Some questions you can respond to in preparation for class on Monday:
How is your experience of trying to make sense of Leapor's Epistle different from or similar to your experience of wrestling with Gray's Elegy?
What puzzles or confuses you about this poem? Are there any particularly baffling passages or lines? Is there any clarification I could supply that would help?
What interesting difference do you see between how Leapor depicts the poet and the way Gray does?
Deadline: Monday (1/31), 1pm.
5 comments:
It seemed to me that I was much more able to decipher Leapor than Gray. I am not sure if this was because the sentence structure was more similar to what I am used to reaing or not. It seemed so to me. What was harder for me was some of the references to the classics, as I am not very familiar with them. I wonder if she relies on them more because of the type of education she recieved and where she found her inspiration.
I was a little confused with lines 27-38. I wasn't exactly sure who "The Hero brave" in line 27 was. I assumed that maybe she was meaning the poet but then poets is referred to by name later on the in passage when she writes, "And Poets tremble at an Idiot's Frown:" but I see now she goes on to write, "And wound an Author in the tend'rest Part." so maybe the author and the poet are one in the same. Just not sure about this whole passage I guess.
I think both Gray and Leapor are commenting on poets who write only to achieve fame. Gray hints at this in the passage we looked over in class when he writes in in lines 71 -72 "or heap the shrine of Luxuar and Pride /With incense kindled at the Muse's flame." Iut seems that he implying that there are some who srite to the elite and "kindle" their fire of fame and that they write to please them to achieve their own fame, that they are seeking the favor of the elites. However it seems to me that Leapor is making a more broad comment by implying that there are some who want fame of any kind and that what is important is the quality of the work moreso than if it pleases people. She makes this clea with lines 133 and 134, "-Praise,if planted wrong, /Is more desrtructive than a spiteful Tounge."
I agree with the comment above. It was much easier for me to make sense of Mary Leapor's poem than it was for Gray's--or at least I think I made sense of it. I will say, however, that each poem has its own, distinct challenges. I had a hard time making sense of the strange syntax in "Elegy," whereas in Leapor's poem, the writer seems to assume that the reader already knows what she's talking about, which I don't half the time. Maybe Leapor does this because this was meant to be written like a letter/epistle in the sense that it is personal and exclusive.
An example of confusion for me is the ending, lines 179-182. I'm guessing that the scenario is about a group of women-bullies who are trying to make the speaker feel bad about her "idleness" as a typical woman during that time. But the speaker takes on a sarcastic tone and exposes how they don't have anything better to do other than to make the speaker feel bad for entertainment. Some questions about the ending: Is she afraid to meet these women or to say something that she shouldn't? And is the speaker/poet the Muse or is her Muse someone else? And lastly, why would the Muse tell the poet to read their prayers? Is there an attempt to expose Pappilia and co. of their hypocrisy?
Actually, I find this poem tricker to understand than Gray's Elegy. This could be for several reasons: as lexi said, I do not recognize the references she is making. There is an abundance of personification. I don't see a consistent theme.
I feel "scrambled" when I read this. Line 34 reads "And the stern Solider like an Infant weeps" and so on. Later on, I sense a mood change (i.e. "the laughing Muse in line 165). The plot is a little vague. Didn't the introduction say it was supposed to be humorous? I feel as if Gray's Elegy is less unswerving compared to Leapor's epistle. It was more placid: I envisioned in my mind the church yard, the bell and harmonious flow of his feelings being put on paper.
As you can see, I have numerous questions and I must sound overwhelmed. Still, I am not fearful; it simply means I need to practice using the tools more to untangle later C18 poetry!
On a more positive note, what I noticed the most about the poem was my approach. I felt refreshed when I faced the poem in a way I would not normally do: take it for its surface value. I could at least visualize the conversations and appreciate the word choices. The frequent capitalization of words encourages me to give them more attention which does help me gain minimal understanding what the poet is trying to say. Words such as Slander, Rout, Despondence, Brethren, Impertinence and insipid make the poem spicy. I wish I had more to offer, but I look forward to tomorrow's class to learn how to better wrestle with this poem. I wonder, do you think there are other ways to use the tools learned from Friday's class depending the on the nature of the literary piece? If so, how?
My experience of trying to make sense of Leapor's Epistle is similar to figuring out Gray's Elegy because of the vocabulary. In "Elegy" there were words such as: Haply, dirges, rove, jocund, and annals that confused me. Without understanding those words, it was very difficult to figure out what the line or stanza was about or trying to convey. I felt that the vocabulary was also a challenge at times in Leapor's poem, but what was more confusing was trying to keep the characters straight: Molly, Vido, Codrus, Parthenia, Delpho etc. I didn't understand who all of these people were and what their significance was to both Leapor and/or her poem?
I also felt that the poem was more of a struggle to read than Gray's "Elegy" because of the length of "Epistle" and the changes that occur in the format of her poem. "Elegy" was divided into stanzas and the reader could clearly differentiate between the subject/message of each stanza whereas Leapor's poem seemed all over the place and unorganized. In the beginning the poem it appears simple but as the reader proceeds to line 90, the format becomes more of a dialogue and then at the end we get a mixture of both. The fact that the poem was over 180 lines long compared to "Elegy" which was around 125 lines made it harder to remember what you were reading. I was constantly re-reading lines and then moving ahead to the next section and then I would forget what had come before it because I was trying so hard to focus on what was taking place in the moment of what I was reading/interpreting. I will definitely have to agree with "217" and say that this poem was a bit trickier to understand than I thought it would be.
I can't say that I could just pick out one particular passage that baffled me because there were quite a few. But it was a lot easier to choose lines that I really enjoyed. I would have to say that the very beginning of the poem was my favorite part:
Say, Artemisia, do the Slaves of Fame
Deserve our Pity, or provoke our Blame?
Whose airy Hopes, like some new-kindled Fire,
A Moment blaze, and then in Smoke expire;
Or like a Babe i'th'midst of Plenty cry,
And leave their Supper for a painted Fly.
I can't pinpoint what it is about these lines that interest me. I thought her choice of similie "like some new-kindled Fire, / A Moment blaze, and then in Smoke expire" was very impressive. But overall, I would have to say that this poem what still just as puzzling to me as Gray's "Elegy."
Similar to a couple of the previous comments, I had less trouble with Leapor's Epistle than I had with Gray's Elegy. The sentence structure is more familiar. For example, it easier to identify what subject the verb is referring to. However, this poem presented some of the same challenges that I encountered with Gray. I have trouble grasping the full understanding of the poem. Many of the references and personifications are unclear to me.
Some of my confusion also arises with the characters. Is Mira the consistent character and subject throughout the poem? Also what is encompassed in the meaning of fame? For example, does fame in this poem derive from being a writer or does it more broadly refer to the attention of others?
I think I am still a bit too confused about a few sections of both poems to comment about the depiction of the poet. How are muse and poet related? Is Leapor's Epistle depicting arguments about poetry's utility (lines 149-165)?
Post a Comment