Chaotic Beauty in Simple Form

Each poem makes a note of how art is not a precise and “neat” form that needs a step by step way of creating nor is it something that is always complex but can be rather simple. From Herrick’s poem I get, as in the title, a more chaotic disorder of what art is, definitely giving me the idea that beauty portrayed here is not a clean and all straightened up thing but more of as stated “Kindles in clothes a wantonness” (Herrick line 2) wantonness being a reckless and freeing act which is being corelated to beauty and art. Herricks poem gives me the sense of not only beauty and art but of love, a sort of romantic feel, something I see closely within the genre of Romanticism. There is that hint of disorder often associated with the genre that shows hints of itself within this poem. Although Herrick’s poem is lovely I dare say Jonson’s poem is seemingly more effective to portraying art. Jonson’s Still to Be Neat also has that unruly and disorderly description to it but in a way the structure and rhythm has a sweeter note. It describes the neat way of how art can be seen and viewed but then goes on to describe how the neat “lady” ,as art is being personified as, does not give the writer the same feeling or as he put, “Such sweet neglect more taketh me” (Jonson line 10) how the neglect of order and formality does not catch his attention as much as the “neglect” or unruliness that art is given form to does. His poem personifying art as a lady who does not need to be a “proper” lady with all her presumption but is better as a lady with “Robes loosely flowing”(line 9), it gives a sense of freedom and carelessness, is much more effective in representing the nature of art and all of the chaotic beauty it entails.

Looks and Simplicity

After analyzing both poems of Ben Jonson, “Still to be neat, still to be dressed,” and Robert Herrick, “Delight in Disorder,” I’ve come to the conclusion that the prosody of these both poems are iambic tetrameters. There is still a variety of foot types in these poems. Such as for Jonson’s poem, there was also a lot of trochaic. For Herrick’s poem, he was consistent with iambic tetrameter, but Johnson was switching in between iambic and trochaic, which broke the flow in the poem. I think he did this because he is switching between the expectations and realities. 

I’ve noticed the big indent in Jonson’s poem on line 11, which is “than all the adulteries of art.” He is showing how attractive a woman’s body is, but it only strikes the eyes and not the heart. He represented the nature of art by saying how women are expected to be in public, but they are neglecting their own selves: “such sweet neglect.” Jonson states the stereotypes and then states the reality saying how you are neglecting your own self by using your body to catch attention, when you can simply be yourself making “simplicity a grace.”

Gurranvir Kaur

Adultery of Art

By: Tierney Bowden

Both Robert Herrick’s “Delight in Disorder” and Ben Jonson’s “Still to be neat, still to be dressed”, there is the use of iambic tetrameter. In Herrick’s poem, the iamb is used consistently while Jonson utilizes other patterns such as in line 10, “Such sweet neglect, more taketh me”. In this line, Jonson uses a trochaic tetrameter to break the poem’s flow. This break in the flow brings attention to the words in the line. Along with this break of iamb, the following line is out of line with the rest of the poem. I believe Jonson intended this because lines 10 and 11 are where the true meaning of his poem is found. The “sweet neglect” Jonson is referring to, is the neglect of an artist to put any soul into their work. They may create the most beautiful piece, but if it has no purpose, no message, it is worthless. This is why in line 11 he calls them, “adulteries of art,  (Jonson). By calling it adultery, he is making a metaphor that creating meaningless art for beauty’s sake is a cheating way to make art. 

Although both poems use similar metaphors for the nature of art, Jonson’s is more effective because of his break in the uniformity of his poem. Herrick sticks to the iamb and perfect rhyme that contrasts with the title of his poem. How can he talk of disorder without creating disorder within his own poem?

Order in Disorder

Robert Herrick’s “Delight in Disorder” and Ben Jonson’s “Still to be Neat” both play on the balance between neatness and disorder in art. 

The prosody in “Delight in Disorder” is written in iambic tetrameter, though its structure reflects this union between neatness and disorder. It follows the iambic pattern; “a SWEET disORder IN the DRESS,” but often a trochee is seen; “KINdles” or “RIBbons (1-2, 8). The speaker’s intentions on clothes specifically rather than a person is emphasized through the spondee “IN CLOTHES” that breaks the rhythmic pattern (2). The syllables relating directly to clothing materials are stressed, in which the stresses parallels the kindling of these clothes into a destructive imagery. This kindle shifts into a storm, with the ribbons flowing “conFUSedLY,” and the “temPEStuOUS PETtiCOAT” utilizing consonance to emphasize the P sound. The poem ends with the speaker mentioning, “beWITCH me” and its emphasis invoking the supernatural and desiring the unknown to emerge rather than the neatness where everything is already expected. The poem itself holds neatness through its iambic rhythm, but its anomalies often reflect how despite the disorder, there is a union with this neatness to convey emotions. The oxymoron “wild civility” invokes these emotions that shows this unity to allow art to hold an emotional connection to audiences.

Jonson follows a similar pattern in “Still to be Neat” that expresses the nature of art best. The “civilized” aesthetic is seen in the first stanza where disorder lacks, and the aestheticism described as “not sweet.” The second stanza with this disorder is where the sweetness resides, and invokes a more emotional response. The prosody is iambic tetrameter, but it is often that the beginning of most lines start as a trochee. The first line is a trochee, “STILL to” which continues in the proceeding line until it reaches “though ART’S” (Jonson 1, 5). The break in the rhythmic pattern reflects the speaker’s intent of displaying how art breaks conformity. The speaker also finds disturbance in the neatness by its spondee’s in the first line, “BE NEAT,” “BE DRESSED,” where the ending emphasizes the speaker’s feelings to the aesthetics as “NOT SWEET,” and “NOT SOUND” (1, 6). The speaker finds no “hid causes” that express emotions of an individual; it is a society where everything works according to expectations.

The second stanza coincides more with Herrick’s poem on aestheticism, mentioning,“ROBES LOOSEly FLOWing, HAIR as FREE; such SWEET neGLECT more TAKEeth me” (3-4). The spondee on “ROBES LOOSE” is the last time a trochee is used before following the neat iambic rhythm. What the speaker argues is that art needs to show causes for why it exists, this poem parallels this as its aestheticism exists to argue that art is spontaneous. The last line mentions that such conformity to a “precise” society may make an observer notice, but not evoke emotions. Herrick and Jonson’s poems both focus on the disorder through aestheticism, but also use neatness to argue that too much ruins the meaning of art.

Phillip Gallo

Tacit

For people of color, there has yet to be a time where they can truly be permitted to be in their bodies. They have been oppressed and marginalized to show their culture and who they really are for years and years. Natalie Diaz does an amazing job of illustrating these issues within her two poems, “My Brother at 3 A.M.” and more specifically “Abecedarian Requiring Further Examination of Anglikan Seraphym Subjugation of a Wild Indian Rezervation”. To which she uses imagery and allusions to signal the lack of freedom she has to be herself even within her own home at the reservation.

Diaz halfway through the poem appeals to the audience of others like her by highlighting the negative association they have with outsiders that visit or appear on the reservation. She writes, “Pastor John’s son is the angel—everyone knows angels are white./ Quit bothering with angels, I say. They’re no good for Indians.” (Lines 16-17) Diaz alludes to an angel in these lines to not only make biblical reference but also to describe how her people don’t feel as though they can feel comfortable or be around the white people in their area that have marginalized them. And how they shouldn’t bother with them, therefore, generating the feeling that they represent people you should avoid. This is likely primarily due to them being a part of those who are put on a pedestal and tiptoed around in these areas, creating the idea that it’s almost as if they are untouchable. By saying that they’re “no good” for Indians she’s capable of reminding us as the reader of the colonization that’s happened to indigenous people in the past. She continues with this idea by saying, “You better hope you never see angels on the rez. If you do, they’ll be marching you off” (Lines 25-26). Demonstrating to us as the reader that there is a feeling of fear created by seeing people like this in their area. That they’re unsafe to be around. By mentioning this, it lets us readers know that because of this, it is likely that those who do face issues with them are made to be muzzled from speaking up to them. In essence, Natalie Diaz by using these elements within the poem aims to accommodate other social identities like herself who wish to call attention to the silence they’ve been forced under by their oppressors. 

Patricia Brewer

Love, Lust

Ode 47 by poet Hafez, tells the story of a drunk trying to win over a beautiful lady. This lady is amused that the drunken man has a crush on her. We can see this in line 15, where he say’s, “…And mocked my foolish hopes of winning her.” She continues on and uses a simile to compare him to her girdle. We can see this simile in line 19, “Thou shall not clasp me so, Like my good girdle – not for all thy songs!” With this simile she tells us she does not want his arms around her body.

I would say these poems go against Islamic spirituality. These poems go against Islamic spirituality because Islamic people are not allowed to consume alcohol. Since these poems talk a lot about drinking, and being drunk I feel that Islamic people would find this shameful.

The Rhythm of Art or Objectification of Women

Poetry is difficult to understand, and poems are said to be up to the interpretation of the person that is reading/analyzing the poem. This week in our class we have been discussing how an author will use rhythm and mete in order to emphasize what he means in the poem. As we read over both of the poems that have been assigned, “Delight in Disorder” by Robert Herrick and “Still to be Neat” by Ben Johnson, we cans see that both of these authors have used rhythm and meter in order to convey their messages.

In the Herrick’s poem, “Delight in Disorder” we can see that most of the poem can be said to be iambic tetrameter. Although we can find this meter through most parts of the poem there are parts if the poem that free themselves from this rhythm such as line 4, “Into a fine distraction”, I would consider this line to be dactylic then spondaic. The parts of this poem where he breaks form the usual iambic iambic rhythm allows the reader to connect the poem back to the title, the fact that poem isn’t completely orderly and the fact that the title sys that there is “Delight in Order” help us see what the poet is trying to tell us. The disorder that comes with these lines free us from the structure and give us something else to focus on, the freedom can give the read some delight in from the poem. The name can be said about the way that Jonson has included rhythm “Still to Be Neat,” but in this case I believe that the neatness of the poem is being forced upon the reader.

Both of these poems have good use of rhythm and meter in order to enhance and better interpret the message/meaning that the author wants to convey with these poems but I prefer Herrick’s take when it comes to interpreting the art. Yes, bit of the poems had an essence of interpreting art and describing how people may view art, buy Jonson began to objectify females and use a misogynistic view in order to try and relate that to art. With the first stanza of the poem describing what he preserves women to be and that they shouldn’t try and impress men with fake glamour, and talking as if everything women do is for the male gaze, it just doesn’t st right with me. Then going on to say that art does this as well and that this is like adultery as it is a deception of what they really are, as I see it this poem just didn’t really interpret art in a correct and well fitting way. So for the message of the poem I prefer “Delight in Disorder” not only did it use rhythm and meter in a way where it had lines and words work with the rhythmrythymto futher exentuate the poem and the meaning but it also completely objectify a whole gender.

Guadalupe Lemus

Rhythm & Meter

The two poems, “Delight in Disorder”, by Robert Herrick, and “Still not to be neat, still to be dressed”, by Ben Jonson, both show the use of the iambic rhythm. However, Jonson’s poem, shows has uses the iambic rhythm to express the beauty and the area of being neat and hygienic. While Herrick’s poem does not use this rhythm as strongly to make his point in the poem. Both poems share the simplicity of being natural and beautiful, but Jonson emphasizes it more.

In “Still not to be neat”, we see that Jonson, in the first line you see the unstressed syllable being “neat” while the stressed syllable comes right after being “dressed”. Jonson uses art to mock society’s preference on women and how they should be dressed and prepared for the world. In the third line he states “Still to be powdered, still perfumed” he furthers the idea of being clean and to smell good by using an iambic tetrameter pattern. Jonson is giving the audience two thoughts, his own and society’s look on how a woman should be. This is why I believe Jonson used a more effective approach in representing the nature of art, because the poem describes women and their beauty whether it is how he sees it or how the world sees it. It is also more precise and not as messy as Herricks

Herricks Poem had a more messy approach. We see that Herrick still uses the same iambic rhythm, he doesn’t have the same consistency as Jonson. This is what makes it a rollercoaster for the reader to process and to understand the poem. However, the poem still speaks volumes about the message it is trying to send.

Joseph Jordan

Rhythm and Meter

Trying to decide between two poems is like trying to decide between ice cream and cake, both are great for certain days or different occasions. For today’s occasion, I suppose Ben Johnson’s “Still to Be Neat” (1609) is the poem that most effectively represents the nature of art, rather than Robert Herrick’s “Delight in Disorder” (1648).

Jonson’s “Still to be Neat” is written in dactylic foot, as each line starts and ends on a stress. The first line, for example, “Still to be neat, still to be dressed” can be read with breaks in the words almost like, “Still, to be neat, Still, to be dressed”. This similar format throughout the poem shows that the words: still, neat, still, dressed, still, powdered, still, perfumed are all emphasized and nearly have a rhyming sing-sound to them. The endings of each two lines rhyme together, and the poem speaks about a woman. Everything about this poem is out in the open, sort of like nature!

Herrick’s “Delight in Disorder ” conveys a similar feeling when breaking down the poem’s rhythm. If you look closely you may notice that the ends of the first two and last two lines rhyme. This poem is written in iambic and has a faster rhythm, for example, the line “A winning wave, dereserving note” has a stress on nearly every word. While this poem does more speciffically talk about art and both poems are alike in that nature in both these poems in represented by women, clothing, and appearance, I do belive that “Still to Be Neat” is the more rhythic and represts the nature of art.

Anne K. Anderson

Rhythm and Meter

Looking at the titles of the poems firsthand, I realized my interpretation was different. It had never occurred to me that it would be a portrayal of woman. To me, “Delight in Disorder,” sounded more of a poem that demonstrated the hues of  blacks, whites and grays within the world from Robert Herrick’s perspective. Whereas, “Still to Be Neat” was revolving Ben Jonson’s focused attention on the world. 

After thoroughly reading over the poems, and taking them into depth, I realized that it was more than that. Both Herrick and Jonson all focus on woman, in such a unique manner. Herrick’s refers the woman as a “sweet disorder in a dress.” Disorder is defined as “putting something out of order.” Herrick symbolism on the woman is a person who is meant to disrupt his daily life. To allure him away with her “tempestuous petticoat.” He gives every inch of her attire a purpose to benefit him. The terms he uses describes the lady as if she intended on doing so. 

In Jonson’s poem, he holds a similar lens on woman. Jonson seems to focus on more of what she is always doing, than rather the attire she wears. The narrator notes that she is always “still to be powdered, still perfumed.” The woman is someone who is always well-dressed no matter what. What caught my eye was lines 10 to 12. He views the woman as a person to complete the act of lust. Where the woman “strike [his] eyes but not [his heart].”

Both poems kind of connect to the history of woman and how they were treated. Today, woman are still facing certain conflicts without being sexualized in any manner.

Evelyn Hernandez