As I walk from class I've continued to think about the poem and specifically the role of an environmentalist poet. Does such a position necessitate some degree of poetic hubris? That is, since nature has no voice and is, especially during the IR, abstracted and objectified, then perhaps it is necessary to enhance the description to level the playing field?
'
Based on a conversation with Professor Porter, I believe there is, in fact, a disconnect between WW the poet and WW the ecologist/political activist. After my first few reads, it seemed as though WW was elevating the importance of the natural world so as to equally compare it to the burgeoning economy. I now, however, don't believe this to be the case. By adding the second stanza he may be cutting his argument at the knees. Nature is not the economy. Nor is it relateable to the IR. In fact, an ecological argument would seemingly contrast the two so as to illuminate the benefits of the natural. Therefore, I would tend to agree w/ Cole's argument from class that WW's "I wander" is hollow.
I mean, I personally think the poem is a bit hollow and corny, yea, but there must be a reason that so many people know this poem and so many people are taught this poem at some point in their academic careers. I know every poetry class I've been in we've read this poem. I know it's a good example of the sentimentality of the romance genre of poetry. I still wonder why this poem is so famous and others that I think are much more original or thought-provoking aren't.
ReplyDeleteHonestly, I believe that, since this poem is so hallow and not thought-provoking, it does serve as a good staple for romantic poetry. It is obviously written in a romantic style: about a natural theme and with fancy adjectives to beautify the piece. Thus, classes are able to display such a piece in their curriculum without worrying about any deep, underlying meanings, because this poem has none! Students are able to focus on the structure and dynamics of the poem and not delve too deeply into the philosophical side of it (if it even has one).
ReplyDelete