Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Poetry analysis paper
The poems ‘Eternal Devotion’ and ‘How You Do It’ by Wt. Bakelar and Labrina respectively, talk about the different ways the men treat their spouses. Bakelar’s poem talks about a couple who have been married for a very long period of time and how the man basically worships her. In Labrina’s poem, the boy breaks his girlfriend’s heart and yet has no guilty conscience. Through the way they treat their partners, their contrasting attitudes stand out. In this essay, I am mainly going to analyse the attitudes of the men from the different speakers’ point of view.
The attitude of the man in ‘Eternal Devotion’ is conveyed from the third person point of view. In ‘How You Do It’, the heart broken girl is the speaker and occasionally she refers to herself in the third person. The use of both the first and third person viewpoint allows us to know what both characters are thinking.
‘Eternal Devotion’ is a six-stanza poem with three lines each and ‘How You Do It’ is an eighteen-lined poem in one stanza. The speaker in ‘Eternal Devotion’ is very appreciative of his wife. He is pleased when she gives him children Therefore, he takes care of them and “upheld his part”. Upholding his part means he does whatever he can do to help raise his children. Sometimes when some women give birth, their husbands or partners abandon or desert them expecting the women to take care of the children alone but this man does what he has to do as a responsible father. This makes me respect the man. However in “How You Do It’, the boy is extremely cruel to his girlfriend. He is the first boy she ever loved and yet he does not appreciate her love for him in any way. We see this through the apt diction that he “shredded” her heart and also “ripped” it. These a...
... middle of paper ...
... is devoted to his wife. He “could not” let her go shows that he is so fond and of her and devoted that even when she is dying he cannot leave her side. Also the words “forever” and “eternity” which generally mean timeless are used to show the extent of his love and this shows his complete fondness and attachment to his wife. He uses these words when he says that when he even dies, he would join her again and he will love her. This man is a complete gem of a husband.
Comparing these two poems, I believe that a man like the one portrayed in ‘Eternal Devotion’ is the best kind to get married to as he will love you endlessly. The one in ‘How You Do It’ is the kind who will just use you and when he is tired of you, he will throw you away like yesterday’s trash. This man is not worth loving.
I have enjoyed both poems immensely for both their content and style.
Our second poem displays the lost meaning of religion, confusion of love and how our misinterpretations on both lead us to think. Take for instance this line: “No way is [he] bringing me home. He wants someone to fix his religion.” Humans constantly want another human to give meaning to their lives in any kind of way. Some even go as far as interpreting sex and one night stands as actions of sincere love. Our secondary character is trying to find meaning in his religion once more, probably thinking if he finds someone to have sex with, eventually they’ll fall in love and it’ll give his life meaning again, ultimately “fixing” his religion. The character’s self-doubt about his religion and his actions to recuperate that meaning displays the lost meaning of religion. The line “Believe me I love religion, but he’s too quiet when praying” shows the lack of knowledge in America when talking about religion. Praying is a sacred time for people to talk to God and be thankful for them or to ask for guidance. Stating that “he’s too quiet when praying” shows a kind of lost in the meaning of religion, as it’s not a thing that’s enforced as much as it was decades
writing the poem, to woo his love. Or maybe is the line was not meant
“The Story of an Hour” and “The Hand” both has remarkable similarities and differences. They share a common theme of women and marriage and the sacrifices they make for their family. The setting in both stories is significant to understand the role of women hundreds of years ago. The symbolism portrayed in “The Hand” is about relationships and marriage. When a relationship is new and everything is wonderful there are not any fears or regrets. As time goes by even the most desirable qualities in someone will begin to be an annoyance rather than a joy.
Love and affection is an indispensable part of human life. In different culture love may appear differently. In the poem “My god my lotus” lovers responded to each other differently than in the poem “Fishhawk”. Likewise, the presentation of female sexuality, gender disparity and presentation of love were shown inversely in these two poems. Some may argue that love in the past was not as same as love in present. However, we can still find some lovers who are staying with their partners just to maintain the relationship. We may also find some lovers having relationship only because of self-interest. However, a love relationship should always be out of self-interest and must be based on mutual interest. A love usually obtains its perfectness when it develops from both partners equally and with same affection.
In paragraph 2, "If I could think of something else. If I could think of something else. " In paragraph 6," Why can not that telephone ring? Why can not it, why can not it? Could not you ring? Ah, please, could not you? " In Paragraph 15," I must not. I must not, I must not. " There are also many times the repetition of this phrase" let him telephone me now " These repetition shows that women are really upset and could not impatient waiting. Then there is repetition that showed women loves that man. In Paragraph 4, That's mine, that's mine ... I want him so much. I want him so much
He wants it to be told that to write poetry is just as difficult as his attempt to court Maud. It is extremely difficult to produce a beautiful poem, as it is difficult to fall in love. Many people think that writing poetry is not hard work, as falling in love seems to be easy for some people. To make, “sweet sounds together” as in a po...
Love is a big part of human life. Love in this poem can be described in two different ways. One way is the love of helping people. The other way is the love of a relationship. The love of a relationship is more than a feeling when it is real. It is a sensation, a connection, something that can not be replaced. In the poem the speaker is torn between the two types of love at first. It is shown in the first two stanzas that the speaker does not know what to choose. Either to let the stranger into the house and not make love to his new wife, or not let the stranger in and send him out into the dangerous night and make love to his wife. The last line of the poem shows that the speaker in someway have feelings for the stranger. The speaker wish he knew what would happen to the stranger after he sent him out into the night.
...ce of outside forces. However, the male-female love still exists in the world because the world in reality is a play where each being can write their script. In poetry reality holds no limitations. Even though the lover’s love is not true, it exists in the world because of the human being’s fight to preserve it. True love may only be able to exist in the female-friendship as shown in the play, but love in relationships still exists because the world allows any being willing to become a poet to be one. Any person can preserve a dream of false love and turn it into true love is they are willing to believe it possible. True love can only exist without penetration, domination, desire, or loss of identity, which exist in male-female love. However, love exists in this relationship because poetry has the ability to transfer this love away from a dream and into existance.
Furthermore, this couple will get divorced because of their opposite thoughts. Men and women are two different species, and sometimes those differences stand in a way of their relationships. It is obvious that the characters in this poem can not find any equilibrium in their feelings. Every action of these characters showed negativity, which predicted their final separation.
Not attempting to hide, Mrs. Mallard knows that she will weep at her husbands funeral, however she can’t help this sudden feeling of seeing, “beyond [the] bitter moment [of] procession of years to come that would belong to her absolutely” (Chopin, 16). In an unloving marriage of this time, women were trapped in their roles until they were freed by the death of their husbands. Although Mrs. Mallard claims that her husband was kind and loving, she can’t help the sudden spark of joy of her new freedom. This is her view on the release of her oppression from her roles of being a dutiful wife to her husband. Altogether, Mrs. Mallard claims that, “there would be no powerful will bending hers in that blind persistence with which men and women believe they have a right to impose a private will upon a fellow-creature” (Chopin, 16). This is the most important of Mrs. Mallard’s thoughts, as she never officially states a specific way when her husband oppressed her. However, the audience can clearly suggest that this is a hint towards marriage in general that it suffocates both men and women. Marriage is an equal partnership in which compromise and communication become the dominant ideals to make the marriage better. It is suggested that Mrs. Mallard also oppressed her husband just as much as he did to her when she sinks into the armchair and is, “pressed down by a physical exhaustion
All readers will read and interpret this story in their own way based on their life and their knowledge of marriage. One thing that is indisputable is the emotions which carry through all people and the empowerment in which marriage has on these inspirations. In life love can renew one spirit as well as kill the passion of a person.
At the start, the first stanza of the poem is full of flattery. This is the appeal to pathos. The speaker is using the mistress's emotions and vanity to gain her attention. By complimenting her on her beauty and the kind of love she deserves, he's getting her attention. In this first stanza, the speaker claims to agree with the mistress - he says he knows waiting for love provides the best relationships. It feels quasi-Rogerian, as the man is giving credit to the woman's claim, he's trying to see her point of view, he's seemingly compliant. He appears to know what she wants and how she should be loved. This is the appeal to ethos. The speaker seems to understand how relationships work, how much time they can take, and the effort that should be put forth. The woman, if only reading stanza one, would think her and the speaker are in total agreement.
Henry Howard also believed that love should be everlasting. Wedding vows have become, to a certain extent, things of the past. People are getting married only to be divorced with in the first couple years of marriage. Till death do us part no longerholds meaning in the holy union of two souls. This is not true love. Luckily Howard helps us to see what true love is when he paints us a picture in words in ?To "His Lady?. ?In the long night, or in the shortest day/ In lofty youth, or when my hairs gray/ Set me in earth, in heaven, or yet in hell/ Sick, or in health, in ill fame, or in good/ Yours will I be? (277 lines 6, 8-9, 11-12). Through thick and thin, no matter what happens the man in this poem will stick by his lady.
These factors lead to the unraveling of the relationship as the conflict precedes and is described through both of their views on the issue. As the topic of their son was brought up, which is the cause of the confrontation, the woman immediately “withdrew shrinking from beneath his arm”, illustrating how she feels as she faces him in such a situation (33). The woman feels she must make herself and her emotions smaller, ultimately concealing them completely from him, as she faces him due to his inability to understand her, avoiding his questions and comments. Throughout the poem she seems insistent in leaving their home saying “[She] must get out of [there]. [She] must get air” because she feels suffocated both by his way of responding to situations which have taken an emotional toll on her and her incapability of being able to have closure on the situation while living in conditions that are not being of assistance to her (39). These actions show how she has to alter some aspects of her personality when speaking to him to please him, and he feels like he has to do the same. As he says “A man must partly give up being a man / With women-folk”, he is describing how he feels he must give up his opinion or view on certain topics and even says “[they] could have some arrangement by which [he’d] bind [himself] to keep hands off / Anything special [she’s] a-mind to name” (52-55). He continues by describing how having such disagreements and having to make compromises with each other are part of being in a relationship “Though [he doesn’t] like such things ‘twix those that love”, but now that he sees how serious she is about
A limitation of this model, like many other models, is it deems the problem it is trying to address as static. With the progress in time, the problem evolves and the model should be dynamic enough to explain it over the course of time. The concept of marriage, while grounded in patriarchal foundation, is continuously changing in the wake of new technologies and global political scene. The theory is also limited by context, as it may not be able to explain every problem connected with oppression. Further, Bergoffen (1999) argues that our current understanding of marriage is patriarchal itself and it hides the true essence, which is ethically erotic. Moreover, the concept of Western cultural dominance and Eastern submission is modifying as well. The duality persists but it is not as clear as it used to be in the pre-technological revolution era.