|
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13
Comment 48 of 128, added on April 20th, 2007 at 7:08 PM.
A poem is a poem for a purpose. That innate purpose is to spark or tickle a
certain fancy within the reader in order for the reader to derive purpose
from the poem. The poem does not give purpose, nor does the poem stipulate
that a certain feeling or perception is manditory after reading it. This
poem is for the reader. The readers life, the readers situation, the
readers feelings, the readers perception is only stipulated by the
individual reader. There is no "right" or "wrong" answer. The reader
creates there own feeling; therefore your responses to the poem tells a
listener more about you then the poem.
Daniel from United States
Comment 47 of 128, added on April 17th, 2007 at 11:11 PM.
this poem is really meaningful to me. it helped me in my life! great poem!
earlabayan from United States
Comment 46 of 128, added on April 1st, 2007 at 11:37 AM.
one of my favorite poems.
main idea is: we are the way we are because we like it.
he's eating his heart which he says is bitter and bitter things usually
aren't good, however he likes it
Ashley from United States
Comment 45 of 128, added on December 21st, 2006 at 11:53 AM.
Chris, it is precicely because we love Stephen Crane's poetry so much that
we will read it from the internet. We love it so much, that if we do not
have bookstores to find his work, credit cards to order his work, or enough
money to purchase it in the first place, then we will succomb a thousend
times to finding it on the internet without cost.
Joshua from Canada
Comment 44 of 128, added on May 17th, 2006 at 7:28 PM.
the bitter on this poem is a reference of the PEYOTE a plant wich growth in
the desert and can teach you about yourself. allicinate
lunari from Peru
Comment 43 of 128, added on April 27th, 2006 at 7:34 AM.
I think that you are too into poetry and that if you liked it so much you
would be reading it out of a book instead of on the internet
Chris Hoffer from United States
Comment 42 of 128, added on April 26th, 2006 at 2:32 AM.
He is not eating his heart. He is eating OF his heart. I think that
noticing that brings a whole new dimension to the poem...
Lindsey
Comment 41 of 128, added on April 12th, 2006 at 1:53 AM.
I read a brilliantly written book called THE POETRY OF STEPHEN CRANE, by
Daniel Hoffman, Columbia University Press, in which it is shown that this
poem refers to the nature of Man: To sin and to be remorseful. If you love
Crane's poetry, as I do, you should look up this book. This is neither
Crane's Best poem, nor my personal favorite, but it is a superb bit of
verse.
Philip from United States
Comment 40 of 128, added on March 26th, 2006 at 11:13 AM.
I think you guys are all dumb... lol u c.. the poem is talking aobut
creature who admits that all our hearts contain sin... though he agrees to
like it.... Figuratively speaking. Of course the creature is only a
creature and doesnt include humans.. Though most people would also agree
that our hearts are also swimming with sin..
William from United Kingdom
Comment 39 of 128, added on March 23rd, 2006 at 2:09 PM.
There is one inherent confusion in this poem that I cannot reconcile. I
believe the creature and the speaker to be two sides to Crane's self. This
has been stated before so I will leave it at that. I also believe that the
"eating" of the heart is a representation of the attraction of misery. It
is all too common for humans to experience a loss and retreat into a "poor
me" attitude that embraces sorrow instead of moving beyond it.
Ok so back to the original conundrum. In this poem, does Crane take a
stance? One one hand, you could assume that the creature's bestial
nakedness puts it on a lower, more primitive level of cognition. Thus it
is a base reaction to embrace sorrow and refuse to move on. If this were
the case, then Crane is saying that we should all move past our misfortunes
and live. Then there is the opposite reading. Is Crane really saying that
the world is a cruel, indifferent, and oftentimes hostile creation that
breeds sorrow? And that embracing sorrow is the only possible reaction in
a world that breeds constant misfortune?
This is my quandary. Which position is Crane really taking? The fact that
the poem ends on the creature's words of woe seems to point to the 2nd
interpretation. One would assume that if Crane wanted us to move past
"eating our hearts" then the speaker would respond to the creature's words.
However, he does not. Is this conclusive proof? I don't think so.
Regardless it is a wonderfully sorrowful poem in either instance.
Patrick from United States
This poem has been commented on more than 10 times. Click below to see the other comments.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13
|
A poem is a poem for a purpose. That innate purpose is to spark or tickle a
certain fancy within the reader in order for the reader to derive purpose
from the poem. The poem does not give purpose, nor does the poem stipulate
that a certain feeling or perception is manditory after reading it. This
poem is for the reader. The readers life, the readers situation, the
readers feelings, the readers perception is only stipulated by the
individual reader. There is no "right" or "wrong" answer. The reader
creates there own feeling; therefore your responses to the poem tells a
listener more about you then the poem.
Daniel from United States