Can someone help me analyze this poem?

[sodr2]

I was having trouble on this *difficult* poem, & a few questions, among others and would like your help.

1. What is the main visual image in each stanza? What is the meaning and effect of each image.
2. What's the purpose of the author using the words horn, reddened Euphrates and "as satisfaction for a sin"?

Thx in advanced!!

Poem can be found at:

http://www.library.utoronto.ca/canpoetry/pratt/poem2.htm

[JBI]

Chop that poem, I think the E. J. Pratt estate would be angry otherwise.

Give me your ideas first - as somewhat who has done a somewhat thorough reading of Pratt's works, I can help you, but note that, help you, not do your homework.

[sodr2]

Alright, I guess it is only fair. *My* interpretation of the poem is of a man who sets out on a journey to his lover (from Java to Geneva), which seems to be taking as long as mankind has progressed "from stone to steel." I'm also guessing that his lover is an Aryan. But then he starts getting into the desires of the flesh??........then everything in my brain collapses. :(

[JBI]

IT may help you to know that Pratt was Canadian, and the poem first published in 1932. Pratt's work at this point was heavily influenced by the First World War, and the subsequent political strife, hence the Germanic symbolism used throughout, and the constant references to European places and civilization.

It is also of importance to note that Pratt himself was an ordained minister, and that there is a strong theological vein running through the entire poem, especially at the end. If you don't know what Gethsemane is, look it up, because the poem rests on it.

In addition to this, some important facts for background - Java is an island in Indonesia, and around the composition of the poem, a time when various neanderthals were excavated. Geneva at this time was the headquarter of the League of Nations.

Aryans according to Nazi, and various congruent Germanic theories, were said to be the "super" race.

And, Euphrates was a river running through Mesopotamia (now Iraq), and the Rhine is a river running through Germany and the Netherlands.

[raindrops4u]

i dont know the author or the poem, but for me the poem seems very sinister- the path runs through gethsemane, gethsemane being the garden jesus was betrayed in, and no matter whether someone walks, rides a bike, rolls a stone, and whatnot, the path will always run through gethsemane?
reddened euphrates is sometimes used as a sign for pontius pilate who said "i wash my hands in innocence" or something to that extent... satisfaction for a sin no idea

[sodr2]

Yes I know what Gethsemane is, so I'm guessing that we must all go through deep suffering, "whether to the cross or crown." Cross or crown?? Temple and cave?
I know part of the poem has to do with animal sacrifices as the atonement of sins as mentioned in the 2nd last stanza. I notice that throughout the poem he's comparing ancient with modern times, um....from stone to steel...yeah, I can't see how this all relates.

lol, my hypothesis about the love journey was wrong? :'(

[raindrops4u]

Hm. I guess it's something to do with betrayal in general...

The evolution of desire
Has but matured a toxic wine,
Drunk long before its heady fire
Reddened Euphrates or the Rhine.

jbi said geneva was headquartr of the league of nations... so maybe this stanza is meant to say that the desire of peace in europe wasn't bad, but the things that sprang from it misevolved and was developed earlier than it was ready?

[raindrops4u]

Between the temple and the cave
The boundary lies tissue thin:
The yearlings still the altars crave
As satisfaction for a sin.

if the temple stands for the people who sought power and the cave for the death/resurrection, and thinking about the yearlings... this stanza could have something to do with "proper" sin- the altars crave when the altars were what originally caused the death of jesus, whose death sort of cleared us of our sins... ahh confusing! i like poems that confuse me ;)

[sodr2]

Hold on I think I have something.....

Correct me if I'm wrong: throughout mankind's evolution, (stone to steel, Java to Geneva, etc) to attain peace, we must go through suffering....something along these lines?? Please help me elaborate.

[sodr2]

JBI!!! Why'd you leave me? :'(

>:O

Well, raindrops4u, any other ideas?....

[sodr2]

Anyone have any other ideas? I'm really stuck and I'm being graded on this....I really don't want to fail. :(

[LitNetIsGreat]

You seem really desperate, I haven't any time because I'm going to bed, but I'll give you a few thoughts to help you out. However all you need to do is go with your own interpretation and back this up with evidence from the text and you can't "fail," anyway a couple of things you may want to look at or may already have gathered:


From stone to bronze, from bronze to steel

Whether to the cross or crown

The evolution of desire

The path lies through Gethsemane

Time never changing in relation to desire
Cross=Christianity=religion=religions
Crown=monarchy=politics
Desire=constant? Evolution of man, of humanity has not changed

Hope that helps in some small way, but don't forget just argue your own individual interpretation.

[sodr2]

Alright, thank you guys for your ideas. I think I have a good foundation now....

[blacksniper]

hello...am facing the same situation as sodr2. 'from stone to steal' has a variety of meanings mostly depending in what angle your looking at it. i would like to ask for assistance in analyzing this poem using marxist criticism. i dont know were to start and what quotes to use.

[JBI]

hello...am facing the same situation as sodr2. 'from stone to steal' has a variety of meanings mostly depending in what angle your looking at it. i would like to ask for assistance in analyzing this poem using marxist criticism. i dont know were to start and what quotes to use.

Whose marxist criticism?

[blacksniper]

Marxist criticism is were by one criticizes a work of art let it be drama, songs or poems using the theory's of Karl Marx (famous economist). so its basically looking for evidence in that piece of art that connects with his theories.

[JBI]

Marxist criticism is were by one criticizes a work of art let it be drama, songs or poems using the theory's of Karl Marx (famous economist). so its basically looking for evidence in that piece of art that connects with his theories.

I know who Marx was, but are we talking Gramsci here, or Lukacs, Benjamin or Eagleton? There is a great deal of scholarship and theory written - Marx himself was not a literary theorist, and there is in no way an agreement on the terms of the theory either.

[blacksniper]

sorry guys, was in class. The question you need to ask is 'what is Marxist criticism?'. Marxist criticism is the type of criticism of art let it be drama, a song or poem based on the theory's of the famous economist 'Karl Marx'. So all you need is to look at the poem and explain it from an economic point of view. am having troubles doing that cause the poem is confusing.:mad: i'll post this question on my own thread....the title is the name of the poem. "from stone to steel"

[JBI]

sorry guys, was in class. The question you need to ask is 'what is Marxist criticism?'. Marxist criticism is the type of criticism of art let it be drama, a song or poem based on the theory's of the famous economist 'Karl Marx'. So all you need is to look at the poem and explain it from an economic point of view. am having troubles doing that cause the poem is confusing.:mad: i'll post this question on my own thread....the title is the name of the poem. "from stone to steel"

That isn't what Marxist criticism is, hate to break it to you, and there isn't only one form of Marxist criticism. Either way, Marxist criticism works far better with novels, but at any rate, perhaps you may want to read this: http://books.google.ca/books?id=UrCln8TYJMEC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_navlinks_s#v=onepage&q=&f=false

and then read some of the primary texts it deals with in the collection. As it is, you seem to be lecturing me on how to read a poem in a marxist perspective, while asking me to read it for you - I know Marxist criticism, I'm into theory, perhaps, before you venture into writing on a poem on Marxist theory, it would be beneficial to look into Marxist literary theory, and then perhaps you would have less difficulty.

As it is though, the poem works far better when read in light of Northrop Frye's work - Pratt and Frye were good friends, and Frye was perhaps his biggest critical supporter - There are also some nice collections of criticism on Pratt that exist, and a reading of Frye's The Bush Garden and D. G. Jones' Butterfly on Rock won't hurt for starts - but if you are still attached to a Marxist point of view, you'd need to start with Eagleton, because, from your post, you make it clear, that though you may know of Marx, you perhaps do not know too much about Marxist literary criticism.


And, P.S. I didn't ask what Marxist literary criticism is - I know what it is, I asked whose criticism you were going to incorporate, and how it applied to this poem in particular, which it probably doesn't, as the whole argument of the poem is counter-Marxist.

[LMK]

hello...am facing the same situation as sodr2. 'from stone to steal' has a variety of meanings mostly depending in what angle your looking at it. i would like to ask for assistance in analyzing this poem using marxist criticism. i dont know were to start and what quotes to use.

Are you referring to Pratt's poem or the Salisbury's book that specifically deals with economics?

Just a couple of thoughts, I am neither a scholar of poetry or economics, though I did take more classes in college on economics (when dirt was new) than I did on poetry….so with a grain of salt…. and with a very broad brush…

Let's look at this briefly from a Marxist point of view (I have no knowledge of the actual published works on critical analysis of Marx having to do with art of any kind, this is simply an opinion of the reading).

In Pratt's poem I suppose one could look at the two images of brutality that are used, the Neanderthal, stone, cave, desire, toxic-wine, and one of a more refined or cultivated brutality of religion; steel, praying fingertips, sacrifice, Aryan.

Using these two conflicts simultaneously might insinuate that civilization is no more civilized in the second, seemingly more advanced of these two life times, the wheel to me conjures the image of the wheel of life and two are mentioned. Not only two wheels, but specifically the revolution of each wheel; revolution as in revolving or revolution as in overthrow?

Additionally, it is through the conflict that forces productivity at the expense of the proletariat.

As a result, the future that is offered; on one hand a conflict for survival and base needs or instincts (survival of the fittest, the conquered are slaves to the conquering), on the other it is the face of religious superiority that causes the conflict which offers the future to be more of the same; those who have not will continue to work for those who have and those who have will use the leftovers created by those who have not in order to have more rather than distribute to the inferior worker bees (those who have not) who continue to suffer (yearlings for the altar crave).

The hope given at the end; Gethsemane might imply the liberation, the revolution of overthrowing the bourgeoisie…all can be equal at this point.

Just some thoughts...not that I spent too much time thinking them, but perhaps it might spark some further thoughts for you to explore.

~L