William Blake was a poet, a painter, and a print maker. The 19th century scholar William Rossetti characterised Blake as a "glorious luminary," and as "a man not forestalled by predecessors, nor to be classed with contemporaries, nor to be replaced by known or readily surmisable successors."I chose William Blake as his poems are enjoyable to read. His poems are very symbolical and are usually religious. He was also thought to be insane by many of his close friends in his later years!
William Blake was a very religious person. His poems have religious themes in them, probably the most obvious one would be "The Lamb" from Blake's "Songs of Innocence"
Little lamb, who made thee?
Dost thou know who made thee?
Gave thee life, and bid thee feed
By the stream and o'er the mead;
Gave thee clothing of delight,
Softest clothing, woolly, bright;
Gave thee such a tender voice,
Making all the vales rejoice?
Little lamb, who made thee?
Dost thou know who made thee?
Little lamb, I'll tell thee,
Little lamb, I'll tell thee:
He is called by thy name,
For He calls Himself a Lamb.
He is meek, and He is mild;
He became a little child.
I a child, and thou a lamb,
We are called by His name.
Little lamb, God bless thee!
Little lamb, God bless thee!
On the day of his death, he stopped working and decided to draw a portrait of his wife, who had "been an angel to [him]". Having completed this portrait, Blake laid down his tools and began to sing hymns and verses.
It is not difficult to admire his work. For example, many of us have probably heard of "The Tyger" by now.
Tyger! Tyger! burning bright
In the forests of the night,
What immortal hand or eye
Could frame thy fearful symmetry?
In what distant deeps or skies
Burnt the fire of thine eyes?
On what wings dare he aspire?
What the hand dare sieze the fire?
And what shoulder, & what art.
Could twist the sinews of thy heart?
And when thy heart began to beat,
What dread hand? & what dread feet?
What the hammer? what the chain?
In what furnace was thy brain?
What the anvil? what dread grasp
Dare its deadly terrors clasp?
When the stars threw down their spears,
And watered heaven with their tears,
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the Lamb make thee?
Tyger! Tyger! burning bright
In the forests of the night,
What immortal hand or eye
Dare frame thy fearful symmetry?
The poem is actually about the tiger. William Blake did not make a spelling mistake, he just wanted to make it sound more...mysterious. This seems to be the opposite of the poem "The Lamb". They are from two different books. "The Lamb" is from the "Songs of Innocence", while "The Tyger" is from the "songs of experience".
Another poem by William Blake I like is "The Land of Dreams"
Awake, awake my little Boy!
Thou wast thy Mother's only joy:
Why dost thou weep in thy gentle sleep?
Awake! thy Father does thee keep.
"O, what land is the Land of Dreams?
What are its mountains, and what are its streams?
O Father, I saw my Mother there,
Among the lillies by waters fair.
Among the lambs clothed in white
She walked with her Thomas in sweet delight.
I wept for joy, like a dove I mourn -
O when shall I return again?
"Dear child, I also by pleasant streams
Have wandered all night in the Land of Dreams;
But though calm and warm the waters wide,
I could not get to the other side.
"Father, O Father, what do we here,
In this land of unbelief and fear?
The Land of Dreams is better far
Above the light of the Morning Star."
And yet another peom by William Blake, "The Clod and the Pebble".
"Love seeketh not itself to please,
Nor for itself hath any care,
But for another gives its ease,
And builds a heaven in hell's despair."
So sung a little Clod of Clay,
Trodden with the cattle's feet,
But a Pebble of the brook
Warbled out these metres meet:
"Love seeketh only Self to please,
To bind another to its delight,
Joys in another's loss of ease,
And builds a hell in heaven's despite."
How are these three peoms? "The Tyger", "The Land of Dreams", and "The Clod and the Pebble".
Monday, June 29, 2009
Sunday, June 28, 2009
The School Boy
The School Boy by William Blake
I love to rise in a summer morn,
When the birds sing on every tree;
The distant huntsman winds his horn,
And the sky-lark sings with me.
O! what sweet company.
But to go to school in a summer morn,
O! it drives all joy away;
Under a cruel eye outworn.
The little ones spend the day,
In sighing and dismay.
Ah! then at times I drooping sit,
And spend many an anxious hour,
Nor in my book can I take delight,
Nor sit in learnings bower,
Worn thro' with the dreary shower.
How can the bird that is born for joy,
Sit in a cage and sing.
How can a child when fears annoy.
But droop his tender wing.
And forget his youthful spring.
O! father & mother if buds are nip'd,
And blossoms blown away,
And if the tender plants are strip'd
Of their joy in the springing day,
By sorrow and care's dismay.
How shall the summer arise in joy.
Or the summer fruits appear.
Or how shall we gather what griefs destroy
Or bless the mellowing year.
When the blasts of winter appear.
This poem seems to use lots of hyperbole, to emphasise on the point that preceeds it. For example, "But to go to school in a summer morn,/O! it drives all joy away". Here, William Blake is exaggerating on the school boy's reluctance to go to school on a lovely "summer morn". Other examples of hyperbole are:
"When the birds sing on every tree;"
"The little ones spend the day,/In sighing and dismay."
Now to move on to metaphors
"How can the bird that is born for joy,/Sit in a cage and sing."
I'm pretty sure this is a metaphor. It relates the child to a bird, and school to a cage. The school boy does not want to go willingly into a cage, to learn to "sing" when he was "born for joy".
"Ah! then at times I drooping sit,"
This relates the school boy to a wilting plant. The bored boy sits, slouching on his table, is compared to a weak plant that desperately needs nourishment.
"O! father & mother if buds are nip'd,
And blossoms blown away,
And if the tender plants are strip'd
Of their joy in the springing day,
By sorrow and care's dismay.
How shall the summer arise in joy.
Or the summer fruits appear.
Or how shall we gather what griefs destroy
Or bless the mellowing year.
When the blasts of winter appear. "
This whole stanza should be a metaphor.
Here, school is the wind, blowing away the blossoms and nipping at the bud, instead of letting them drop naturally. How can the "Summer fruits" appear this way?
I like this peom because I can relate to it, being a student. It explains every student's hatred of school and gives them a good reason not to. Jokes aside, This poem is also beautiful as it uses many examples of nature, especially the bird, as it relates best to a child and freedom. This poem is written by one of my favourite poets, William Blake, and I enjoy reading his other poems as well. This is one of his "innocence" poems and the school boy reflects that innocence well.
I love to rise in a summer morn,
When the birds sing on every tree;
The distant huntsman winds his horn,
And the sky-lark sings with me.
O! what sweet company.
But to go to school in a summer morn,
O! it drives all joy away;
Under a cruel eye outworn.
The little ones spend the day,
In sighing and dismay.
Ah! then at times I drooping sit,
And spend many an anxious hour,
Nor in my book can I take delight,
Nor sit in learnings bower,
Worn thro' with the dreary shower.
How can the bird that is born for joy,
Sit in a cage and sing.
How can a child when fears annoy.
But droop his tender wing.
And forget his youthful spring.
O! father & mother if buds are nip'd,
And blossoms blown away,
And if the tender plants are strip'd
Of their joy in the springing day,
By sorrow and care's dismay.
How shall the summer arise in joy.
Or the summer fruits appear.
Or how shall we gather what griefs destroy
Or bless the mellowing year.
When the blasts of winter appear.
This poem seems to use lots of hyperbole, to emphasise on the point that preceeds it. For example, "But to go to school in a summer morn,/O! it drives all joy away". Here, William Blake is exaggerating on the school boy's reluctance to go to school on a lovely "summer morn". Other examples of hyperbole are:
"When the birds sing on every tree;"
"The little ones spend the day,/In sighing and dismay."
Now to move on to metaphors
"How can the bird that is born for joy,/Sit in a cage and sing."
I'm pretty sure this is a metaphor. It relates the child to a bird, and school to a cage. The school boy does not want to go willingly into a cage, to learn to "sing" when he was "born for joy".
"Ah! then at times I drooping sit,"
This relates the school boy to a wilting plant. The bored boy sits, slouching on his table, is compared to a weak plant that desperately needs nourishment.
"O! father & mother if buds are nip'd,
And blossoms blown away,
And if the tender plants are strip'd
Of their joy in the springing day,
By sorrow and care's dismay.
How shall the summer arise in joy.
Or the summer fruits appear.
Or how shall we gather what griefs destroy
Or bless the mellowing year.
When the blasts of winter appear. "
This whole stanza should be a metaphor.
Here, school is the wind, blowing away the blossoms and nipping at the bud, instead of letting them drop naturally. How can the "Summer fruits" appear this way?
I like this peom because I can relate to it, being a student. It explains every student's hatred of school and gives them a good reason not to. Jokes aside, This poem is also beautiful as it uses many examples of nature, especially the bird, as it relates best to a child and freedom. This poem is written by one of my favourite poets, William Blake, and I enjoy reading his other poems as well. This is one of his "innocence" poems and the school boy reflects that innocence well.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
What is happiness?
Happiness is a state where you do not have to worry about anything at all. For example, a Primary 6 student after completing his PSLE should be happy. He knows that he has done his best and need not worry about his results what's more, he can enjoy the rest of the school term and the long holiday ahead without worrying about the next year. Besides, he should enjoy the rest of his Primary school life.
Some people say rich people are never happy, whereas poor people always are. I, for one, don't think so. Rich people need not worry about the next day, for their food, water and other necessities. Poor people, however, need to constantly worry throughout their entire life. They might lack the proper necessities like clean water and food, the worse-off ones might even have to worry for their life!
Happiness an only be temporary. Like other emotions, it is not permanant. This is probably why so many religions preach about heaven, where you would get eternal "happpiness"... if you behaved yourself. This means that many people would believe it as they want to look forward to something after their death, something which most people are afraid of.
Some people say rich people are never happy, whereas poor people always are. I, for one, don't think so. Rich people need not worry about the next day, for their food, water and other necessities. Poor people, however, need to constantly worry throughout their entire life. They might lack the proper necessities like clean water and food, the worse-off ones might even have to worry for their life!
Happiness an only be temporary. Like other emotions, it is not permanant. This is probably why so many religions preach about heaven, where you would get eternal "happpiness"... if you behaved yourself. This means that many people would believe it as they want to look forward to something after their death, something which most people are afraid of.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Should you criticise people or the opinions they have?
We should criticise people or the opinions they may have. This is so that they can learn from their mistakes which were pointed out and ssignificantly improve their opinion or themselves as a whole.Criticising proud people and their opinions can make them humble, causing the work they do to be of better quality. Criticising people who are in the wrong or have evil thoughts can make them think twice about doing something illegal.
Of course, criticising people can be harmful too.
Criticising people who are stressed out can make them break-apart. This is one of the main reasons that some people do not criticise people often. This, however, leads people to have a wrong impression about you, that you are weak and are easily overpowered. They would then take advantage of you. This is another reason why you should criticise others.
In working life, not criticising people can lead to your boss or superior thinking that you are either not interested in your job or that you have no opinion about the matter, both which would give him a bad impression about you.
Therefore, we should strive to criticise people whenever possible, as there would be good results in the long run.
Of course, criticising people can be harmful too.
Criticising people who are stressed out can make them break-apart. This is one of the main reasons that some people do not criticise people often. This, however, leads people to have a wrong impression about you, that you are weak and are easily overpowered. They would then take advantage of you. This is another reason why you should criticise others.
In working life, not criticising people can lead to your boss or superior thinking that you are either not interested in your job or that you have no opinion about the matter, both which would give him a bad impression about you.
Therefore, we should strive to criticise people whenever possible, as there would be good results in the long run.
Monday, June 8, 2009
If many people think something is true, is it true?
I'm sure you have heard the phrase "majority wins" being used repeatedly everywhere. This shows itself in voting, from presidential elections to just a group of people choosing what to do in their free time. But what I would be talking about is slightly different. Think of all the subjects that were tabooed throughout the world.
Not long ago, I did a post on the short story "The lottery". The story has a stoning incident, something which eventually got it boycotted throughout the world in its time. Normal people would be horrified at the story's outcome. Mrs. Hutchinson finally got stoned by her friends, with whom she was just talking and laughing with before the stoning. In fact, Mrs. Delacroix "selected a stone so large she had to pick it up with both hands." Even the victim's family joined in the stoning.
Notice that the story was banned throughout the world (the author also recieved lots of hate-mail). Why is this so? The public is horrified that the villagers kill one of their own people with no remorse whatsoever. They think that it is wrong, uncivilised, for people to do such things. Is it true? What about the small minority who thinks that it is not?
In life, we must look at both sides of things, see things from a different perspective. Why are people thinking in that way? There is no right answer. Usually, these conflicting opinions occur when there is a clash of cultures. Usually different cultures would cause different ways of thought. Religion is one of the key factors that cause this.
So, if many people think something is true, it is neither true nor false. It is the way you look at it that makes your opinion differ from others'.
Not long ago, I did a post on the short story "The lottery". The story has a stoning incident, something which eventually got it boycotted throughout the world in its time. Normal people would be horrified at the story's outcome. Mrs. Hutchinson finally got stoned by her friends, with whom she was just talking and laughing with before the stoning. In fact, Mrs. Delacroix "selected a stone so large she had to pick it up with both hands." Even the victim's family joined in the stoning.
Notice that the story was banned throughout the world (the author also recieved lots of hate-mail). Why is this so? The public is horrified that the villagers kill one of their own people with no remorse whatsoever. They think that it is wrong, uncivilised, for people to do such things. Is it true? What about the small minority who thinks that it is not?
In life, we must look at both sides of things, see things from a different perspective. Why are people thinking in that way? There is no right answer. Usually, these conflicting opinions occur when there is a clash of cultures. Usually different cultures would cause different ways of thought. Religion is one of the key factors that cause this.
So, if many people think something is true, it is neither true nor false. It is the way you look at it that makes your opinion differ from others'.
Sunday, June 7, 2009
I am lying. True or False?
I am sure you would have seen or at least heard of the above riddle. In actual fact, it is a paradox. For example, I cannot be lying as I would then be telling the truth. I also cannot be telling the truth as I would be lying. This actually makes the statement both true and false, (at least in my opinion) rather than just either one.
Take it in another way. Lets say, "This sentence is false". What this sentence means is that it is false. Its that simple. But the sentence says it is false, meaning that the sentence is also true.
Apparently this paradox is called the "liar paradox". It is explained by some using a "truth value", or the amount of truth that it has. (wikipedia)
This paradox can just be taken in another way. I can say "It is the truth. I am lying" In place of just "I am lying" this would be taken as that he was lying about himself telling the truth. Therefore, he is lying and there would not be any underlying paradox.
Besides, in the real world, when people say something, they usually mean it and probably, the person who started this paradox, actually did so unknowingly.
Take it in another way. Lets say, "This sentence is false". What this sentence means is that it is false. Its that simple. But the sentence says it is false, meaning that the sentence is also true.
Apparently this paradox is called the "liar paradox". It is explained by some using a "truth value", or the amount of truth that it has. (wikipedia)
This paradox can just be taken in another way. I can say "It is the truth. I am lying" In place of just "I am lying" this would be taken as that he was lying about himself telling the truth. Therefore, he is lying and there would not be any underlying paradox.
Besides, in the real world, when people say something, they usually mean it and probably, the person who started this paradox, actually did so unknowingly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)