Mr. Perrine has expressed the view that some interpretations of poetry are too "far-fetched" to be correct. I won't say that I disagree with that, necessarily. Rather, I would like to refer to this opinion as the "Hermione Viewpoint." Hermione Granger of the Harry Potter series is a terribly intelligent witch; indeed, Sirius Black once calls her the "cleverest witch of [her] age." However, she often finds herself at odds with another witch in the class behind hers who has what I would call a broader range of realities. That witch goes by the name of Luna "Loony" Lovegood, and it is worth noting that she, rather than Hermione, resides in the Ravenclaw dormitories, where "wit beyond measure is man's greatest treasure," whereas Gryffindors treasure daring, nerve and chivalry. My point is that if there is no way for a poet to describe exactly what he meant without limiting his work, then perhaps the reader should be allowed to interpret it as they see fit, as long as they have ample evidence for their beliefs. If the interpretation is particularly "far-fetched," the interpreter will have to work a bit harder, but that's what makes poetry so interesting, right?
For instance, I "misinterpreted" Melville's poem. I do indeed prefer the "correct" interpretation with the deeper questions and *coughpretentiouscough* metaphors, but why couldn't it simply be a poem about soldiers soldiering? Perrine goes on in his essay to say that William Blake's "The Sick Rose" has a broad base of interpretation. Would my interpretation, then, that the rose is a rosy apple, the worm's dark secret love, be correct? It seems a little ridiculous, in retrospect, which is probably because I did it in the wee hours of the morning, long after I should have been asleep, but it still seems logical enough to me. "The rose must always represent something beautiful or desirable or good. The worm must always be some kind of corrupting agent of youth," says Perrine. Apples are desirable to some people, I suppose, although personally, they make me itchy. Also, a worm is indisputably a worm. I don't know about "corrupting agent of youth;" that seems like sketchy phrasing.
hm...so you're saying the worm is literal, but the rose is symbolic?
ReplyDeleteI guess so.... It's not very consistent, but that was my first impression.
ReplyDeleteWoahwoahwoah, something crazy happened to the Richard Scarry picture. I'm going to fix that now.
ReplyDeleteI loved the Busy World of Richard Scarry when I was a wee one! I watched erry day. Blues' Clues is without a doubt its subordinate.
ReplyDeleteOooohh, I wouldn't go THAT far. Don't you remember the episode with the treasure at the end of the rainbow? It was right before Steve "went to college," i.e. joined a death metal band.
ReplyDelete