Becoming Jane

The other day I stumbled upon what I think is quite an entertaining movie: Becoming Jane 

It deals with a pre- Pride and Prejudice, 20 year-old Jane Austen. It tells the story of how she fell in love with Thomas Lefroy (allegedly the inspiration for Mr. Darcy) their affair, and how it ended, making Miss Austen a wiser woman and better novelist.

Of course I had to research and find out if what is shown in the movie is based on actual facts. It’s not – Sadly, it’s just speculation and a bit of imagination.

Why do I use the word “sadly”?

As you probably know, Jane Austen never married, or had a known “companion”, nevertheless, the heroines in her novels almost always get their “Mr. Darcy”. Even though it has been said in lessons that Jane Austen did not write about romance (but about morality, gender, social class, etc.) It is sad to think that she never found an intellectual equal that made her heart flutter.

As a matter of fact, I believe the film makers felt the same way I did, since Miss Austen is portrayed as one of the heroines in her novels, in fact most of the dialogue between her and her love interest is lifted from Pride and Prejudice.

 The good news is: She did meet Thomas Lefroy, and she disliked him at first, but then she did flirt with him. Below are excerpts from Jane´s letters to her sister

"Tell Mary that I make over Mr Heartley & all his Estate to her for her sole use and Benefit in future, & not only him, but all my other Admirers into the bargain wherever she can find them, even the kiss which C. Powlett wanted to give me, as I mean to confine myself in future to Mr Tom Lefroy, for whom I donot care sixpence."

letter to Cassandra
January 14, 1796

"After I had written the above, we received a visit from Mr Tom Lefroy and his cousin George.  The latter is really very well-behaved now; and as for the other, he has but one fault, which time will, I trust, entirely remove--it is that his morning coat is a great deal too light.  He is a very great admirer of Tom Jones, and therefore wears the same coloured clothes, I imagine, which he did when he was wounded."

letter to Cassandra
January 9, 1796

"He is a very gentlemanlike, good-looking, pleasant young man, I assure you.  But as to our having ever met, except at the three last balls, I cannot say much; for he is so excessively laughed at about me at Ashe, that he is ashamed of coming to Steventon, and ran away when we called on Mrs Lefroy a few days ago."

letter to Cassandra

January 9, 1796

"At length the Day is come on which I am to flirt my last with Tom Lefroy, & when you receive this it will be over--My tears flow as I write, at the melancholy idea."

Lletter to Cassandra

January 15, 1796

To our dismay, Cassandra had the habit of destroying Jane´s letter after she read them, and Jane herself never spoke publicly about Lefroy. However, Lefroy is reported to have said that he did love Jane “with a boyish love” according to a letter send by his nephew to James Edward Austen Leight in 1870.

We can conclude that our forward-thinking (at the time) author did write from experience. Even though she didn´t live as Elizabeth Bennet or Emma Woodhouse, she did have her own, private, incredible story which, in one way or another helped us acknowledge the universal truth that a single woman in possession of a good brain, must not necessarily be in want of a husband.

 References:

Jarrold, J.(Director). (2007). Becoming Jane. Uk-Ireland. UK Film Council

Walker, L.R. (2006). Jane Austen and Tom Lefroy: Stories. Persuatsions on-line. V27, N°1. Retrieved from

http://www.jasna.org/persuasions/on-line/vol27no1/walker.htm

Ode to Joy: Romanticism as Rebellion.

As we saw in classes, Romanticism was an artistic movement originated on the late 1700s, whose purpose was to oppose and rebel against the neo-classical notions of beauty in arts in general

Among many Romantic artists, there were different poets, painters and philosophers. Musicians where also part of this movement. One of them, and probably the msot important one, was the german genius of music, Ludwig van Beethoven who is very well known by his celebrated song, "Ode to Joy".

Before I continue with this entry, I ask you to watch this video analysis from the movie "The Pervert's Guide to Ideology" by Slovenian philosopher, Slavoj Žižek:

Now, according to Zizek, "Ode to Joy" would be one of the most outstanding critics against ideology or the imposed cultural spectrum. Let's remember our previous classes where we were describing Neo-Classical period: every view of beauty was related to logical thinking, also with sublime and sort of artificial features. At that time, fashion was made by long dresses, big wigs, etc. 

Now let's take a look to what Beethoven did: He made this breathtaking piece of art called "Ode to Joy", and as Zizek states, we all relate this Ninth Symphony with peace around the world, everybody are happy, "Mao Tse-Tung hugging with White supremacists, and so on". That part of the symphony was perfect for the aristocracy and/or burgeuoisiee 1700's to select it as a symbol of "the Big C"   culture, and use it as a useful tool for propaganda and maintain the status-quo, just as the examples you've seen on the video.

The truth is that Ludwig van was a really sad and solitary person since he suffered a lot in his childhood by his father's  brutal punishments. The message here is a paradox: How a solitary and deppresive person, with so many childhood traumas, could create this masterpiece dedicated to brotherhood and joy? Because, and as many Romantic artists, Beethoven was inspired by the beauty you only see once. There will be no utopia, peace will never be eternal. Is just an instant, a fragile moment were you can see perfection, but, and as a critic to the Neo-classical standars, you can't keep that perfection forever. Beauty is something that is not eternal. Beauty is something that you have to look by yourself, as Alex did in "A Clockwrok Orange" while he was walking through the music store. 

To conclude, we can say why Beethoven is a Romantic genius, since he undermined neo-classical fascination of eternal beauty from within.

For you to think:

Can you think of other ways in which Romantic artists played a role of rebels against the imposed "culture"?

Can you find a contrast between Ludwig van's vision of "peace and equality" with Whitman's philosophy of Democracy?

References:

• A brief guide to Romanticism. Retrieved September 5, 2014 from http://www.poets.org/poetsorg/text/brief-guide-romanticism
• Fiennes, S. (2012). The Pervert's Guide to Ideology. United Kingdom: P Guide Productions.
• Ludwig van Beethoven. (2014). The Biography.com website. Retrieved 12:00, Sep 06, 2014, from http://www.biography.com/people/ludwig-van-beethoven-9204862.

 

For maximum effect, please pretend you are in the year 1813 while reading the following post. Also, pretend you are reading from paper and not a computer. How about drinking a cup of tea while you read it by candlelight?

Dearest friend,                                                         June, 1813

 

 

I must tell you about my life threatening encounter with the notorious Lord Byron. Yes, he is a gentleman who writes (have you read Childe Harold´s Pilgrimage? If not, then you should) but I must say that he is mad, bad and DANGEROUS to know. 

First, let me describe his looks: His pale skin seems like a porcelain vase illuminated from within, his blue eyes are so intense they almost stopped my heart, and his “devil may care” attitude makes me care all that more. Just so you don´t think I am completely in love with him, let me say he does have a receding chin.

Second, he is not just a pretty face; he is involved in politics, giving his support to the working class. Must he always do the opposite of what he is expected to do? Is like he is delighted to be hated by his aristocratic peers.

But he is nice to look at and helps those less fortunate (Dreamy). 

Unfortunately he is famous not only for his poetry, but also for his womanizing ways. He tried to seduce me, and I told him we should just be friends. He responded "“A mistress never is nor can be a friend. While you agree, you are lovers; and when it is over, anything but friends”. Can you belive the nerve? I will under no circumstances become another one of his conquests. I am married for God´s sakes.

Nevertheless, I enjoy his poems very much. He signed my copy of the Giaour. It tells the story of a woman in the East, drowned in the sea for being unfaithful. Her lover later avenges her by killing her master, but he himself must then pay for his sins and is doomed to live as a vampire.

Just as Lord Byron himself, his writing is a contradiction. The Giaour shows the same event from a Muslim and Christian point of view. Lord Byron is both good and wicked. And I both despise him and adore him.

I think I´ll  go visit with him soon.

If I ever tell you I have fallen under his spell, please smack me.

Yours truly,

Lady Caroline Lamb

 

 

Ok, now you can go back to being a young literature student (or teacher – hello Mr. Villa) in the 21^st century.

To make the post mote interesting, above I wrote a letter as if I where Lady Caroline Lamb, using the letter as a device to provide some backstory on Lord Byron and highlight the importance of the public character he created which has a direct influence in his notoriety.

Lady Caroline Lamb went down in history as one of Lord Byron´s craziest lovers. When he became bored of her she went mad and made quite a spectacle of herself. Lord Byron is sometimes referred to as a “rock star poet” because of the many scandalous rumors (and some facts) about his private life.

Lord Byron was only mentioned in class, but I wanted to know more about him and his poetry, since he is considered such an important author of the Romantic era. After my research I can conclude that his poetry is wonderful, but (as most poets) he probably had mental issues. You can see his inner contradictions in his poetry: The clash of the ideal world and the real world.

Even though he always stated that his writings were not autobiographical, It is easy to see that he drew heavily from his real life. And perhaps his greatest work of art is himself: The heroes he created in his imagination versus the man he really was.

After his death, his friends went over his memoires, but decided after some consideration, they should never be published and burned them. Thes mystery about the man contributes to the greatness of his legacy.

My personal favorite poems by Lord Byron are (click the name to read) :

She Walksin Beauty

Epitaphto a Dog

Lachin y Gair

 

I urge you to watch “The Scandalous Life of Lord Byron” in which Rupert Everett retraces the late romantic poet´s journey: the good parts, the bad parts, and the funny parts. It’s in five parts on YouTube.

 

References:

The Independent. Great lovers: A celebration of true romance – Lord Byron and Lady Caroline Lamb. Retrieved from: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/love-sex/romance-passion/great-lovers-a-celebration-of-true-romance-1895508.html?action=gallery&ino=5

 

History Channel. (2004) Biography.

Retrieved from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usuxB9lOGUA

Keats and Love

As we saw in classes, the Romantic movement was a response against the Enlightment ideals, since Romantic poets emphasized and believed in individualism, imagination, wild nature, rebellion, among others. This kind of poetry was focused on displaying emotions passionately and gave less importance to reason.

One of the features of this movement that I want to point out is related to emotions. Here, the most important thing is to free oneself through the overflow of emotions that go beyond the boundaries of logical reasoning, in which, the major inspiration would be pain. That is why, in a way, there is this stereotype associated with Romantic poets, in which they are showed as tortured and melancholy people. 

One of the most remarkable poets of this era is John Keats. Besides, it was very well-known his relationship with Fanny Brawne. 

It really caught my attention the way Keats felt towards Fanny. As we saw in classes, probably this love was unconsumated, and very intense. Actually, Fanny was the object of his intensity. In addition, as Brawne was a cold woman, for Keats, this feeling towards her was not very positive, because, as Keats loved her with passion and intensity, even if Fanny answered to that, it would not be in the same way. 

I could not help but make the connection between Keats and his relationship with Brawne and with Jean Paul Sartre's point of view regarding to be in love. According to Skye Cleary, in an article called "Jean-Paul Sartre's Philosophy of Romantic Loving Relationships", Sartre's existencialism can be described as the following:

 "We are abandoned in the world, without a god and without reason for being. If existence is absurd, then it makes sense that in the absence of anything else, lovers choose to make each other the reason for their existence".

We can clearly see that for Keats, Fanny became the center of his existence, and he gave himself up to her fully. Let's take a look to one of letters sent from Keats to Brawne in 1820:

"Upon my soul I have loved you to the extreme. I wish you could know the Tenderness with which I continually brood over your different aspects of countenance, action and dress. I see you come down in the morning: I see you meet me at the Window - I see every thing over again eternally that I ever have seen... .If I am destined to be happy with you here - how short is the longest Life - I wish to believe in immortality - I wish to live with you for ever... Let me be but certain that you are mine heart and soul, and I could die more happily than I could otherwise live."

Here we can see one of the aspects that Sartre mentions in his philosophy, in which, when you are in love, you want to become the absolute ends for your lover, "to be their whole world". We can notice that Keats' love for Fanny goes beyond the love he feels for himself, we could even say that he loses himself.

Following this idea, Cleary says: "Basically, loving is a deception as Sartre formulates it because it is to want and to demand to be loved. However, reciprocity is important in Sartre’s philosophy because the more you value the other, the more they are likely to value you". And one of the problems that the author mentions is: "there is no guarantee of mutual reciprocity." 
All in all, this made me question myself if what we think it is to be in love, is it really to be in love? Is it healthy for oneself to fully lose yourself to your beloved and put your lover at the center of your existence?
What do you think?

References:

Cleary, S. (2008). Jean-Paul Sartre's Philosophy  of Romantic Loving Relationship. Retrieved  September 1, 2014 from http://www.philoagora.com/content/view/177/106/

Harvard College Library. (2012). "I shall ever be your dearest love", John Keats and Fanny Brawne. Retrieved September 4, 2014 from http://www.hcl.harvard.edu/libraries/houghton/exhibits/keats/in_italy.cfm

Buzzle. Romantic poets characteristics. Retrieved from September 3, 2014 from http://www.buzzle.com/articles/romantic-poetry-characteristics.html

A brief guide to Romanticism. Retrieved September 4, 2014 from http://www.poets.org/poetsorg/text/brief-guide-romanticism

Keats and Poe: Time, Beauty and Truth

The Romantic era, as we have discussed in class, is characterized by the returning to nature, since it represents simplicity and a source of wisdom and inspiration. In that sense, every concept related to nature and unfiltered by human action, for instance, flowers, trees, landscapes, etc., was considered relevant for poets such as Keats, Whitman and Poe (Harvey, 2014). 

Having said that, we can assure that Romantic poets have many traits in common regarding certain topics. Those topics are mainly truth, beauty and time. 

Bearing that in mind, I wanted to raise awareness of the relationship of truth, beauty and time within two main works. John Keats' Ode to a Grecian Urn and Edgar Allan Poe's The Tell-Tale Heart.

First of all, it results necessary to summarize each work: 

On the one hand, in "Ode to a Grecian Urn", there is a speaker who actually describes an ancient Grecian urn. He/she refers to the characters that tell different stories, even when they are "frozen in time", and the speaker wonders about those stories. Besides, he/she states that their static traits will lead to beauty that will never fade in comparison with what surrounds the speaker at that moment.

On the other hand, "The Tell-Tale Heart" refers to a man who confesses the crime of killing an elderly man who presumably lived with him. The excuse that the man gave was because he was obsessed with his eye, as we can notice in the following extract:

"I loved the old man. He had never wronged me. He had never given me insult. For his gold I had no desire. I think it was his eye! yes, it was this! He had the eye of a vulture --a pale blue eye, with a film over it. Whenever it fell upon me, my blood ran cold; and so by degrees --very gradually --I made up my mind to take the life of the old man, and thus rid myself of the eye forever.”

(Poe, 1843)

The main character, also known as the murderer, used to visit the old man every night and observed him while he slept. One day, the man wakes up in the middle of the night and noticed that there was someone in his bedroom. Then, the young man attacked him, chop his body and buried the corpse in the same bedroom. The next day, the police arrived to the house looking for the old man since a neighbor heard some strange noise the previous night. The young man showed the house trying not to look suspicious. Indeed, he led them to the same room where there was the corpse. Finally, the murderer started to hear a sound pretty similar to the old man's heart beat so he felt frightened since he believed the police officers also noticed that sound. In the end, he confessed the crime and showed where the body was.

After summarizing the main ideas of each text, some similar points can be highlighted.

In Keats' Ode to a Grecian Urn, there is a paradox between what beauty means. As we saw in class, the central thought of him was that the essence of things is always transient, for example, a flower, that is beautiful but it will eventually die. Besides, beautiful things are beautiful because they are not permanent. If they last forever, they would not be real and thus, they would lose what make us consider them as beautiful. In that sense, we can establish a deep connection among an object, its presence in the real world (or what makes it real and hence, true), and the traits that transforms it into a beautiful piece. 

Keats suggests that the concept of beauty brings more ideas, such as, softness, something delicate, pleasant and temporary, like the smell of a perfume or the vision of the sunset. However, as we can see in Ode to a Grecian Urn, Keats seems to consider something astonishing when it is frozen in time, lifeless or artificial (Smith, 2011).

On the other hand, Poe has an absolute vision about beauty as it has been mentioned in class. He believed that the closer he gets to death, the more inhuman and the closer he gets to obsession. That obsessions are lead by beauty. In The Tell-Tale Heart, the murdered was obsessed with the elderly man's eye so he wanted to preserve it in a way. Bearing that in mind, I would say murderers in many of Poe's stories want to freeze a moment of something that called their attention by killing someone or by challenging rules of nature (as in The Facts in the Case of M. Valdemar, in which he wanted to be hypnotized in order to avoid death and maintain himself "alive"). 

The main idea that I want to highlight after stating all these points is that Keats's and Poe's views about truth, beauty and how they are affected by time are pretty similar. 

In order to conclude with this post, I want to share a Youtube video which called my attention. Annette Jung, an illustrator and comic-artist, tells Poe's The Tell-Tale Heart in a kind of creepy way that shows us how obsessed the murderer was.

My final question is: Can you perceive another conception of beauty or truth in other Poe's stories, such as The Fall of the House of Usher, The Raven, or Mesmeric Revelation?

And as a bonus track, and regarding Gustavo's death, I wanted to share this song by Soda Stereo called "Corazón Delator". 

References:

Harvey, B. (2014). American Romanticism Overview. Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~mmcfar/AMERICAN%20ROMANTICISM%20overview.htm#_ftnref1

Keats, J. (1819). Ode to a Grecian Urn. Retrieved from Poetry Foundation: http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poem/173742

Poe, E. A. (1843). The Tell-Tale Heart. Retrieved from http://xroads.virginia.edu/~HYPER/POE/telltale.html

Smith, N. (2011, December 7th). Explanation and Analysis of “Ode to a Grecian Urn” by John Keats. Retrieved from Article Myriad: http://www.articlemyriad.com/analysis-ode-grecian-urn-keats/

The Road Not Taken

In mi opinion, what robert Frost tris to express in the the poem "The Road Not Taken" is, in an ironic way, the idea that all our decisions are accidental, the two roads in the forest represent the freedom of choice and the fate, but no mather which one we took we wont know which was it or were will it takes us but we will ponder and try to al least once the road is over tell the tale in a more heroic way either to save face or in a desperate attemp to approve our choices.

"I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference." (Robert Frost (1874–1963).  Mountain Interval.  1920.)

This reminded me of one of the lasts chapters of futurama,"bender big score" at the end of the movie bender tell his history in front of the whole world claiming to be a hero that just saved everyone while keeping the details that we all know.

Although he is unable to sigh

References:
http://www.bartleby.com/119/1.html
http://www.biography.com/people/robert-frost-20796091#public-recognition-for-poetry

The Master letters

Reading Emily Dickinson's biography I found that there was a whole mystery surrounding "the Master letters". The Master letters is a set of three letters that were written between 1858 and 1861that were addressed to a "Master".
According to the author of "The Master letters" the letters indicate "a long relationship, geographically apart, in which correspondence would be the primary means of communication". The identity of the Master is unknown if they were addressed to a man, but some candidates are the Reverend Charles Wadsworth, Samuel Bowles a friend of Dickinson's family, and the publisher and editor of the "Springfield Republican", or a professor named William Smith Clarke.

 

It called my attention Emily Dickinson's writing, her word games, her particular writing style with the dashes and the replacement of words (that sometimes changes the whole sense of a verse or stanza). I really like her writing, the topics and the way they are written, as we can see in the letters, her poetry is full of incomprehensible passion.

 oh- did I offend it-
Did'nt it want me
to tell it the truth,
Daisy- Daisy- offend it- who
bends her smaller life to
his (it's)(,) meeker (lower) every day-
who only asks- a task-
Who something to do for
love of it- some little way
she cannot guess to make
that master glad-

Second letter



There are too many things to say about this letters, the one that was more attractive for me was the writing itself, how much is she able to transmit and how difficult it is to explain what I feel when I read it.

What can you say about this mystery, or the letters? To whom do you think these letters are written? What are your interpretations of the Master letters?


In this website you can read the three Master letters.




References:
The Master letters
http://therumpus.net/2011/05/the-dark-mystery-of-emily-dickinsons-master-letters/

D.Thoreau: Civil Disobedience

David Thoreau was an American writer and poet. His works are mainly based on nature and philosophy following the transcendentalist school of thought. There is where he is going to be exposed to the world of the empirical thinking and observation thanks to his mentor and friend Ralph Waldo Emerson.

Thoreau was an active abolitionist and in 1846 he refuses to pay the taxes because he advocates against the war in Mexico. He was sent to jail where he wrote an inspiring essay for a lot of historical activists in the twentieth century. It was called the civil disobedience.

I strongly suggest that you read it, but for the time being I will go straight to the point by asking you to reflect upon my favorite quote from this essay:

“Law never made men a whit more just; and, by means of their respect for it, even the well-disposed are daily made the agents of injustice.”

How could you relate it to the educational field? How are things being improved in the our deficient educational system? do laws actually contribute to society's outgrowth? what criticism  could be made regarding new educational policies and our role as students and prospective teachers ?

If you come up with another idea just shoot!

Emily Dickinson and Nature

As we have seen and discussed in class, Emily differs from the Emerson transcendentalism (American romanticism) in the sense that for her, observing nature does not lead to revelations. Nature does not answer her questions. Emily adopts a more pessimistic view if nature contrary to, for example, Whitman’s view in which there is a union with nature. For Whitman, nature and mind can unite, for Emily, this is not possible.

This difference in how Emily views nature was one of the aspects or characteristics of her poetry that piqued my interest and which, consequently, had me researching more on the topic.

Henry Wells in his essay Romantic Sensibility finds that Emily distrusted romanticism, which could explain her different point of view. In another reading, Richard Wilbur’s essay “Sumptuous Destitution”, there is no mention of this distrust. However, the author does mention that Emily “could not see in Nature any revelations of divine purpose.”

But what I found most interesting by far was Joanne Diehl’s take on Emily’s ‘relationship’, so to speak, with nature. In Diehl’s Dickinson and the Romantic Imagination, it is states that although Emily shares “an abiding concern with the relationship between self and the world” with the romantic poets, her poems focus on “the struggle she describes between two competing forces: the individual consciousness and all that is external to it.” rather than the union of self and world.

It is in this text that distrust is once again mentioned. To Emily, nature can be a hostile enemy, it is an antagonist. It does not reveal the answers to the questions you make. It does not divulge its secrets. Therefore one can only trust the truth that one finds themselves.

Another interesting way of how Emily relates to nature that Diehl point out is that  “Nature becomes alternately a storehouse from which she takes objects to invest them with personal, allegorical significance or she sees it as the place across which she spreads self, blood, vital life.” (Diehl, 1981) This refers to the ‘self’ that Emily places into the landscape as evidenced in her following poem where the image of body (e.g. blood, artery, vein) is presented in the land:

The name-of it-is "Autumn"-

The hue - of it - is Blood-

An Artery - upon the Hill-

A Vein - along the Road-

Great Globules - in the Alleys-

And Oh, the Shower of Stain-

When Winds - upset the Basin -

And spill the Scarlet Rain-

From this post and what we have seen and studied, one can determine that yes, there seems to be a difference in views between Emily and other romantic poets in relation to nature. One can even describe these differences and compare them. But what continues to escape me are the reasons behind these differences. Joanne Diehl proposes that one of these reasons is the fact that Emily is a woman, a minority in a predominately male community of poets. Of course, Diehl has a feminist view on this topic so it is understandable that she arrived at that conclusion. However, this still raises some doubts. Are the differences presented here in this post really due to that fact that Emily is a woman? What other reasons could have led to her divergent views? I leave the floor open.

References:

Diehl, J. (1981). Dickinson and the Romantic Imagination. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Wells, H. (1963). Romantic Sensibility. In Seawall, R. (Ed.), Emily Dickinson: A collection of critical essays (pp. 45-50). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Englewood Cliffs.

Wilbur, R. (1963). “Sumptuous Destitution”. In Seawall, R. (Ed.), Emily Dickinson: A collection of critical essays (pp. 127-136). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Englewood Cliffs.

To G. A. W.

While I was reading about the life of John Keats, there was one period of his life that caught my attention. It was not because of the relevance or quality of the poems that he wrote in that period but because of the irony that surrounded his professional life.   Between 1813 and 1818 was the period of his life in which he wrote the majority of his poems, however none of them turned out to be successful, at least, at the same level of his letters. Though, He advocate his life to write and create new poems during those years, his immaturity towards life and his immaturity towards what he thought the public wanted from him as a poet stopped him from getting recognition while he was alive.

According to Richard Marggraf Turley (2012), “Keats revelled in the deliberate use of immaturity, but at a physical level he was to experience his boyish imagination as profoundly disorientating, especially when it came to sorting out ‘a right feeling towards women’ (Turley, 2012)”. Which in the end means that his poems were immature and juvenile, but he was immature and young. He was in a period that every man and woman goes through, in which the perception of new things, like the opposite sex, new adventures, etc., is so vivid and desirable. And this was a characteristics of John keats’ poems in his early life, even a great like yeats notices this:”

 “Yeats suggests a key word, particularly in regard to the early Keats: sweet. The senses, primarily oral, secondarily tactile, gorging on the luxuries of the world, dominate the imagery. The “slippery blisses”, “moist kisses”, and “creamy breasts” have not escaped notice.” (Wilbur, 1959, pp. 12)

I decided to chose the poem To G. A. W. because it is one of Keat’s works that, in my opinion, illustrated better that juvenile and immature period in Keats’ works, especially towards females, that I referred to before. Though this poem has some indiscutible traits that all keats’ poems present, the essence and naturality is distinctly different from the masterpieces that make him famous.  

To G. A. W.

Nymph of the downward smile and sidelong glance! In what diviner moments of the day Art thou most lovely? when gone far astray Into the labyrinths of sweet utterance? Or when serenely wandering in a trance Of sober thought? Or when starting away, With careless robe to meet the morning ray, Thou sparest the flowers in thy mazy dance? Haply 'tis when thy ruby lips part sweetly, And so remain, because thou listenest: But thou to please wert nurtured so completely That I can never tell what mood is best, I shall as soon pronounce which Grace more neatly Trips it before Apollo than the rest.

In this poem, Keats is writing to a woman who he is infatuated with, a woman that he feels that is perfect and beautiful at every hour of the day, and he is actually indecisive as to when she is at her most beautiful, because in his eyes everything about her is perfect. Even though, this poems represents what Keats works were all about, it actually does not represent him as a writer and his real feelings towards true love. If we take a look at one of Keats’ letters to Fanny, the words he used to illustrate the sensations he is feeling towards that woman are completely different from the ones used in this poem, the degree of the feeling is different and the maturity of the message is different.

Not every great writer knows himself and his style right away. We can evidence that with Keats; however, every good writer overcomes those obstacles and becomes successful in the long run. In the case of Keats, his letters make him the name he is right now for English literature. Nevertheless, I do not think we should overlook his poems because it helps to reconstruct the puzzle of whom John Keats was.  

References

Turley, R. (2012). Keats's boyish imagination (p. 8). London: Routledge.

Wilbur, R., & Moss, H. (1959). Keats: Selected poetry (p. 12). New York: Dell.