Literary Criticism
Posted Sunday, September 13, 2009 by yours truly in Labels: charles sweet jr., edwin arlington robinson, j.c. levenson, richard cory, school, wallace l. anderson
"Literary criticism is the study, discussion, evaluation, and interpretation of literature."
I wrote these for AP English for the poem "Richard Cory" by Edwin Arlington Robinson. It was difficult at first, but when I finally found the rhythm, I was actually finding it interesting. These are three separate pieces. I did not space them out while writing them individually, so it should be easy to tell them apart.
J.C. Levenson writes a literary criticism for the poem "Richard Cory" by Edwin Arlington Robinson. Levenson is rather harsh in his judgment of the townspeople. His discussion of the poem focuses more on the townspeople's senselessness and less on forming assumptions to explain why Cory took his own life. Levenson says, "those who count over what they lack and fail to bless the good before their eyes are truly desperate." I agree with that statement, although the adverb "truly" could be a bit of an exaggeration when paired with desperate. I believe that both the townspeople and Richard Cory were desperate, to determine the degrees and differences in degrees of their desperation only opens up for excess debate. Levenson uses exaggerated writing, and he can sometimes be clumsy in his analysis. It makes it easy to argue his points because they are sometimes written to an extent that's ridiculous. He is correct when he says that, "the blind see only what they can covet or envy." The townspeople fail to see beneath Cory's exterior, they fail to recognize his despair as they absent-mindlessly isolate him as they idolize him. Levenson, although he is not the clearest in his writing, his points can be recognized by his exaggeration, so it is effective in that way. But it takes careful reading to reach that point.
In a literary criticism written by Wallace L. Anderson concerning his thoughts on the poem "Richard Cory" by Edwin Arlington Robinson, he introduces a whole new level of understanding, an understanding that underlies the context of the poem. Anderson argues that the townspeople are better off than Cory. So far, I cannot see anything amiss with his perception of the authors point of view. In the first three stanzas the poem, Cory seems far better off than the townspeople. He was a "gentleman from sole to crown," he was "rich." Anderson cites many of the townspeople's observations of Richard Cory, soon after concluding that all these descriptions derive from external qualities only, "even his manner is not a manifestation of something innate but only a characteristic that has been acquired." The critic also concludes, in the very last sentence of his literary criticism, that the things that gave Cory his regal status also revealed "the inner emptiness that led him to take his own life." His argument there I cannot challenge, if it were not for the external traits that the townspeople admired and equally envies, it would be nearly impossible to form a conclusion that explained Cory's suicide. What I don't agree with is the critics method of over-emphasizing the word "light." Robinson writes "so on we worked, and waited for the light." To wait for the light, automatically suggests that the people believe in the light. Anderson says that, "light suggests a spiritual sustenance of greater value." The critic attributes Cory's sudden death to his lack in spiritual value, explaining that his life was meaningless and that he "lived only on a material level." to assume that Cory was deprived of spirituality is an unfair assumption that favors the townspeople. I cannot justly affirm whether or not Anderson speaks of a religious spirituality or one dealing with the human spirit. Either way it discredits Cory, and possibly over-credits the townspeople. This criticism is an example of effective writing because Anderson explains his observations well using direct evidence from the poem by choosing excerpts and quoting them in his literary criticism. He fails to define the grounds of spirituality, but offers a definition of his own when he relates it to the word "light." He is easy to understand, his thoughts are clear and he is contemplative in his perception.
Charles Sweet Jr. writes a literary criticism for Edwin Arlington Robinson's poem, "Richard Cory". He presents many thoughtful observations in his criticism. He sees deeper than any other critic, for this poem, that I have read so far. He focuses on the narrator of the poem, one of the townspeople before explaining his reasoning for favoring Cory as the main character. There is much to read into, much to discover when you read the point of view of one of the townspeople. Reading Charles Sweet Jr.'s literary criticism made me realize this. Although I understand that there is more to the narrating, Sweet allowed for me to go beyond my limited understanding. Sweet states that in the first stanza, it introduces the narrator and his limited view of Cory. The narrator focuses greatly on Cory's status and wealth, a conclusion that can be inferred by the speaker's imagery. Sweet realizes that in "stanza two, however, appears to contrast and even contradict the previously established viewpoint." "Sole to crown," can infer that the townspeople regarded Cory regally and then the "lines five and six of a different wording from lines as 'and he was always...' contrast with '(And) he was always...." "Cory seems at times like a king the narrator admits he is always 'quietly arrayed' and 'human.'" So, the narrator contradicts himself, as Sweet sys. Sweet recognizes that Cory attempts to communicate with the townspeople whenever he "went down town," but they "erected a barrier around themselves and their only reaction to Cory is stasis and silence." The critic says, "it matters not that it is Cory who pulls the trigger since the people have pointed a weapon at his temple." I admire his insight and am awed by the phrasing. There is nothing that Charles Sweet Jr. has said in his literary criticism that I can argue, because I agree completely with his reasoning. He put my own initial thoughts and inferences into a whole new perspective that I admire for it has also shown me new levels of understanding. This criticism is a very good example of effective writing. It is very well written, very well explained and formatted. It introduces a new way of questioning, where not only the common excerpts in "Richard Cory" are analyzed but also the words and teh tone of the narrator are somehow translated into new meaning, superior (in my opinion) in comparison to the other two liteary citicisms that I read.
I wrote these for AP English for the poem "Richard Cory" by Edwin Arlington Robinson. It was difficult at first, but when I finally found the rhythm, I was actually finding it interesting. These are three separate pieces. I did not space them out while writing them individually, so it should be easy to tell them apart.
J.C. Levenson writes a literary criticism for the poem "Richard Cory" by Edwin Arlington Robinson. Levenson is rather harsh in his judgment of the townspeople. His discussion of the poem focuses more on the townspeople's senselessness and less on forming assumptions to explain why Cory took his own life. Levenson says, "those who count over what they lack and fail to bless the good before their eyes are truly desperate." I agree with that statement, although the adverb "truly" could be a bit of an exaggeration when paired with desperate. I believe that both the townspeople and Richard Cory were desperate, to determine the degrees and differences in degrees of their desperation only opens up for excess debate. Levenson uses exaggerated writing, and he can sometimes be clumsy in his analysis. It makes it easy to argue his points because they are sometimes written to an extent that's ridiculous. He is correct when he says that, "the blind see only what they can covet or envy." The townspeople fail to see beneath Cory's exterior, they fail to recognize his despair as they absent-mindlessly isolate him as they idolize him. Levenson, although he is not the clearest in his writing, his points can be recognized by his exaggeration, so it is effective in that way. But it takes careful reading to reach that point.
In a literary criticism written by Wallace L. Anderson concerning his thoughts on the poem "Richard Cory" by Edwin Arlington Robinson, he introduces a whole new level of understanding, an understanding that underlies the context of the poem. Anderson argues that the townspeople are better off than Cory. So far, I cannot see anything amiss with his perception of the authors point of view. In the first three stanzas the poem, Cory seems far better off than the townspeople. He was a "gentleman from sole to crown," he was "rich." Anderson cites many of the townspeople's observations of Richard Cory, soon after concluding that all these descriptions derive from external qualities only, "even his manner is not a manifestation of something innate but only a characteristic that has been acquired." The critic also concludes, in the very last sentence of his literary criticism, that the things that gave Cory his regal status also revealed "the inner emptiness that led him to take his own life." His argument there I cannot challenge, if it were not for the external traits that the townspeople admired and equally envies, it would be nearly impossible to form a conclusion that explained Cory's suicide. What I don't agree with is the critics method of over-emphasizing the word "light." Robinson writes "so on we worked, and waited for the light." To wait for the light, automatically suggests that the people believe in the light. Anderson says that, "light suggests a spiritual sustenance of greater value." The critic attributes Cory's sudden death to his lack in spiritual value, explaining that his life was meaningless and that he "lived only on a material level." to assume that Cory was deprived of spirituality is an unfair assumption that favors the townspeople. I cannot justly affirm whether or not Anderson speaks of a religious spirituality or one dealing with the human spirit. Either way it discredits Cory, and possibly over-credits the townspeople. This criticism is an example of effective writing because Anderson explains his observations well using direct evidence from the poem by choosing excerpts and quoting them in his literary criticism. He fails to define the grounds of spirituality, but offers a definition of his own when he relates it to the word "light." He is easy to understand, his thoughts are clear and he is contemplative in his perception.
Charles Sweet Jr. writes a literary criticism for Edwin Arlington Robinson's poem, "Richard Cory". He presents many thoughtful observations in his criticism. He sees deeper than any other critic, for this poem, that I have read so far. He focuses on the narrator of the poem, one of the townspeople before explaining his reasoning for favoring Cory as the main character. There is much to read into, much to discover when you read the point of view of one of the townspeople. Reading Charles Sweet Jr.'s literary criticism made me realize this. Although I understand that there is more to the narrating, Sweet allowed for me to go beyond my limited understanding. Sweet states that in the first stanza, it introduces the narrator and his limited view of Cory. The narrator focuses greatly on Cory's status and wealth, a conclusion that can be inferred by the speaker's imagery. Sweet realizes that in "stanza two, however, appears to contrast and even contradict the previously established viewpoint." "Sole to crown," can infer that the townspeople regarded Cory regally and then the "lines five and six of a different wording from lines as 'and he was always...' contrast with '(And) he was always...." "Cory seems at times like a king the narrator admits he is always 'quietly arrayed' and 'human.'" So, the narrator contradicts himself, as Sweet sys. Sweet recognizes that Cory attempts to communicate with the townspeople whenever he "went down town," but they "erected a barrier around themselves and their only reaction to Cory is stasis and silence." The critic says, "it matters not that it is Cory who pulls the trigger since the people have pointed a weapon at his temple." I admire his insight and am awed by the phrasing. There is nothing that Charles Sweet Jr. has said in his literary criticism that I can argue, because I agree completely with his reasoning. He put my own initial thoughts and inferences into a whole new perspective that I admire for it has also shown me new levels of understanding. This criticism is a very good example of effective writing. It is very well written, very well explained and formatted. It introduces a new way of questioning, where not only the common excerpts in "Richard Cory" are analyzed but also the words and teh tone of the narrator are somehow translated into new meaning, superior (in my opinion) in comparison to the other two liteary citicisms that I read.
0 comment(s) to... “Literary Criticism”
0 comments:
Post a Comment