Friday, October 9, 2009
Week 6 - The Sonnet
Friday, September 25, 2009
Week 4 - The Faerie Queene
Friday, September 18, 2009
Week 3 - Queen Elizabeth
First from a purely literary standpoint, Ralegh's poetry is clearly superior. I am not someone who likes poetry, nor am I one who has a mastery of poetry in general, however Walter Ralegh is an accomplished poet who I had even heard of. Admittedly there is some bias in my judge of Ralegh as the better poet. He uses a concise style of poetry with little complex adornment that gets straight to the point. Elizabeth on the other hand is clearly mimicking Renaissance poetry with her style, which her mastery of is questionable. Her response feels more like that of a high school student imitating other poets. She fails to display that mastery of the art of crafting words that signifies a talented poet. This is not to take away from Queen Elizabeth, she was an amazingly smart women trained for the throne, however poetry is not her strong suit.
On the other hand, in class many expressed the opinion that Elizabeth was the clear victor in this exchange. This view is supported by the practical issue of power. Elizabeth's power over Ralegh was twofold. First as a Queen she was controller of all of England, someone who could put her enemies to death on a whim. Elizabeth fully understands this power and her regal attitude leaks into the tone she uses to address Ralegh. The other aspect of her power is purely sexual. Ralegh's desire for Elizabeth places him in a position of supplication which Elizabeth plays with in her writing. So wile Ralegh's writing is in itself superior to Elizabeth's, the real roles of power play a clear effect in determining that Elizabeth got the better of the exchange with Ralegh.
Friday, September 11, 2009
Week 2 - Utopia: More to love
Utopia, written by Saint Thomas More, details the account of a fantastic island whose practices were unlike those of any other land. The practices of this society echo sentiments of liberals, communists, feminists, environmentalists and many others. However, it is not the details of this land which motivate my own interest. Rather, I am intrigued by the question of what was More attempting to achieve with this story? I think to take Utopia as merely a fanciful story or a direct representation of More's own ideals would both be too simplistic. I will attempt to provide evidence here as to why I find these to explanations to be lacking.
First, Utopia is a work of fiction and, as such, it is reasonable to start at that point to try to understand it. Yet by looking at the work of Utopia as a whole as well as the manner it was written makes this opinion untenable. Book II of Utopia is what most readers would think of when Utopia is mentioned. It is this second book which details Utopia and its customs. To overlook Book I when trying to interpret More's reason's for writing Utopia would be foolhardy. Book I details the character Thomas More meeting Rapheal Hythloday, the traveler who tells More about Utopia. More and this traveler engage in a discussion which cannot be interpreted as mere fiction, with talk ranging from capital punishment, the place of philosophy in government, and the best way to counsel a king. This dialogue is more in line with works of philosophical discourse than with general fiction. The other fact which makes me hesitant to believe that More meant this to be read as mere fiction is that More wrote Utopia in Latin. Latin is a language of science and education, not one used to appeal to a mass audience. It would not make sense to write a book of fiction in a language no one could read. These two reasons both lead me to believe that More did not intend for Utopia to be read as a typical work of fiction.
The second position which I wish to disprove starts at the other end of the spectrum from the last. Namely that Utopia is an expression of More's own ideals which he wishes to bring about by promoting them. However, by looking at More as a person as well as the manner in which he talks about Utopia would disagree with this premise. Saint Thomas More was a devout Catholic, being killed for his refusal to acknowledge what would become the Anglican Church. As such, I find it hard to believe that More would advocate for a society with married and female priests, divorce, and religious toleration of all faiths. These are just of a few practices of Utopia which seem to jar with the Thomas More depicted by history. The other reason for doubting that the views espoused in Utopia reflect More's own beliefs is how More talks about Utopia. If More was actually supporting the practices of Utopia I would expect him to explain how Utopia developed into what it had become or why it's practices were better than those found in Europe. Instead More's descriptions often border on a satirical tone rather than those of someone attempting to promote their own ideals.
I'm already running long so I'm going to end with a mere statement of my own theory of why More wrote Utopia. This was likely a thought experiment which came from More's own dislike of the current society. More traveled as a diplomat and was able to see aspects of other nations, giving him a broader view of the state of European society than others. By writing Utopia in Latin More was talking to the educated in society, those in the social circles who could do affect public policy. In writing Utopia More was likely attempting to spark more discussion and thought about social issues. More went beyond what he himself thought of as "right" simply to spark greater discussion about policies. This is a simple technique of expressing something more provocative in order to begin discussion which would lead to a correct answer. The End.