The Beauty of Messy Art

I believe Herrick’s poem, “Delight in Disorder” is more effective in representing the nature of art than Jonson’s poem. (Both poems are in iambic tetrameter). Art is created for many purposes. It can be argued, there is no right purpose of art. It is created for aesthetics and for viewing pleasure. It is created to make a statement, oftentimes social or political. It is created for entertainment purposes, i.e., books and poetry. The list goes on. And no art is the same. Just like no two people are the same. But all art aims to capture their audience. To enthrall or to move them. Herrick speaks of this enthrallment in his poem. At the end of the poem, he wrote:

 “do more bewitch me than when art 

Is too precise in every part.” 

This was after Herrick had described the disorder of a dress–of a person’s getup. He described the carelessness of a shoestring. A neglectful cuff. In these things, he saw a “wild civility” (Herrick 12). And it is this ‘wild civility’ that bewitched him. Not art that is ‘too precise’. Precise as in exact or careful. It seems Herrick believes art is best when it is messy. Or, in his own words, disordered. Which means untidy or unkempt. To convey this, he described one’s disheveled attire. I thought this was brilliant. Especially if we were to look at this poem through a modern lens. Nowadays, there is a greater appreciation for clothing styles that, at one time, had been deemed strange or unusual. And people are not afraid to experiment and mix different styles. Oftentimes, it is these people who receive praise and are deemed fashionable. It is these people who inspire others to step out of their comfort zone and explore different styles. The same can be applied to art. Artists should not strive for perfection. Perfection is boring. Perfection does not move people. It is the flawed, the messy, the most unusual pieces of art that capture and enthrall people. That provokes them to look at themselves and the world around them differently. Jonson’s poem was good, but it did not conjure the same feelings as Herrick’s did. The second stanza was similar to the whole of Herrick’s poem. But because the first stanza fell flat and failed at conveying its message to me, I had to go with Herrick.

Bella Cortez

A Beautiful Mess

Herrick’s “Delight in Disorder” follows primarily iambic tetrameter in couplets, but contains slight variations in some lines, having dactylic and trochaic feet in addition to the iambic feet. Moreover, Herrick is purposeful in the mixture of meters, as it creates a slightly off-putting rhythm when read. Instead of being read straightforward in the most commonly spoken meter (iambic), “Delight in Disorder” varies, forcing readers to alter how they read it, giving a sense of disorder within the poem. For instance, line 9, “A winning wave, deserving note,” read in iambic, splits away into a dactylic line of “In the tempestuous petticoat.” The second line within the couplet singles out the disorder within the woman Herrick describes, with the temptation, representing the disorder, contrasting with her “winning wave” and “deserving note,” thus which are fairly orderly. Herrick alternates meter within the individual couplets three times (lines 1-2, 7-8, and 9-10), drawing additional attention to the secondary line in each of the couplets. Herrick further reinforces his purpose in showing that art should be disorderly, as the beautiful work of art he has produced, “Delight in Disorder,” has no abundantly dominant meter (or feet length for that matter) and also utilizes more complicated language like “wantonness” and “tempestuous” (ll. 2, 10) in order to create more chaos in the poem too, as the reader will have a harder, less simple way of deciphering and reading the poem.

In contrast, Jonson’s “Still to be Neat” keeps iambic tetrameter throughout the entirety of the poem. The poem flows nicely and is uniform, as is Jonson’s point that art is to be neat, uniform. Jonson’s poem capitalizes more on surface beauty than anything– it means what it says, and it reads easily with no struggle due to comfortable meter that English is generally spoken in. Jonson speaks to how “art’s hid causes are not found” (li. 5) and how “simplicity [is] a grace” (li. 8). The poem reads quite simply, and Jonson writes the meaning within the poem as well– art is simple and not hidden; it is presented frankly where everyone can understand it, unlike Herrick’s “Delight in Disorder,” where the meaning is somewhat convoluted and hidden within meter and more complicated words. Since Jonson’s poem reads uniformly, thus neatly, it further reinforces the clear meaning of art’s simplicity and neatness, as the poem itself does not contain any sort of messiness or disorder.

In all, I do believe that Herrick’s “Delight in Disorder” does a better job in representing and explaining art’s nature. Herrick’s poem is layered with difficult language and has a more complex meter pattern, which reinforces his point greater; even though the poem is difficult at first to read and understand, the more one reads it, the more beautiful it becomes in understanding it. In contrast, Jonson’s poem is too uniform, too simple; it simply speaks to nothing and doesn’t say much. Herrick makes the poem sound beautiful even without delving deeper into the inner workings of the poem, so a reader can still understand that the poem is difficult, yet beautiful; on the flip side, if a reader analyzed the poem to the innermost bones, they would also reveal a disorderly, yet beautiful poem, which to me, is what art truly is. No matter your experience within the subject matter, you can still enjoy it and admire it for its beauty, which Herrick’s “Delight in Disorder” successfully does.

Isaak Puth

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 and Meter

In Ben Jonson’s “Still to be Neat,” he starts in Dactylic in the first stanza before throwing in some iambic and trochee. In the second stanza, he switches to iambic tetrameter as the prosody after the first two lines. In Robert Herrick’s “Delight in Disorder,” he uses iambic tetrameter as the prosody throughout. I think Herrick’s poem is a better representation of the nature of art because his more choice of an iambic meter and consistent use of the prosody with few variations makes his poem more musical and fluid than Jonson while he talks about disorder in the words. This contrast of order and disorder is often a defining feature of art. Furthermore, there is something mesmerizing about the way the iambic meter flows which reinforces Jonson’s comparison of art to being mesmerized by a beautiful woman. This poem excellently conveys the experience of beholding art.

On the other hand, in Jonson’s poem, the second and fourth feet of the last line of the first stanza emphasize that “all is not sweet, all is not sound” with trochee, and thus the disorder aspect of art. However, Jonson pairs that with more disorder in the form of a meter with many anomalies and a prosody that changes partway through. His work thus lacks the contrast between the meter and the text presented in Herrick’s. Finally, I feel that Jonson speaks more from the perspective of an artist while Herrick speaks more from the perspective of a someone viewing the final product and I find the latter more relatable.

Evan He

Defining Poems Through Rhythm/Meter

Ben Jonson’s “Still to Be Neat” and Robert Herrick’s “Delight in Disorder” are two unique poems that, in some sense, contradict one another when it comes down to interpretations. In a normal world, we as people have a common understanding that everyone views the world through their own lens filled with distinguishing meaning and purpose. Both these poems are perfect examples of two opposite sides of the spectrum involving the idea of simplicity, or the lack there of it, and perhaps the openness and acceptance of it. One can argue that neatness is the prime example of higher order or superiority, while others believe that uniqueness is what sets one apart from the rest: the true definition of superiority and higher order.

Jonson’s poem presented with an iambic tetrameter pattern as he a went on about the idea that women constantly maintain themselves to appear simple and put together in order to hide whats within. He creates a lot of emphasis around wanting women to be true to themselves rather than sulking because it’s not what matters on the outside as much as it does in the inside. This is a very powerful message for readers and the audience in general because society and social norms have the tendency to set unattainable beauty standards, forcing women or anyone to try and one up the next person. Such insecurities cause a constant battle not only for women all around, but with oneself too. Jonson used an interesting rhyme and rhythm combination at the ends of each line, creating a balanced flow throughout the poem. This highlights his message nicely because just like the rhythm, the poet reflects two thoughts back and forth between women and his own from the outside looking in.

Herrick’s poem also presented with an iambic tetrameter pattern while explaining the concept of imperfection and how disorderliness is quite beautiful in its own way. There’s something powerful about women who own their identity and openly embrace their style. Often times, people feel the need to pull up a facade to the world in order to prove that everything is ideal, when true beauty lies in admitting the opposite. Another thing that makes this poem unique from the other is the diction usage. Terms like “wantonness” and “bewitch” can create a more exciting scene showcasing power. The title “Delight in Disorder” is a perfect way to sum up the poet’s thoughts on confidence and artistic endeavors. The usage of rhythm creates sass and sexiness, which is very fitting for the poem as it constantly brings light to the intention that not being put together is essentially favored.

It’s almost difficult to choose which poem was more effective in representing the nature of art because both, in their own way, showcased brilliant skills and techniques alongside deeper meanings for the audience. While Jonson had the right idea of keeping an orderly and concise poem with his rhythm, Herrick played with the concept of contradiction to the next level. He used rhythm in order to describe messy and quirky scenarios. I see this as art because it gives the poem a different and deeper meaning, almost like telling the audience that perhaps not being perfect is perfection in itself.

Simranpreet Kaur

Patterns of Rhythm Post

The two poems “Still to be neat, still to be dressed” by Ben Jonson and “Delight in Disorder” by Robert Herrick both use imagery as well as prosody to convey their views on art, while using entirely different techniques. The first poem, “Still to be neat, still to be dressed”, is written in dactylic prosody, in which the poem stresses the beginnings of phrases and lines more heavily. This creates an almost soothing lull to the poem, similar to the feelings of waves crashing or a lullaby. It makes the tone of the poem more relaxing and soothing as a result. This ties into the imagery of the poem, in which the “art” is described as being in preparation, sort of like the “calm before the storm” in terms of creativity. The final lines of the poem add on to the mysticism set by the prosody of the poem as well, stating that “They strike mine eyes, but not my heart”, relating to how art’s beauty is separate to someone’s emotional response to said art; someone can experience art and appreciate it as beautiful, yet still be unable to connect with it emotionally. It could also be a connection to the earlier lines, where the “neat” and “proper” imagery is not as engaging to the speaker as the “robes loosely flowing, hair as free”, possibly stating that the speaker appreciates the wild and free sides of are rather than the prim, proper, and dressed-up side.

The second poem, “Delight in Disorder”, also speaks on this idea of the wonders of the wild. The prosody in this poem is iambic, so it is quicker, with more stresses and has more energy than the former poem. The poem marches onward like the beat of a drum in a band or the beating of one’s heart, creating an exhilarating energy within the poem; it is much more light and awe-inspiring than the other poem. Using this newfound energy, the poem’s imagery focuses on wild and “disorderly” concepts: and erring lace, a cuff neglectful, a careless shoe-string. These images are talked about in a wistful and mystifying manner, as if to prop-up these ideas in the minds of both the speaker and the reader. This is further exemplified in the final liens of the poem, stating “Do more bewitch me, then when art Is too precise in every part.” In these final lines, preciseness in art is rejected, instead opting for the wild, untethered, and imaginative subjectivity more vague art entails. Coupled with the more energetic prosody, this poem acts as a celebration to the disorder within vague art.

While both poems use different prosody and images effectively, I personally enjoyed the lighter, more energetic tone of “Delight in Disorder”. While both poems pose some critique over aspects of art, the faster rhythm of “Delight in Disorder” makes the tone more celebratory of art that breaks those criticisms than the softer, more contemplative tone of “Still to be neat, still to be dressed.”

Sky Miller

Rhyme and Meter

For this assignment, we were provided two poems that focus on the same subject; however, they diverge in implication. While Robert Herrick’s “Delight in Disorder” follows the speaker through a beguiling path of lust and desire, Ben Jonson’s “Still to Be Neat” physically describes a woman’s seemingly beautiful appearance. Herrick states, “A sweet disorder in the dress” in the very first line, and one can infer that unkempt clothing enchants the speaker in a sense. In the next line, “wantonness” is used as a way to describe a lack of restraint. As the reader continues with the poem, they are able to detect an iambic rhythm similar to one’s heartbeat. The first line is an evident example of iambic rhythm. It is until the second line where the iambic rhythm comes to a halt, and its place is a trochaic tetrameter. This potentially symbolizes the flutter of the speaker’s heart when describing the woman. Furthermore, there is something captivating in moments of disarray. Looking at Jonson’s poem, the speaker begins with discussing the elegant attire of a woman as if she were dressing up for a “feast” in the first stanza. In the second stanza, we see the speaker deviate from the initial theme of sophistication. Instead, notions of “true” beauty begin to form. In lines 10-12, the speaker indicates that “powdered” faces pertain to superficial ideals. In a metaphorical sense, there is a meaning to every piece of art, which includes human beings. 

When reflecting the true nature of art, I believe that Robert Herrick’s poem executes it thoroughly; however, both poems are able to convey it. Herrick’s heartbeat rhythm persuaded me when there were pauses of trochiac tetrameter to emphasize the palpitations. It is also true that art is still beautiful in complex forms that go beyond the conventional definition of appeal. Herrick does a wonderful job exuding that sentiment through the brisk imagery presented in his poem. 

Emily Pu

Turbulent

Lauren Hamilton

“Delight in disorder” by Herrick, talks about how disorder of dressing in women can be beautiful, artisy, and should be encouraged. It shows off the beauty of staying with a similar pattern of rhythm and meter throughout. That is up until line 10 where its as turbulent, in the rhythm, as the words of the line. By doing this little rebellion, it reinforces what is being described throughout the poem, a little rebellion in style is a good thing. It even goes meta a little and points it out in line 12 that it was wild to do so. With it being crazy, for the time, and labeled as such, it is something nice to see and watch but something not to touch or mess with, because art is “too precious in every part”. (line 14)
“Still to be neat” by Johnson, it seems as though the author is frustrated with a lady who is still nicely and formally dressed; almost as if they wanted the other to have some kind of imperfection to be able to delight in it. They want the “Robes loosely flowing, hair as free”(line 9), instead of what is being presented to them. This poem was difficult for me to scan and believe I may of messed it up. It seems to me that the pattern for it is that there is no real pattern and it adds to the feeling of frustration that author is feeling.
The two authors seem to have a similar take on how women should dress for artistic purposes, due to women being so pretty and all. According to them women should be well dressed with a small flaw or two to make them as beautiful as art. Another thing that they seem to agree upon is that if something is so beautiful to be considered art then no one should interact with it, physically or emotionally.

Simplicity or Everything

Jackeline Salazar

The nature of art can be meaning in many things. In this next blog we will discuss about two poems that actually have a different meaning in what the nature of art can mean to them. In the first poem by Robert Herrick in “Delight in Disorder” he discusses the important details in the disorder of someone, more specifically a women since they’re in a dress but, he discusses the disorderedness that he sees in her. Then again he does see a disorder in this women and how she’s a mess but at the same time he notices that she’s basically every detail that he likes. For example, in lines 11-14 “A careless shoestring, in whose tie I see a wild civility; Do more bewitch me than when art Is too precise in every part”. It seems like he understands and knows that she is very careless and that she is dress in disorderly fashion way but for some reason it was like art to him. It was art to him because at the end of all that, the last line basically meant that every piece that she was or is, was art to him and he admired it. So if the nature of art can matter to Herrick he sees it as a beautiful piece. On the other hand while Johnson’s poem, “Still to be Neat” he does mentions how this person is all dressed up and looking all fancy and nice but in reality to him that doesn’t mean anything. For example the line that caught my attention that lead to the conclusion was lines 11-12, “Then all th’ adulteries of art. They strike mine eyes, but not my heart.” He basically is trying to say that the art is all nice and that it is very beautiful but it doesn’t really catch his attention. He sees it but he can’t really feel it or have a meaningful moment with it. He basically sees the nature of art through his eyes but not exactly all the way to his soul. To conclude everything, Johnson doesn’t agree that much when it comes to the nature of art while Herrick thought the nature of art meant everything to him. 

A Heart and a Waltz

While both Herrick’s, “Delight in Disorder” and Jonson’s, “Still to Be Neat” express a similar appreciation for the occasional disorder in an otherwise pruned life, I will argue that the scansion and rhythm implemented in Jonson’s more effectively delivers this message and feeling.

From the first line in Herrick’s poem, “A sweet disorder in the dress”, the idea of disorder coexisting with and enhancing groomed life is established. I find Herrick’s decision ineffective right off the bat because it is delivered in a very steady and common iambic tetrameter, which comprises the majority of the rest of the poem. While Herrick voices such a strong appreciation for disorder with ideas like, “A carless shoestring, in whose tie I see wild civility”, this language is the only way in which he relays this appreciation. In essence, Herrick’s art is “precise in every part”, and the only peek into how he truly feels is through the actual sentence meanings in the poem. This seems somewhat ineffective and begs the question of why it needs to be a poem, and not, say, an essay. While Herrick does implement spondees in lines 2 and 8 with “Kindles” and “Ribbons”, I did not feel they successfully added enough variation or emphasis on disorder to effectively make me feel what he was trying to convey.

Jonson’s, “Still to Be Neat”, on the other hand, cleverly combines lines of waltz-like dactylic meter, with the rhythmic and steady heartbeat of iambic meter. This creates variation in the rhythm, as well as a sense of natural disorder created by two coexisting aspects of a woman’s life. What I mean by this is that Jonson focuses on two aspects of the woman’s life––preppy and perfumed, vs. free and disorderly––with the preppy qualities written in a very luxurious waltz-like rhythm, and the free and disorderly written with the rhythm of a heartbeat. For example, “Still to be neat, still to be powdered”, a very posh description of the precise parts of life is composed of waltz-like dactylic meter, which is contrasted greatly with the heartbeat-like iambic, “Robes loosely flowing, hair as free”, which Jonson describes as a more beautiful and raw state of living. This technique that Jonson implements provides a very clever way of relaying how the beauty of disorder coexists with the “neat” aspects of life.