« Unconscious Criticism - We all do it. | Main | What is Literature? »

Beauty and Truth. . .

"Although we cannot establish that Keats believed consistently in eternity, we can establish that he tentatively proposes the idea and that he undoubtedly hoped for the kind of eternity he imagines." (51)

The author of this essay brings up some very interesting points. The thing that I liked most was that Austin started the essay by touching on the 6 things that beauty and truth could mean the same thing in. Of the six, I found that beauty and truth could mean the same thing in eternity, as the author puts it. I found this to be the most valid of the arguments presented. I also liked how Austin still makes his points, yet leaves it all up for reader interpretation. I mean, the six points brought up throughout the essay could potentially be the most "logical", but he never completely throws out the idea of thinking outside the box. As a reader, I really appreciate that.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://blogs.setonhill.edu/mt/mt-tb.cgi/19076

Comments

That's a good point. Austin suggested that these were just the most discussed ideas of interpretation. It does leave room to still interpret it otherwise and also gives you information that may get you to your point. Did you have a specific idea of what the poem meant that wasn't suggested in Austin's analysis?

I agree with you Corey. I learn better when authors present their points in a clear and concise way and then elaborate, just as Austin did. I also liked the way that he left it up to the reader to decide-after all this is what should be done for us students who are learning to be more critical readers. Not only should we evaluate the primary literary sources, but also other critical literature.

Corey, I also liked seeing the six different perspectives that Austin wrote about in the article. At first, I thought that he was just going to talk about how the interpretations came about; however, he continued by giving plausible explanations as to why they may not be the complete interpretation. Additionally, I agree with you that Austin did not put down new ways of thinking about the poem.

This seems to be the consensus down the line about Austin's essay. He has a convincing arguement and he backs it up with facts. His own writing style was interesting and I think helped with the overall read of the essay.

That is a good point you make. The essay was very well-written and gracefully argued. It wasn't like Austin was beating us over the head with his argument, and it was nice that he laid out the six points so obviously in the beginning. It made it a little easier to follow along. However, I interpreted Keats's poem completely differently and took it in a whole new direction. Though Austin brought up several good points with which I found myself agreeinig with when going from his perspective, I disagree with the essay as a whole.


I think this was a great way for us to begin reading critiques. Austin was such an organized writer in this piece and I followed his every word. I didn’t always agree, but he presented the topic so well I wanted to agree with him. I think that marks a pretty good critic.

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

[Future Spam Check]