If you read my blogs often, you would know that I hate looking too deep into words on paper, but as I flipped towards Chapter 2 I was once again being asked too. With this being the case, I decided to have an open mind (I can't say for sure I will do this again) and give it a shot.
At the beginning, it was helpful that Keesey provided exampls of the history that might have helped form Anglo-American criticism instead of just simply giveing us time frames, because I will be the first to admit, I do not know much about past history, especially dates.
"At the same time, it would be misleading to suggest that formal criticism represents a new or peculiary modern approach" (76).
I liked the statement above because he was being upfront and honest stating that the approaches that we use today are all influenced by the approaches that we used 50 years ago. It made me want to have an open-mind and trust him, so if that's what he intended, he succeeded.
"The speaker is a character who undergoes emotional changes as the "plot" of the poem moves from mood to mood, from statement to statement, from problem to solutions" (82).
""Poetic form and poetic meaning are inseperable, sre in fact, one and the same thing, and that all relevant criticism must start from this principle" (83).
I didn't know what statement I liked better so I chose both. Keesey did a pretty good job explaning a formalist point of view versus the historical point of view, but its all a matter of how each individual apllies the information. One way is not proven to be better than the other.
Posted by GinaBurgese at February 12, 2007 11:41 PM