The author starts off by saying that to understand English and American thought about literature in the 20th century, we must go back to the poet, Matthew Arnold (1822-1888). Arnold felt that Darwin's theory of evolution made people question the Church and religion, so he placed a religious responsibility on poetry.
He wrote an important book called 'Culture and Anarchy' in 1869 where he outlined his views.
Arnold was familiar with Greek classical history and literature or 'Hellenism'.
T.S Eliot in the early 1920s set out to define 'the best that had been thought and said in the world'. Eliot felt that poets must keep their emotion in check with 'wit'. The poet's private life should play no role in the presentation of the poem. Emotion must be conveyed indirectly. Eliot's own poems were complex and intellectual. He had been trained as a philosopher.
Robert Frost(1874-1963) felt poetry provided 'a momentary stay against confusion'.
The Intentional Fallacy
This is when the author intends to convey something through his/her poem, and it is misunderstood. The text should be used a guideline, not what the author might have wanted to say.
The Affective Fallacy
This has to do with the reader who confuses the meaning of the poem according to his or her emotional response to the poem.
Good poetry happens when there is neither an intentional fallacy nor affective fallacy - only techniques and strategies that poets use.
Some of the important literary works listed include Eliot's The Wasteland(1922), Ezra Pound's Cantos(1925-1960), Virgina Woolf's To the Lighthouse(1927), James Joyce's Ulysses(1922), and William Faulkner's 'The Sound and the Fury'.
My two cents:
However, in 2017, times have changed. Views on what constitutes 'good poetry' have changed. These days 'slam poetry' is in vogue, people express their angst, and language, culture and poetry are constantly evolving.
Comments
Post a Comment