Mikey at 06:50, 17 October 2017

2017-10-17T06:50:48Z

Mikey: Created page with "Berstein makes a good point about the necessity of "sounding" the poems rather than interpreting them the traditional way, especially with the pieces that we have been introdu..."

2017-10-17T06:50:17Z

Created page with "Berstein makes a good point about the necessity of "sounding" the poems rather than interpreting them the traditional way, especially with the pieces that we have been introdu..."

New page

Berstein makes a good point about the necessity of "sounding" the poems rather than interpreting them the traditional way, especially with the pieces that we have been introduced to in this class. Although, I'm almost certain that I wouldn't enjoy rearranging words or the structure of say, John Keats poems, for I love them as they are. Substituting words in any of his Odes would feel like a crime. This method seems to be designed solely for contemporary poems, in my opinion. Then Berstein got even more complicated when he tried to explain the "Poem Profiler" to help with literary criticism. He added, "[...] dense (you don’t get it do you, huh?), richly detailed, and opaque". It makes complete sense though, that he uses the "Poem Profiler" to help some students realize that they enjoyed a certain poem even though it contained elements that he or she had initially rated low on their preference list. This also shows that there is no specific elements and factors that indicate what is a good or bad poem; which makes me wonder, is the literary canon comprised of truly great works or is it biased? Similar to style trends or art pieces (as I have mentioned before), who gets to decide what is a masterpiece and what is "trash"? There truly is no right or wrong answer when talking about feelings, interpretations, thoughts, etc. when you are diving into poetry, especially electronic and contemporary poetry.

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:50, 17 October 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	~~Berstein~~ makes a good point about the necessity of "sounding" the poems rather than interpreting them the traditional way, especially with the pieces that we have been introduced to in this class. Although, I'm almost certain that I wouldn't enjoy rearranging words or the structure of say, John Keats poems, for I love them as they are. Substituting words in any of his Odes would feel like a crime. This method seems to be designed solely for contemporary poems, in my opinion. Then ~~Berstein~~ got even more complicated when he tried to explain the "Poem Profiler" to help with literary criticism. He added, "[...] dense (you don’t get it do you, huh?), richly detailed, and opaque". It makes complete sense though, that he uses the "Poem Profiler" to help some students realize that they enjoyed a certain poem even though it contained elements that he or she had initially rated low on their preference list. This also shows that there is no specific elements and factors that indicate what is a good or bad poem; which makes me wonder, is the literary canon comprised of truly great works or is it biased? Similar to style trends or art pieces (as I have mentioned before), who gets to decide what is a masterpiece and what is "trash"? There truly is no right or wrong answer when talking about feelings, interpretations, thoughts, etc. when you are diving into poetry, especially electronic and contemporary poetry.	+	Bernstein makes a good point about the necessity of "sounding" the poems rather than interpreting them the traditional way, especially with the pieces that we have been introduced to in this class. Although, I'm almost certain that I wouldn't enjoy rearranging words or the structure of say, John Keats poems, for I love them as they are. Substituting words in any of his Odes would feel like a crime. This method seems to be designed solely for contemporary poems, in my opinion. Then Bernstein got even more complicated when he tried to explain the "Poem Profiler" to help with literary criticism. He added, "[...] dense (you don’t get it do you, huh?), richly detailed, and opaque". It makes complete sense though, that he uses the "Poem Profiler" to help some students realize that they enjoyed a certain poem even though it contained elements that he or she had initially rated low on their preference list. This also shows that there is no specific elements and factors that indicate what is a good or bad poem; which makes me wonder, is the literary canon comprised of truly great works or is it biased? Similar to style trends or art pieces (as I have mentioned before), who gets to decide what is a masterpiece and what is "trash"? There truly is no right or wrong answer when talking about feelings, interpretations, thoughts, etc. when you are diving into poetry, especially electronic and contemporary poetry.

Create - Revision history

Mikey at 06:50, 17 October 2017

Mikey: Created page with "Berstein makes a good point about the necessity of "sounding" the poems rather than interpreting them the traditional way, especially with the pieces that we have been introdu..."