“The Fish” a poem by Elizabeth bishop shows various forms of New Criticism.
When Elizabeth wrote “The Fish” she wrote it in a sense so the reader would be able to visualize the story being told, so that every word would have a meaning behind it. In new criticism authors portray poems in ways so the reader can visualize exactly what is happening.
In the poem “The Fish” the speaker says “Here and there / his brown skin hung in strips / like ancient wall paper”, this piece of text shows a form of ambiguity. Meaning that the view of the fishes skin looks like old wall paper, to portray an image to the reader that the fish is an older fish that has fought its hole life to stay alive and has been battered and bruised. The author could have written the fish was beaten up badly but the author wanted to portray a meaning full image in the mind of the reader when they read that certain passage in the poem.
When Elizabeth wrote “The Fish” she wanted to have a certain tone when righting the poem, so when the reader read the poem the reader could feel and imagine the words, and not just read them.
I think you’re on the right track; however you should go further with your explanations. I'm not sure what the fish being old has to do with, because I did not read the poem. You should first summarize the piece and then get into analyzing. Also some grammar needs to be fixed, as well as repetitive words, such as "author."
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteAlex,
You write,
“The Fish” a poem by Elizabeth bishop shows various forms of New Criticism.
The poem itself doesn’t “show” New Criticism; you, as the critic, are USING New Criticism to analyze it. The criticism isn’t “in” the poem, in other words; it’s something you’re applying TO the poem.
“When Elizabeth” – always refer to authors using last names. You can use the writer’s full name on first reference but last name only after that.
You write, “she wrote it in a sense so the reader would be able to visualize the story being told, so that every word would have a meaning behind it.” Do you mean she uses imagery, then?
“In new criticism authors portray poems in ways so the reader can visualize exactly what is happening.” Again, the poem’s author isn’t using New Criticism – you are.
“In the poem “The Fish” the speaker says “Here and there / his brown skin hung in strips / like ancient wall paper”, this piece of text shows a form of ambiguity.” Do you mean a particular word or line is ambiguous? You’re on the right track – it’s just a matter of how you frame it, grammatically and syntactically.
“ Meaning that the view of the fishes skin looks like old wall paper, to portray an image to the reader that the fish is an older fish that has fought its hole life to stay alive and has been battered and bruised.” As you explain it here, you suggest a very clear meaning, not ambiguity. Which part is ambiguous?
“The author could have written the fish was beaten up badly but the author wanted to portray a meaning full image in the mind of the reader when they read that certain passage in the poem.” When you’re doing analysis, you want to deal with what the author did choose, not the “could have/would haves”. It will suffice to say the author uses imagery to drive home the fish’s age, etc..
“When Elizabeth wrote “The Fish” she wanted to have a certain tone when righting the poem, so when the reader read the poem the reader could feel and imagine the words, and not just read them.” This repeats what you said a bit earlier. That said, the response as a whole doesn’t use any New Critical or Reader Response elements. I can tell you’re still working out your ideas, but you haven’t at all dealt with paradox, irony, or most of the required elements of New Criticism. Please let me know if I can be of help.
A