He complains

at my scent and does not think

I comprehend, but I speak

English. I speak Dutch. I speak

a little French as well, and

languages Monsieur Cuvier

will never know have names.

The fact behind these lines is that she is not only as smart as him, but even smarter, but he treats her like an animal. How can language be used a device to create differences and false superiorities between groups of people?

For the library assignment, I chose to study Elizabeth Bishop, and the different analysis and critique of her work we can find in our own library. The first piece I selected, called Elizabeth Bishop and the Music of Literature by Angus Clearhorn highlights the relationship that Elizabeth Bishop had to music, and how that influenced her work. The author goes on to write about how, from the sounds of the sea to Brazilian sambas, Elizabeth Bishop’s works were full of sound, most importantly the sound above all else being the voice of not only the poet, but of the reader as well. This analysis of her work helps one understand the rhythm of her poetry, and even why she rhymes when she does. The second piece I discovered was called Elizabeth Bishop and Translation by Mariana Machova, where the author wrote on the impact that literal translation from one language to another can affect a text, as well as the meaning behind the kind of language Bishop uses in her text. Machova results in the conclusion translation is adaption of themes and words, but also that a certain type of poetry can be analyzed through translation, providing a unique outlook as Machova pushes back on the idea that all writing is, in essence, translation from the mind to words, as she feels that is best left to philosophy. Next, in Elizabeth Bishop and the New Deal: Queer Poetics and the Welfare State in Key West. by Eric Strand, he states that Bishop highlighted the role of a poet in society, as well as reimagining the poet’s relationship with the national government, concluding that, had Bishop been able to publish a certain volume of Florida poems titled Bone Key, that those writings might have been some of the strongest support for Roosevelt’s New Deal by any writer of the time, a fascinating fact that truly pulls back the mist on Bishop’s life and opinions. In Elizabeth Bishop and Marianne Moore : The Psychodynamics of Creativity by Joanne Feit Diehl is a very interesting dive into the so-called literary mother of Bishop in Marianne Moore, and how she had a remarkably complex relationship with Moore ranging between envy and gratitude, further highlighting how Moore not only influenced her writing but her thinking as well. The book Five Looks at Elizabeth Bishop by Anne Stevenson quite literally looks at five pieces by Elizabeth Bishop, and then critically analyses each one, as well as providing both a timeline of her life as well as maps of the regions she lived in, truly helping illustrate a good understanding of her life.

Sources Cited

Cleghorn, Angus. Elizabeth Bishop and the Music of Literature. Palgrave Pivot, 2019.

Diehl, Joanne Feit. Elizabeth Bishop and Marianne Moore: The Psychodynamics of Creativity. Princeton University Press, 1993.

MACHOVA, MARIANA. Elizabeth Bishop and Translation. LEXINGTON Books, 2019.

Stevenson, Anne. Five Looks at Elizabeth Bishop. Bloodaxe Books Ltd, 2006.

Strand, Eric. “Elizabeth Bishop and the New Deal: Queer Poetics and the Welfare State in Key West.” Twentieth-Century Literature, vol. 68, no. 2, 2022, pp. 199–224., https://doi.org/10.1215/0041462x-9808104.

From the poem Ode on a Grecian Urn by John Keats, the final line “Beauty is truth, truth beauty,-that is all Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know”(Pgh. 5, Lns. 9-10) has made many a critic confused, annoyed, and even disappointed, for in this poem otherwise devoid of a lesson, there is one large, encompassing statement tacked right on the end, to provide closure for the whole piece. For the new critics, that was unacceptable. But that is where Cleaneth Brooks steps in. In the piece Keat’s Sylvan historian by Cleaneth Brooks, he attempts to redefine those final lines into a more substantial statement as opposed to a simply a blanket lesson with no true deeper significance. For example, he clearly states that perhaps the meaning behind these lines does not and can not be simply defined, as the “very ambiguity of the statement…ought to warn us against insisting very much on the statement in isolation, and to drive us back to a consideration of the context in which the statement was set.” (Pg. 141) However, he goes on to write that that does not necessarily mean that by pouring over the writings of Keats we will find the answer to the last lines, as “our specific question is not what did Keats the man perhaps want to assert here about the relation of beauty and truth; it is rather: was Keats the poet able to exemplify that relation in this particular poem”, can its true meaning really be found? (Pg. 141) As Brooks goes on to articulate, one could examine the urn as merely a character, and compare the lines “spoken” by the urn as similar to “Ripeness is all”, the closing lines from Shakespeare’s King Lear, or perhaps the urn, or sylvan historian, is reciting ideas that “may be characterized as ‘tales’-not formal history at all” and as such merely stories that aren’t meant to be taken deeper at all. (Pg. 143) He goes on to conclude the piece by proposing that perhaps, “best of all, we might learn to distrust our ability to represent any poem adequately by paraphrase”. (Pg. 152) As he says, such a distrust is healthy, and truly since one can’t exactly find one solid conclusion from this poem, perhaps its greatest meaning is in its ability to convey a vast unknown, but not just any unknown where one can hunt for the answers, but an unknown that can never be known. After reading Brook’s piece, one could think, “how does this guy’s input help? Why do I need his opinion? I can do critical analysis myself.” While it’s true one can draw whatever interpretation one wants from Keats’ poem, one not only gets a deeper, more comprehensive understanding of this poem by looking at another perspective, but a deeper understanding of how one analyses not only poetry but literature as a whole, creating a more expansive reservoir of knowledge and analysis than one had prior to reading this piece, thus shaping our thinking to grow as opposed to hold stagnant as to where we are in the moment.

“hope—a new constellation waiting for us to map it, waiting for us to name it—together” That is a truly powerful and enlightening way to look at a better future, as not only something we can obtain, but moreover something that is waiting for us to simply realize it. How do the themes of the two inaugural poems compare and contrast?

“Because being American is more than a pride we inherit” As the poem goes on further to describe the complexities of America, this line stuck out because so often we think of America into a few, boiled down things that are easy to think about, not the baggage with it. What does it truly mean to be an “American”?

“But how could Arthur go, clutching his tiny lily, with his eyes shut up so tight and the roads deep in snow?” Here, the teller can’t quite understand that Arthur is dead, and is worried about the practical nature of his “passing on”. How can an author capture the grieving process of someone other than themselves, especially someone’s process so complicated such as a child’s?

“My sympathies are with the criminals
rather than with the victim, and I will not handle
this case” This statement by Sherlock Holmes really changes the way one thinks about the stereotypical “Sherlock Holmes” story, and makes one remember that he is supposed to be a real person, not simply a stereotype or one dimensional figure. How does it change the idea of a detective novel, if the detective sympathizes with the killer?