The World is Too Much With Us

This poem by William Wordsworth reflects the attitudes of Romanticism mainly by rejecting classical forms and beliefs and praising the beauty of nature. During the Renaissance and Restoration, people did not see nature as something of great importance. People did not see the beauty in nature, but during the Romantic period poets wrote about the unity between nature and humans. In this poem William Wordsworth discusses how people are ignoring the beauty of nature and he is criticizing it. He writes that as a society "we lay waste our powers". He means that they have all of this beautiful nature right in front of them, but they waste their ability to see it because they live such busy lives. He goes on to describe the beauty in nature. For example, he says the "sea bares her bosom to the moon". He personifies the sea by giving it a human characteristic. Not only is it a human characteristic, but the word bosom promotes the idea of beauty to people. This is so intelligent because people can identify with that idea, even though now it describes the sea. Wordsworth goes on to say that for ignoring this great beauty "we are out of tune". Instead of writing about something heroic or a great achievement of a noble man, Wordsworth writes about something to be frowned upon. The poem does not bring about inspiration or excitement, but rather is a bit of a disappointment. This poem fits right in to the historical context of the Romantic period. The Industrial Revolution began and urbanization occurred. Wordsworth noticed that with all the hustle and bustle people payed little attention to the beauty of nature that was in fact disappearing due to urbanization. This literary piece reflects the themes and attitudes of Romanticism as it criticizes the modern society for failing to see the beauty of nature. It rejects the former topics of poetry during the Renaissance and Restoration and instead focuses on a problem of the society and the beauty of nature that is being ignored.

Satirical Article

http://www.theonion.com/articles/report-14-trillion-spent-annually-on-trying-to-loo,17125/

This article is both satirical and humorous in that it criticizes the way the vast majority Americans choose to spend their money and makes fun of their decision. This article points out that the American people spend 14 trillion dollars annually on trying to "look cool". Looking cool is defined in this article as "the outward projection of an appealing and often enviable image of oneself that others perceive as requiring little to no effort. It points out that Americans spend more money on material things such as sneakers or sunglasses rather than cancer research, doctor visits, and childcare. It is incredible how much people are concerned about their appearance and how people perceive them and how little people pay attention to the bigger problems in this world and country specifically. With this 14 trillion dollars we could solve the problem of poverty or cure numerous deadly diseases. Instead Americans are only concerned with themselves and "looking cool" which is most often failed at by the American people anyway. That is the most funny part about the whole story. Americans want to look cool so they choose to spend 14 trillion dollars per year on "cool" accessories, and still end up in the same place after each year, not satisfied with their appearance. It is an endless cycle of wasted money when numerous important issues could be solved. After seeing reading this satirical piece, it is quite funny to now realize that Americans are accomplishing nothing at all with 14 trillion dollars while there are still countless important problems yet to be solved.

"If Poisonous Minerals"

In John Donne's If poisonous Minerals, the tone or attitude shifts from the beginning of the poem to the end. At the beginning of the poem, John Donne's speaker has a demanding, judgmental, and insubordinate tone. He is questioning why many bad things in this world, such as poisonous minerals, do not ever get punished for anything, but he does. Poisonous minerals are lethal and therefore are essentially committing murder when somebody consumes them, but there are no consequences for them. But, if he kills somebody and commits murder he will be greatly punished, because it is a sin. Another example that John Donne uses is an allusion to the story of Adam and Eve in Genesis. He says, "if that tree whose fruit threw death on else immortal us." By this he means that the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge is responsible for the downfall of humanity. If that tree did not exist then humans would be perfect, without sin, and be immortal. But, even though that tree caused this terrible thing, or the entering of sin into the world, there are no consequences for it as there are for humans who commit "bad things". In this first part the speaker is being disrespectful to authority and questioning God when really he has no reason to do this because he is inferior to God. In this part he is also not talking directly to God, but he is speaking about him in the third person. It is almost like he is talking about God behind his back. Then in the second part of the poem, there is a change of attitude by the speaker. This is where the tone shift occurs. He says, "But who am I, that dare dispute with thee, O God?" Now he recognizes that he has no right or reason to be questioning his creator. He also changes from speaking about God in the third person and now he is talking directly to God like a prayer. This is called an apostrophe because he is directly talking to somebody in the poem. This also makes it seem more personal. He then makes reference to a Lethean flood and asks God to drown his sins in it so they can be forgotten. This second part can be described in one word by remorse. He feels bad about all the sins he has committed and is asking for forgiveness. In the final two lines of the poem, the poet not only asks God to forget about his sins, but he is asking God to completely forget about him completely. The tone shifts from an insubordinate and demanding attitude, to one of remorse, and finally to one that seems almost hopeless as he asks God to completely forget about him.

"There is no frigate like a book"

The poem "There is no frigate like a book" by Emily Dickinson uses two main literary devices that add to its effect and help to accomplish its purpose. That purpose is to honor or acknowledge the power that a book has and the adventures on which it can take the reader. The important literary devices that Emily Dickinson makes use of in this poem are denotation and connotation and figurative language. In the first few line she uses both of these tools. It says, "There is no frigate like a book to take us lands away." This is a simile because she is comparing two unlike things, a book and a frigate using the word like. Dickinson could have used many different words instead of frigate that mean some type of boat or ship. For example, ship, yacht, canoe, and raft all could have been used by Dickinson. But, she picked frigate because the connotation of the word is perfect to describe the nature of a book. A frigate literally means a naval vessel or ship. That implies that it is something adventurous, just like a book is. Also, a frigate can pretty much go anywhere and with one order from the admiral it could be headed to the other side of the world. This is just like how a book can take the reader anywhere in the universe with the flip of a page. Frigates also serve a very specific purpose, to protect the country. Many books have a specific purpose to them as well. The comparisons or relationships between a frigate and a book are endless which is exactly why Dickinson chooses that word. Later in the poem Dickinson uses another comparison, a metaphor, to describe a book. It reads, "How frugal is the chariot that bears the human soul!" The main focus of these two lines is the word chariot. Dickinson could have stuck with her comparison between a book and a frigate, but instead she changes it this time. This is so she can cover land as well as sea. Books can take the reader anywhere and between the chariot and the frigate there is really no place that is not covered. The chariot also implies something adventurous and majestic and also for the most part has a specific purpose, just like a book does. Emily Dickinson uses figurative language to compare a book to things that at first glance seem completely unrelated. But, after thinking about the connotations of her words such as frigate and chariot, the reader is able to truly understand her thoughts and experience the adventures that can be found in a book.

"The Man He Killed"

Thomas Hardy's work "The Man He Killed" is one that engages the reader and causes the reader to think about what its words mean. This poem involves the thoughts of a soldier who had enlisted in the army and killed another man. Thomas Hardy's words allows the reader to experience the same feeling as this soldier was having. Instead of looking at war from far away, or in other words just the idea that two countries are fighting with one another, Hardy looks at the actual people that are being affected and killed. He questions the legitimacy of war by examining two men and questioning why one dies but not the other when they are both essentially equal. At the beginning of the poem, Hardy describes what the relationship between the two men would have been if they were not at war against one another. He says that if they had met at an inn, "We should have set us down to wet". This means that they would have sat down at a bar together and had a good time together, instead of being enemies. Then, later he says, "And staring face to face, I shot him as he at me." The line in which he says they both stared at each other suggests that these two men might have some sort of connection. As it turns out these men are in very similar situations. But, because they are at war and enemies just because their respective countries are fighting, they must fire at each other even though they personally do not have anything against each other. The next stanza shows how the killer tries to justify what he has done because on the inside he feels guilty. He says "I shot him dead because-", but then he does not finish the sentence. This is because he has no legitimate reason to kill this man. He goes on and tries to convince himself that this man was his "foe". Of course this is no reason to kill a man because they have never even met. There is no way he can be his foe, other than the fact that he belongs to a different country. This is incredible poetry by Hardy because he captures the feeling of guilt in al humans. Anyone would feel guilty after killing a man so they must justify their action with something. In the next stanza Hardy compares the two man and it is clear that they are both in similar situations. They were both poor and probably hard working men because they were both out of work. The other man had just sold his traps to make a little money. This just strengthens the fact that neither man deserves to die in war. Here are these two hard working poor men that get sent off to war. One of them lives and the other dies at war. The last stanza questions the curiousness of war. He says "You shoot a fellow down you'd treat, if met where any bar is." He means that in war people shoot each other that under other circumstances outside of war might sit down at a bar together and befriend one another. In other words, it is not the two men that have anything against each other, but war puts these men in a situation where they have no choice but to kill one another. This work by Thomas Hardy really caused me to think about the irrationality of war and how so many people lose their lives for illegitimate reasons. He is able to accomplish this feeling just by the words and punctuation that he has evidently mastered.