Blog Post Week 6

Secretaries: Lilly Loftin, Claire Williams, Brittany Rosenthal and Leah Filloy

Starting with a short review of our last class we began the discussion with elements of the epic, form, and context. We considered our own epic and what form it might take, the coordinates, details of our own culture, the style and shape it would take and so on.

This exercise was extremely helpful because later in the class we delve into our reading for the week. Looking at Gwendolyn Brook’s work and using the  framework of these questions to further the understanding of the piece, at one point in our discussion it was said that “tradition of the epic that was never hers” and “the juxtaposition of what her experience be as a Black female” which is particularly interesting and sad. However, her unique individual experience is lived out through her work which can bring us back a question that we talked about earlier in the term, “why write” “why this form. Especially in the context of Brook her piece is extraordinarily important to implement these questions. The form of her work was cut short (in even a physical manner) and her work speaks truth into an experience that is not heard.

There was a brief part of our discussion in which the term “voyeur” was discussed and whether or not it could be applied to Whitman or at least the speaker in “Song of Myself.” Ultimately it was decided that because the poem did not seem to be conveying a sense of privacy, it was decided that “voyeur” was not quite the right term. I believe this point is solidified by Whitman’s frequent use of “we” and by the grand scale of his poem, which raises the question of whether or not the protagonist in an epic can be a voyeur. It seems the two are at odds, as literature that feels voyeuristic tends to focus rather intimately on a subject while, even if the cosmos of an epic is small, it still feels vast, never claustrophobic. Additionally, to me, voyeurism requires intense scrutiny and interpretation of a stranger, and both in ancient epics and in the more modern epics, while we may stop and look at certain characters briefly, they seem to be presented factually and rather generally.

This week we discussed how the idea of what makes up an epic is constantly changing through time. Last week as we analyzed the literary classic epics: The Odyssey by Homer, The Aeneid by Virgil, and Metamorphosis by Ovid, we concluded on some factors that seem to be essential to epic’s formation and creation. The form usually suggests that epics are lengthy narrative poems including supernatural forces from the heavens, the gods, and the underworld. It consists of a heroic figure fulfilling a journey back home or to the place of destination in order to achieve what was promised. Historical events usually are included to support the fact that these epics are the most wonderfully ever done. And of course, very important part of the epics is the way women are projected under the heroic figures of men; it is an invocation to the Muse for inspiration in the telling of a story. This week we read Song of Myself (1892) version by American poet, Walt Whitman. As we discussed in further closer the first three cantos, we were able to notice how Whitman changed a little the perspective of where epics are supposed to be heading.

“I celebrate myself, and sing myself,

And what I assume you shall assume,

For every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you.” (Whitman 1. 1-3)

This quote already suggests that Whitman does not need a muse to for his epic when he has himself and his readers. He suggests that his epic has no beginning or end, instead, it is a journey within his own boundaries of what constitutes his life. As we continued with other modern epics: Amor America by Pablo Neruda and The Annaid by Gwendolyn Brooks, we were able to compare and contrasts the classical epics to the modern approach suggested by these writers.

A source for disagreement in the class this week was the concept of humility or arrogance portrayed in Song of Myself. As well as with members of this group showing a fun disagreement in the interpretation of the text. Some believed Walt Whitman to express his thoughts in a way to be very open to his lack of knowledge others believed he views himself as above everyone just a bit. For example in connote 24 he uses his name!

Walt Whitman, a kosmos, of Manhattan the son,

Turbulent, fleshy, sensual, eating, drinking and breeding,

No sentimentalist, no stander above men and women or apart from them,

No more modest than immodest. (Whitman 24. 1-4)

Although in another part of the text he expresses how the reader should not think about the dead author or their writing. We are reading his writing after he is dead and he mentions his name in it to keep that on the forefront of our minds.

Questions for Next Week –

Next week we will be ready The ODY-C which is indeed a modern approach to that of the classical epics, how is another version of The Odyssey going to compare and contrast to Whitman, Brooks and Neruda and to Ovid, Virgil and Homer? Do you find the range of interpretation to be greater with detailed and vibrant artwork or in lengthy poetry? How does the epic give value in the visual as well as the written imagination?

 

Bibliography

Whitman, Walt. Song of Myself (1892 Version).Poetry Foundation, Poetry Foundation, www.poetryfoundation.org/poems-and-poets/poems/detail/45477. Accessed 11 May 2017. Canto 1, 1-3.