Explanation: The first thing Darwin talks about in his autobiography is change. Darwin accepts that he has changed. He can hardly read a line of poetry, and he dislikes pictures and music. He enjoys reading novels. He associates the imagination with a novel. Poetry is bland and predictable; however he does not interpret poetry blandly because of his old age. Many poems have been written about Darwin’s theory of natural selection. To Darwin, the recent poetry about natural selection is bland because the poems limits the reader’s imagination by concluding with the opinion of the poet; therefore, it makes making it difficult for the reader to take what they want from the poem. The poems fail to provoke the imagination.
May Kendall’s poem, Philanthropist and the Jellyfish, is a great example of this type of poetry. In the poem, a jellyfish washes up on the beach. While the jellyfish is baking in the sun, a philanthropist approaches it. The philanthropist feels guilty watching the jellyfish lay on the shore, awaiting its death. The philanthropist feels guilty because he or she wants to save the jellyfish. However, the philanthropist only wants to save the jellyfish just for his or her own personal benefit. The philanthropist wants to make him or herself feel better about saving another creatures live. Therefore, the philanthropist is selfish. Even though the philanthropist is in his or her weakest moment, the jellyfish is not in its weakest moment. Then, the jellyfish speaks to the philanthropist. Despite the philanthropist’s kind intentions, the jellyfish believes that human culture is incomplete. The jellyfish’s comments to the philanthropist are straight forward and do not require any further input from the imagination for comprehension. The jellyfish never becomes troubled or depressed during its turbulent life. The jellyfish knows it is going to die and understands its death is just part of natural selection.
Darwin comments that poetry involving science is bland because it concludes with a poet’s opinion on a topic. For example, by ending the poem with “and that is how it is,” the poet leaves very little if any room for any interpretation besides her own. The point of the poem is clear. Kendall personifies her opinion through the jellyfish. She states very blatantly that natural selection occurs and that it is apart life. Therefore, the imagination of the reader has very little room to run with. Therefore, Darwin longs to enjoy art for what it is and the similar for science.
However in Darwin’s opinion, novels are the perfect blend between science and fiction; novels allow the mind to enter the imagination. In Darwin’s autobiography, his process of literary evolution, from his boredom of reading poetry, to an interest in novels, to a desire for a return to the enjoyment of poetry, is analogous to an inevitable cycle of beginning and end. Darwin’s riddle is similar to the Riddle of the Sphinx: What goes on four legs in the morning, on two legs at noon, and on three legs in the evening? The answer is man. In the morning, man is a baby and crawls on all four. In the afternoon, man walks on two legs. In the evening, man is older and needs a cane to walk.
The Answer: Charles Darwin’s Autobiography. Darwin begins with one opinion in the beginning of his autobiography, the jellyfish talks about the acceptance of natural selection or in a broader sense, the acceptance of Darwin’s work in the afternoon, the sphinx ties together poetry and Darwin together in the evening. In his autobiography, Darwin does not only present a theory of literary evolution; he also discusses a digression of humanity’s imagination towards the coexistence of science in art. His autobiography represents a continuous cycle of beginning and end- the ending of a species and start of a new one.
I second the “I dig it” opinion above. What a fabulous mode of presentation for your second blog—clever and on point! Your first paragraph of “explanation” started off very strong; you carried over the tone from your riddle very nicely. Be careful, however, that you do not mislead your reader: Darwin was not *only* talking about poems “written about [his] theory of natural selection.” After all, he does mention how he used to enjoy those works by Shakespeare and Milton (for example), but cannot do so any longer. So be sure that it is clear that the argument about natural selection poems is coming from you. It is your contention that such poems “fail to provoke the imagination,” right? (They rely on too much subjective posturing?) Also, how, for example, do we know that the jellyfish is *not* in its weakest moment? And how do we know that “the jellyfish’s comments … do not require any further input from the imagination”? Including explicit portions of textual evidence to support your claims would have been very helpful. In fact, they would have grounded your claims and made it all the more difficult for your reader to come to any other conclusion but yours. When you do finally include a piece of textual evidence (in the third paragraph), it goes a good way to supporting your preceding points; but had you included additional evidence prior to this, the point about the poem not leaving any room for imaginative interpretation would have been a lot stronger. (Also, watch for some typos: in the third paragraph you wrote “apart” rather than “a part”—which completely reverses what I assume was the intended meaning of the latter.) What does it mean to “enjoy art [and science] for what it is”? I wonder if this is taking your argument too far afield of a provable thesis, as the statement demands that you not only define art and science, but that you define and can prove enjoyment as well. I liked very much the final paragraph of your post--some very astute ideas being offered here. So I wondered why the contents of this paragraph weren’t more fleshed out in the post itself. Why not make the riddle the true focus/centerpiece of your post, so that an explanation of the “answer” makes up its majority?
It could be said that the Victorian age reveals both the decadence and the corruption at the root of the human condition, its almost simultaneous evolution and devolution. To help unravel the implications of such a seeming paradox, this blog will collect readers' reviews of Victorian England's rising genres of children's literature, fantastic literature, and sensation (or detective) fiction. As we traverse both the colonizing efforts of the British Empire and the hometown mysteries of England herself, we hope to reveal the Victorian Age as a complex of historical, cultural, and scientific perspectives. Ultimately, this blog aims to produce an accurate and intriguing reflection of the sensibilities and aptitudes of Victorian England--as understood by 21st century readers.
Explanation:
ReplyDeleteThe first thing Darwin talks about in his autobiography is change. Darwin accepts that he has changed. He can hardly read a line of poetry, and he dislikes pictures and music. He enjoys reading novels. He associates the imagination with a novel. Poetry is bland and predictable; however he does not interpret poetry blandly because of his old age.
Many poems have been written about Darwin’s theory of natural selection. To Darwin, the recent poetry about natural selection is bland because the poems limits the reader’s imagination by concluding with the opinion of the poet; therefore, it makes making it difficult for the reader to take what they want from the poem. The poems fail to provoke the imagination.
May Kendall’s poem, Philanthropist and the Jellyfish, is a great example of this type of poetry. In the poem, a jellyfish washes up on the beach. While the jellyfish is baking in the sun, a philanthropist approaches it. The philanthropist feels guilty watching the jellyfish lay on the shore, awaiting its death. The philanthropist feels guilty because he or she wants to save the jellyfish. However, the philanthropist only wants to save the jellyfish just for his or her own personal benefit. The philanthropist wants to make him or herself feel better about saving another creatures live. Therefore, the philanthropist is selfish. Even though the philanthropist is in his or her weakest moment, the jellyfish is not in its weakest moment. Then, the jellyfish speaks to the philanthropist. Despite the philanthropist’s kind intentions, the jellyfish believes that human culture is incomplete. The jellyfish’s comments to the philanthropist are straight forward and do not require any further input from the imagination for comprehension. The jellyfish never becomes troubled or depressed during its turbulent life. The jellyfish knows it is going to die and understands its death is just part of natural selection.
Darwin comments that poetry involving science is bland because it concludes with a poet’s opinion on a topic. For example, by ending the poem with “and that is how it is,” the poet leaves very little if any room for any interpretation besides her own. The point of the poem is clear. Kendall personifies her opinion through the jellyfish. She states very blatantly that natural selection occurs and that it is apart life. Therefore, the imagination of the reader has very little room to run with. Therefore, Darwin longs to enjoy art for what it is and the similar for science.
However in Darwin’s opinion, novels are the perfect blend between science and fiction; novels allow the mind to enter the imagination.
In Darwin’s autobiography, his process of literary evolution, from his boredom of reading poetry, to an interest in novels, to a desire for a return to the enjoyment of poetry, is analogous to an inevitable cycle of beginning and end. Darwin’s riddle is similar to the Riddle of the Sphinx: What goes on four legs in the morning, on two legs at noon, and on three legs in the evening? The answer is man. In the morning, man is a baby and crawls on all four. In the afternoon, man walks on two legs. In the evening, man is older and needs a cane to walk.
The Answer: Charles Darwin’s Autobiography. Darwin begins with one opinion in the beginning of his autobiography, the jellyfish talks about the acceptance of natural selection or in a broader sense, the acceptance of Darwin’s work in the afternoon, the sphinx ties together poetry and Darwin together in the evening. In his autobiography, Darwin does not only present a theory of literary evolution; he also discusses a digression of humanity’s imagination towards the coexistence of science in art. His autobiography represents a continuous cycle of beginning and end- the ending of a species and start of a new one.
I like the way you did that Alex.
ReplyDeleteI dig it.
ReplyDeleteI second the “I dig it” opinion above. What a fabulous mode of presentation for your second blog—clever and on point! Your first paragraph of “explanation” started off very strong; you carried over the tone from your riddle very nicely. Be careful, however, that you do not mislead your reader: Darwin was not *only* talking about poems “written about [his] theory of natural selection.” After all, he does mention how he used to enjoy those works by Shakespeare and Milton (for example), but cannot do so any longer. So be sure that it is clear that the argument about natural selection poems is coming from you. It is your contention that such poems “fail to provoke the imagination,” right? (They rely on too much subjective posturing?) Also, how, for example, do we know that the jellyfish is *not* in its weakest moment? And how do we know that “the jellyfish’s comments … do not require any further input from the imagination”? Including explicit portions of textual evidence to support your claims would have been very helpful. In fact, they would have grounded your claims and made it all the more difficult for your reader to come to any other conclusion but yours. When you do finally include a piece of textual evidence (in the third paragraph), it goes a good way to supporting your preceding points; but had you included additional evidence prior to this, the point about the poem not leaving any room for imaginative interpretation would have been a lot stronger. (Also, watch for some typos: in the third paragraph you wrote “apart” rather than “a part”—which completely reverses what I assume was the intended meaning of the latter.) What does it mean to “enjoy art [and science] for what it is”? I wonder if this is taking your argument too far afield of a provable thesis, as the statement demands that you not only define art and science, but that you define and can prove enjoyment as well. I liked very much the final paragraph of your post--some very astute ideas being offered here. So I wondered why the contents of this paragraph weren’t more fleshed out in the post itself. Why not make the riddle the true focus/centerpiece of your post, so that an explanation of the “answer” makes up its majority?
ReplyDelete