Poem for the month! Some AP practice...

As the AP Literature Exam date get closer, my anxiety in regards to the poem free response question increase. In light of solving my anxiety problem, for this blog, I have decided to take an old AP Exam poem prompt and analyze it in 30 min. I choose to do the 2006 AP Exam poem prompt; Here is a link: http://apcentral.collegeboard.com/apc/public/repository/_ap06_frq_englishlit_51753.pdf

And my time starts now (tick toc tick toc):

Most humans wish or dream to control their world (to be the center of it); most human wish perhaps to make no mistakes, to sore heights, to be perfectionist. most humans wish time was in their hands and their lives were directed by the time they gave themselves. The poem, “Evening Hawk,” by Robert Penn Warren displays humanities hope of controlling time as a weakness that holds them back to conquer the heights. Nonetheless, the speaker indicates that nature is not only the most powerful source that drives humanity, but is so powerful that it can not be touched, nor framed to fit one’s need. The poem portrays a naturalistic view on mankind’s vulnerability to hold a position like a “hawk.”

The poem begins with a vivid description of the hawk, although, the speaker does not indicate that it is his hawk he is speaking out till the end. This use of suspense questions the reader as to who the subject of the poem may be. The details in this first stanza, are very grandiose- all depicting some object powerful and big- of great impact. For example in line 4, the author states “The last tumultuous avalanche of/ Light above the pines and guttural gorge.” First of all, the adjectives tumultuous and guttural connotate to loud and powerful noises, almost that of a thunder. The use of the words avalanche and gorge depict a being greater than the average human being- perhaps god, but later we find that all this noise that was made was just by a hawks arrival, as he states in line 6- “The hawk comes.” The powerful adjectives along with the thunderous descriptions are important to note and he frames the hawk as a individual that can make a difference, one that has the ability to control all. The hawk may symbolize a higher being such as god, but in reality, the speaker is describing the inner ego of a man.

The next stanza refers to his wings symbolizing man’s hands or arms that are used as a source of manipulation. Note that at the end of this second stanza he states that “The crashless fall of stalks of Time.” This relates to line 11 when he states that “Who knows neither Time nor error.” Technically, what the speaker is saying is that man tries to ignore what natures real time is and tries to make his own, when in reality, nature is the real verdict over such.

Hamlet Discussion- Class Poster Response

Hamlet can be interpreted through many frames- whether it is Hamlet as the fool, Hamlet as the savior, or Hamlet as the Villain, he is never just one of these. What made me really interested was the discussion over Hamlet as the “fool.” When looking up the archetype of a fool, I found these characteristics: one that has comic relief, enjoys making a crowd laugh, very cynical, ignores social boundaries, and most importantly- acts absurdly. This absurd behavior roots from the “antic disposition” he will put upon; he states: “As I perchance hereafter shall think meet/ To put an antic disposition on” (187-188). Matter of fact, these all express the very clever Hamlet.  Although, whenever I think of the word “fool,” I think negative and silly, hence for the purpose of the debate or discussion I framed Hamlet as the “con man.” It is interesting to note that a con man has everything that a fool has, but is just risky and multifaceted- oh look, just like Hamlet. Take for example Hamlet’s current behavior; from the inside, he dreads his fathers deaths and wants to take revenge over Claudius, but he must put on a show to society in order to hide his intentions. So technically, he is “conning” society, nonetheless, turning them into fools as well. Often times though, we think that con men or fools are bad, when in reality they could be good- either an antagonist or protagonist. What is Hamlet? From Act 1 to Act 4 (what we have read thus far) he seems as if both. The protagonist Hamlet is trying to do his duty of taking revenge over his fathers murder (what the ghost told him to do) whereas antagonist Hamlet is the crazy, mad, fake being that actually manipulates society so he can fill his duty. “O cursed spite/ That ever I was born to set it right!” (202-204).  This selfishness (and self-fulfillment he is so obsessed with) is the root cause of why I think he can be an antagonist. He is not aware that he is hurting others, but in reality, he was done much damage to the kingdom. Starting with Ophelia’s restlessness, to the King’s and arousal, to friendship manipulation, and ending with the unintended death of Polonius. Therefore, Hamlet is an Antagonistic con man unknowingly.   In Fact, he thinks he is opposite the devil- almost god like: “ I’ll have these players/ Play something like the murder of my father/ Before mine uncle…Assume a pleasing shape” (613-615). In Hamlet's mind he is the center of the world has the ability to “shape” or control. Hence, we can see him as the “writer, actor, and director- destinies creator- god. What is ironic though is that Hamlet wants society to be real, and the actors to be real, when in reality, those are the ones that are the least moral. In scene ii of Act 3, he states that “suit the action to the word, the word to the action, with this special observance, that/ you o’erstep not the modesty of nature” ( 12-15). Such statement enhances Hamlet’s ironic disposition throughout the play of “seeming vs. ising.” All in all, Hamlet can be characterized through many lights.

Hamlet's Soliloquy - To be or not to be? hmmmm

Throughout  the poem Hamlet, the multiple façades of man are used  promote truth and honesty, more so, uncover a mystery (Hamlet's true feelings). Why Hamlet's feelings remain enclosed within his intelligent mind is for the revenge of his father...but it is more than this. After his father's murder, can he trust anyone?  Act III, scene  i, builds upon this motif of trust and the dismissal from society to remain true to himself and his father. It is also to find himself, and  be in the "Dragon" and discover his purpose in life- should he live to seek his father's revenge or should he live to die and possibly be in a place of hell after death? Hence, the "To be or not to be" (line 62) speech shows the self questioning he must go through in order to answer a simple, yet complex question. Thus, the speech exhibits shaper like qualities from Grendel- what is the meaning of life? Now from the soliloquy, as he his questioning his duty in life, he wonders whether or not there is a point to living- should he commit suicide. Going back into the texts, this relates to Hamlet's words when he says" That this too solid flesh would melt/ That, and resolve itself into a dew/ Or that the everlasting had not fix'd/ His canon 'gainst self-slaughter! O God." What he is saying here is that death forcefully or suicide is against God's wishes and destroying God's gift is a sin. Notice that he view's God above him, and hence his decisions are based on pleasing this higher being, avoid any troubles that he must face from the curses of this higher being- God. Now, the soliloquy also faces such dilemma of death, contemplating "to be or not to be" aka do I live or not? Is it my duty (again the motif of duty arises!) to carry this burden of revenge? What I question  through this is the noun "that we know  not of". Who is Hamlet referring to when he says that man flies to whom he does not know? This could go either way- fly to heaven with the Gods, or Hell with the demons...but either way, man tries to escape the reality. To me, this whole soliloquy is based on the fact that he must, as a son, take revenge. Therefore, he states that "Than fly to others that we know not of?/ Thus conscience does make cowards of us all." This pretty much states that what defines men is our ability to just leave a situation without trying to resolve a conflict or perform the duty that is bided with the conflict. Nonetheless, because all men do such a thing, they are all "cowards." Just the mere thought we must escape from this life (take the easy route) makes man a whimp. The tone of his soliloquy is powerful yet frightened as seen at the end when he says "Be all my sins remember'd." At first he debates the need to take such revenge, and  now he says that he has committed sins in the pat, therefore to avoid that (the fear or evil and hell) he will do such thing. 

Much Madness is divinest sense- Poem Analysis

Much madness is divinest sense 
By: Emily Dickinson 

Much madness is divinest sense
To a discerning eye,
Much sense, the starkest madness.
’Tis the majority
In this, as all, prevail:
Assent, and you are sane;
Demur, you’re straightway dangerous
And handled with a chain.

This poem advocates a thought, that to most humans, our normal society, would deem as odd and different. The jist of lines revolves around the fact that madness is the pure essence of truth, the driving force of introspection and realism. Hence discovering one's inner self is fostered by the insanity. Madness roots are part of all our sense- it is a universal calling of self questioning and discovery. 

Note that through the poem, "madness" is neither physical anger nor the state of a psychological disorder, rather it is the uncovering of oneself, which can be tiresome and gruesome, also painful, hence the "madness." This madness also has another denotation, that is struggle. To find ones self, is often a struggle due to the plethora of thoughts that one must organize and make sense of. Hence the poem concentrates on this meaning of madness and its role within the mind- it is a positive type of madness. 

There are many symbols in the poem, first stating with the "eye. The "eye" or the being that wishes to see what a normal human struggles with must face madness. Those with a "discerning eye" are often proposed as the wise and clever, justifying their "madness." Often, as a society so obsessed with the normal actions and behavior, calls these clever people "mad" or "crazy" mistakenly. Insanity is the root of or basis of sanity. The eye can also represent a new source of light, that enters through the pupil. When we are sane, or too calm, we often bypass or are blind to the real essence of our existence...indulging in the material rather than the mind. Hence the eye, or the inner light of the mind is lost. Once we break out of this sanity, sometimes becoming insane, we can see the inner mind more clearly and analyze our stance as humans. 

The essence of life is fostered by the real madness that prevails in all, yet is hidden, or "bare in appearance". The sheerness of such madness is the majority. Thus we are concealed within the sanity of preservation of our normality that we lack an understanding of thy true self. We fear insanity only constitutes lack of understanding and has no need in a humans life. When one believes that they are "mad," they have experienced the pure essence of sanity. Without this realization, one hinders their ability to reconcile and handle life; nonetheless the face "danger"- they are trapped by a chain (this chain being the initial thoughts of sanity rather than madness). Breaking away from sanity is a positive thing as it helps uncover the underlying thoughts that itch to come out in the form of insanity. Once they are out, the mind is free.