bplist00Ò _WebSubresources_WebMainResourceĄÔ ^WebResourceURL_WebResourceResponse_WebResourceData_WebResourceMIMEType_ohttp://www.englishandmedia.co.uk/emag/subscribers/downloads/archive_emag/_emagpast/_script_css/text_archive.cssO!bplist00ÔnoX$versionX$objectsY$archiverT$top Ż""()012NOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdhiU$nullĘ !R$6S$10R$2R$7R$3S$11R$8V$classR$4R$9R$0R$5R$1 ! Ó#$%&[NS.relativeWNS.base _ohttp://www.englishandmedia.co.uk/emag/subscribers/downloads/archive_emag/_emagpast/_script_css/text_archive.cssÒ*+,-Z$classnameX$classesUNSURLą./UNSURLXNSObject#A¶ŠJâÙĐ ÈÓ3456BWNS.keysZNS.objects«789:;<=>?@A «CDEFGHIJKLMVServer\Content-TypeWX-Cache]Last-ModifiedSViaZConnection]Accept-RangesTDate^X-Cache-Lookup^Content-LengthTEtag_Apache/2.2.16 (Debian)Xtext/css_8MISS from wttaos03, MISS from netprotect.victoria.edu.hk_Wed, 25 Aug 2010 13:00:16 GMT_$1.0 wttaos03:80 (squid/2.6.STABLE17)Zkeep-aliveUbytes_Wed, 16 Jan 2013 02:41:38 GMT_)MISS from netprotect.victoria.edu.hk:8080T2276_"5062e-8e4-48ea57684b800"Ò*+ef_NSMutableDictionaryŁeg/\NSDictionaryäÒ*+jk_NSHTTPURLResponseŁlm/_NSHTTPURLResponse]NSURLResponse_NSKeyedArchiverŃpq_WebResourceResponse # - 2 7 \ b } Ą € § Ș Ź ź ° Č Ž ¶ ž ș Œ Ÿ À Â É Ő Ę ß á ăUZentw} «č»œżÁĂĆÇÉËÍÏÛĘßáăćçéëíïńű *8=L[`yœĘ5afĄź±¶ÊÎâđ r Oä/* CSS Document for ARCHIVE only */ /*BODY: page base setting*/ body {background-color:#FFFFFF; margin-left:1em; margin-top:1em; border:0; font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif} /*MAIN TITLE: colour dark gray 12pt bold*/ .main_title {color:#666666; font-weight:bold; font-style:normal; font-size:12pt; line-height:11pt;} /*SUB TITLE: colour dark gray 11pt bold*/ .sub_title {color:#666666; font-weight:bold; font-style:normal; font-size:11pt; line-height:11pt;} /*INTRO PARAGRAPH: colour dark gray 10pt bold*/ .intro {color:#666666; font-weight:bold; font-style:normal; font-size:10pt; line-height:11pt;} /*MAIN BODY TEXT: colour dark gray 10pt normal*/ .main_text {color:#666666; font-weight:normal; font-style:normal; font-size:10pt; line-height:11pt;} .main_text a {color: #49597D; font-weight: bold; font-style: normal; font-size:9pt; line-height:11pt; text-decoration:none;} .main_text a:hover { color: #448EB0} /*QUOTE: colour dark gray 10pt normal*/ .quote {color:#666666; font-weight:normal; font-style:normal; font-size:10pt; line-height:11pt; margin-left:2em; margin-right:3em;} .quote a {color: #49597D; font-weight: bold; font-style: normal; font-size:9pt; line-height:11pt; text-decoration:none;} .quote a:hover { color: #448EB0} /*AUTHORS NAME: colour dark gray 10pt bold*/ .author {color:#666666; font-weight:bold; font-style:normal; font-size:9pt; line-height:11pt;} /*AUTHORS NAME: colour dark gray 10pt bold*/ .magazine {color:#666666; font-weight:normal; font-style:italic; font-size:9pt; line-height:11pt;} /*colour white 12pt*/ .headerwhite {color:#FFFFFF; text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; font-style: normal; font-size:12pt; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;} .headerwhite a {color: #FFFFFF; text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; font-style: normal; font-size:12pt; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;} .headerwhite a:hover {color: #FFFFFF} /*colour white 10pt*/ .headerwhitesm {color:#FFFFFF; text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; font-style: normal; font-size:10pt; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;} .headerwhitesm a {color: #FFFFFF; text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; font-style: normal; font-size:10pt; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;} .headerwhitesm a:hover {color: #FFFFFF} Xtext/cssŐ_WebResourceTextEncodingName_WebResourceFrameName__http://www.englishandmedia.co.uk/emag/subscribers/downloads/archive_emag/_emagpast/CADuffy.htmlO$
Reading Carol Ann Duffy â three critical approaches to contemporary poetry
Roddy Lumsden shows how personal and contextual approaches can be added to practical criticism as a way of bringing fresh life to studying living poets.
When I was 17, the poets I studied were Robert Browning and Robert Frost â both immense talents, but both dead and both hard to relate to. Changes in the teaching of literature in schools have seen a wider and more contemporary range of texts being studied. The introduction of younger British poets like Carol Ann Duffy and Simon Armitage to the A Level reading list is welcome, but troublesome for teachers and students alike. Why? Well, firstly, we lack the usual context that goes with studying living writers â we cannot look at the background of, say, Ireland in the 1890s, or Ivy League America, and since these authors are still around, we have a less clear idea of the poetâs character and personal history; we lack the images of the gloomy librarian and the troubled young genius we focus on (despite the disapproval of some critics) when studying Larkin or Plath.
Also, from the point of view of studying them, both Duffy and Armitage seem accessible and forthright. The references are based in modern life; the poems were written by poets in their twenties and thirties; there is a general lack of historical and classical allusions; the scenarios are often edgy and urban and recognisable. So these poems should be easier both to teach and to study, right?
No. It might seem more approachable to sit down with a sharp, witty 24 line poem by Armitage than a five page, historical monologue by Browning, but we need responses here, we require fresh insights, we need to speculate on intention and reward, we need to look at the technical know-how which has gone to shape the piece of writing. We are going to write essays, we are going to pass exams.
As tasters of culture, we naturally respond instinctively, even irrationally. We argue about the best track on a CD, we bicker about whether a TV series is moving or tacky. A book read on a beach holiday will hit us in one way; to read it under the covers during a personal crisis is altogether different. When we are called upon to react to poetry in the position of student or critic, we must find the right balance between personal response and academic understanding.
What I want to do here is describe three basic critical approaches to looking at poems which you can adopt or mix and match when offering your opinions and guesses on a poetâs work. Yes, guesses â for poetry is not physics: there is no hard and fast answer, but it is possible to make clear and/or inspired statements about what the poet was thinking, about what the poem means to you and where the poem might fit into its social and historical period.
Practical criticism
If you look at a journal like Poetry Review, you will see that critics use a variety of methods with which to measure the worth of contemporary poetry. Some look at historical perspective; some look at style, technique and form; some judge how the work fits into a larger picture. The most tried and tested way of responding to poetry in schools is that which has been called, somewhat oddly, âpractical criticismâ. This involves looking closely at one piece of text and making decisions about the meaning and impact. The focus is the poem itself: the readerâs like â or dislike â of it is not a crucial issue.
This method certainly has its values. We approach a text directly, without too much reference to the poems which surround it, or those which influenced it, and without speculating about whether the poet had a complex love life. We ask ourselves what the poem âmeansâ, what its âmessageâ is, if any. We decide if it is working on several levels, or as a metaphor; we detect metre and rhyme schemes. We produce a clear and careful statement on the piece.
All fair and good, but two other broad approaches to criticism â the âpersonalâ and the âcontextualâ â exist which offer richer, more original scope for analysis. Iâll use brief examples connected to Duffyâs book Mean Time to help me describe them here.
Personal response
Criticism by personal response gives precedence to your gut feelings, your enjoyment (or lack of it), your empathy with the poem, and with the poet. Be wary though, like and dislike are tough fellows to portray in words; clear âpersonal responseâ means strong ideas: I wish, when studying Frostâs famous poem âThe Road Less Traveledâ I could have said why, despite its charm, I found it clumsy and cloying. I knew it was, but couldnât explain why, as I can now.
Mean Time is a good collection, but it has its bad hair days. You and I would disagree on these, but chances are we would pick some in common. Donât assume you have to bow down to a book thatâs set for you; argument is the spice of poetry. Is the stop-start style annoying. After a while. I mean? Are the male speakers a bit uniformly nasty and wooden? Couldnât you have written a better poem than the title piece? âRockall. Malin. Dogger. Finisterre.â = â**** all. Malice. Doggone. Finished there.â Geddit? It does. Doesnât it?
But if you have your little dig, youâd better be able to back it up, for Mean Time is a rightly lauded, much copied bestseller. It manages to be inviting, and disturbing, and impressive. No mean feat. The famous âPrayerâ uses simple images and language to evoke the common anguish of small town lives, and is over in a minute, but, boy, do poets wish theyâd written it! So balance what you donât like with a big bouquet for what you do. Is it her bleak humour, her easiness when talking about human failings (there are no blushes in this book)? Does her use of pop culture and clichĂ© chime with our TV and film and rock music filled heads?
Contextual criticism
Contextual criticism adds further layers to the more mathematical and emotional responses described so far. It leads us to take other things into consideration when studying a poet. Unless the criticism is blind, you are going to have some background â youâll know the poetâs gender, approximate age, if they are still alive, and maybe where they come from, what prizes they have won and if they have a âproper jobâ (most unlikely).
The thinking behind âcontextual criticismâ is that what we know about a poetâs life, background, interests and influences will help shape our enjoyment and understanding of their work. Some poets hate this, but letâs run with it. Reading up on the poet you are writing an essay or exam answer on can be very helpful. With Duffy, itâs confusing though. Sheâs Scottish, right? Maybe. Irish parents, grew up in Scotland, moved to England while young. Scratching your head? Just write down something about âconfused identityâ and youâre on the right track â itâs there in the poems (see âNever Go Backâ, âStafford Afternoonsâ, two of the bookâs best). And sheâs gay? Well, this book was apparently written at a time when she was beginning her first long-term partnership with another woman, but her work contains poems about love and sex with men and women.
Other contextual considerations might include influences and genre â Duffyâs work has evident connections to the work done by Liz Lochhead in the mid 70s to mid 80s and, like Lochhead, her work has an implicit connection to monologue and performance. Never seen Duffy read? Oh, you must. Sheâs fabulous. Think of Mean Time less as a book, more as a record of a bravura performance.
If you can find a way of mixing these ways of looking at poetry from the angles of text, emotion and contextual knowledge, youâll find yourself producing more original and more personal responses to the work you are studying. No more gazing at the blank page, chewing the biro â learn to say what you think in three different ways and itâs three times as easy. To guess better. At least.
This article first appeared in emagazine 17 September 2002
Ytext/htmlUUTF-8Tview 1 3 <