The Interesting Part—What’s Missing

| | Comments (0)

From Barbara Jones Guetti’s “Resisting the Aesthetic”:

“And I would argue that what gives the urn its special status for Keats is precisely this problem: that the urn ‘matters’ to Keats because of his ignorance about it” (386).   

I think that Guetti did a really good job of applying many of the things that de Man said in his article to another piece of literature.  I think Keesey chose to include this essay because it really shows (not just tells) how applicable the ambiguity of rhetoric is, not just to All in the Family, but to anything. 

I chose the quote above simply because of how well I can relate to it.  I really could see what Guetti was saying.  After all, we are not enthralled by the past and history because of what we know, but because of what we don’t know.  Guetti writes in her essay, “The questions he starts to ask are not so much about what’s on the urn, as about what’s missing from it” (389).  If we look at any past event that people are interested in, the pyramids for example, people do not obsessively study them for no reason.  They study them because they are curious.  They wonder how the pyramids were built and how people lived back then.  What were the class divisions?  How was day to day life for the pharaoh/for the normal person?  It is the mystery which attracts our attention and makes us wonder.  And Guetti relates our inherent curiosity and romanticism (of the past) to Keats’s poem.      

Read what my classmates have to say about Guetti. 

Leave a comment


Type the characters you see in the picture above.