts off the corner of his blood-stained pants out of the absolute fear of being caught, or the junior-high girl who, in a panic, deletes the inboxes and outboxes of her cell phone as her parents pass by, we simply cannot bottle up our sin inside. When the human conscience gets a hold of us, it strangles us, and it never lets go until we appease it with confession- with truth that loosens the thick, hot, sticky, blood clogged in our over-filled heads.
Raskolnikov has "blood" in his ears. However, contrary to Nastasia's thinking it is not his own. Dostoevsky establishes blood as a symbol for the human lives that Raskolnikov has taken. When he murdered the two women with an axe, the author employed intense visual imagery, describing "pools of blood," and clothing "soaked with blood," in order to establish the connection between the appearance of blood and Raskolnikov's crime (Dostoevsky 78). Later, the criminal distresses over a spot of blood on his sock, and on the corner of his pants, and finally, as Nastasia mentions the "blood crying in [his] ears," the author's word choice of "crying" points to his inability to erase the stain of this figurative blood from his mind. In other words, he is haunted by the 'cries' of his victims, to the point where he hears the cry of his landlady, even though she does not call out. Dostoevsky thus conveys in this one sentence that Raskolnikov, though he is a mad man and a criminal with a stone-cold heart, is still a man, and, therefore, still subject to all-consuming guilt, which drives him to complete paranoia.
Nastasia continues to say that, without an "outlet," the blood "clogged" in his ears will cause his imagination to create unreal circumstances. For Raskolnikov, this "outlet" is the confession of his crime. With this sentence, Dostoevsky comments that a man who hides his crimes inside, never confessing them, is like a head filled with clogged blood, that creates hallucinations, and is ready to explode. With this comparison, the reader sees that man, in his weakness, cannot handle the paranoia, guilt, and obsession that come with trying to conceal a crime. Because of his human limitations, he will go insane. Regardless of how crazy, how cruel the criminal is, he cannot keep the crimson "blood" of his crime, "crying out in [his] ears" "clogged" inside the small cavern of his mind without arriving at a point of absolute insanity.
...Oh, how easy it is to look at Raskolnikov, contained by the blood-stained prison walls of his mind, and think, "What a crazy man! Surely the lunatic is one of a kind!" However, what a shame it would be for the reader to not identify with the man that is, quite intentionally, the main focus of Dostoevsky's novel. We are all guilt-ridden, obsessed, and paranoid. Simply because we are all guilty of something. Whether we are the cold-hearted criminal who cuts off the corner of his blood-stained pants out of the absolute fear of being caught, or the junior-high girl who, in a panic, deletes the inboxes and outboxes of her cell phone as her parents pass by, we simply cannot bottle up our sin inside. When the human conscience gets a hold of us, it strangles us, and it never lets go until we appease it with confession- with truth that loosens the thick, hot, sticky, blood clogged in our over-filled heads.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)