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.

The Beauty of Nonconformity

Jonson’s and Herrick’s poems at first glance seem to be  in contradiction as a result of the poems titles, they both share a common ground, that true beauty that enthralls the soul is the small chaos that people exude. Both poems utilize similar rhythm schemes, that being an iambic tetrameter, in order to pull the reader into the story which each poem tells. While both talk about how the nature of beauty is not found in precise strokes, ordered lines, or perfection, but rather it is found in the imperfections that seem to escape the deliberate acts. Between the two poem however, “Delight in Disorder” seems to more efficiently represent where the nature of art can be found.

This comes to the forefront when Herrick describes the clothing of a woman in detail, but focuses on how despite using words that would be deemed insulting to a person, the words instead do the opposite and cause the woman to gain more appeal to the reader’s mind. The woman is not held down by conforming to the standards of proper attire but rather frees herself from those shackles and gains the freedom of expression, which is the essence of art. The constant use of iambic tetrameter causes the reader to feel as though they are in a song marching to the beat of one’s heart, most seen in the line of “do More beWitched me thaN when Art is Too Precise In every parT.” The main subject of Herrick’s poem boils down to the idea that no matter how a person attempts to appear, the true nature of the person will find some manner in which to appear, and capture the attention of the audience.

Isaac Ruiz

Rhythm and Meter – Edmund Feng

First, I decided to look at Ben Johnson’s poem, “Still to be neat, still to be dressed.” Overlooking the entire poem, it’s very clear that it’s supposed to represent something about the appearance of women. This is indicated quite literally, when he talks about “Be powdered, still perfumed,” and “neat, still to be dressed.” However, we’re given this information exactly when he says “Lady, it is to be presumed.” Now, we look at the poem lines. There seem to be around 6 lines per section, with each line having 8 syllables. There’s a lot of emphasis placed on the appearance of the woman, emphasis on words like dressed, powdered, perfumed, and the description of her outfit that apparently is “loosely FLOWING.” This poem is definitely an iambic tetrameter, due to there usually being around four iambic in each line to create what seems to almost be a whimsical musical, through repetitive repeats.

Now, we look at the second poem, Delight in Disorder. Once again, it seems to be directed towards the outfit and dressing of women, such as the “sweet disorder in the dress,” to an “erring lace, which here and there.” When looking closely at the story, one can make the connection between The dressing of women, and the disorder and messiness that comes before it is inherently pleasing to the eye, a playful feeling almost. This poem has 14 lines, around 7-8 syllables every line, and seems to stress words that describe the dress itself – such as “Lace,” “neglectful,” “tempestuous,” and so on. Delight in Disorder is an iambic tetrameter, the same as the previous poem, also following a very music-like fashion through the repeat and repetitions.

Personally, I really do prefer the poem Delight in Disorder, mainly because I’m a firm enjoyer of direct repetition. While the poem by Ben Johnson is quite nice as well, I Simply just more so prefer the style of Robert Herrick, which is almost essentially a wall of letters and words that follow a more specific pattern.

-Edmund Feng

“But not my Heart”

Ben Johnson’s “Still to be Neat” and Robert Herrick’s “Delight in Disorder”, on the surface, are talking about two different women. One in a more eccentric outfit and the other in a more simple description, Johnson’s poem seems to take in the beauty of simplicity more than layered meaning for the nature of art. Herrick enjoys seeing the crazed chaos in art as “a sweet disorder in the dress”. These two poets offer great views as both are equally enjoyable. I must say that I agree more with Robert Herrick, not that I don’t agree with Ben Johnson, I simply see more of the truth in Herrick’s work. I find change more interesting as well as more captivating rather than simplicity. The title of this post reflects my choice, I found that to imagine Johnson’s poem was nicer but to imagine Herrick’s was a ride. I could imagine a erring lace or lot of ribbons flowing, the waves in a coat or a careless shoestring. Near the end, Herrick offers what he views,
“A wild civility”, I think this captures the nature of art as it is rather than what was offering in Johnson’s poem. I reiterate, I prefer Herrick to Johnson because the nature of art is more captivating and offers more depth than just the simplicity of itself, Johnson’s meaning is only meant for “mine eyes, but not my heart”.

Roman Arroyo

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

In search for the real beauty

Jonson and Herrick search for the natural beauty of woman. Both insist that real beauty is not found in a fine, neat dress, but in a sightly distracted dress. There is a similarity between Jonson’s poem and Herrick’s poem. Through my individual analysis, I found that their poem’s prosody is Iambic Tetrameter. They both used Iambic Tetrameter to equally describe the natural beauty of women. In my opinion, the most effective poem in representing the nature of art is Herrick’s. To compare some lines from the two poems, I am going to talk about the reasons.

Jonson’s poem, “Still to be Neat”, has an emphasized line, “Though art’s hid causes are not found.” I think ‘Though’, and ‘art’s’ are stressed syllables, combining two syllables, making it a “spondee.” Focusing on that line, Jonson highlights the idea that even though a woman continues to conceal the original looks, the essence cannot be entirely hidden. And through ‘Spondee,’ he strongly emphasizes this fact. He mentions that the neat appearance is kind of beauty, but it fails to resonate with his own heart. Overall, looking at his poetry, instead of describing the slightly disheveled appearance of a woman he likes, he depicts the perfectly neat appearance and expresses his dislike for it. However, if the disheveled appearance is genuinely the beauty that he loves, wouldn’t directly describing it make readers feel that he truly appreciates that beauty? Therefore, I felt that his appeal to the beauty that he likes lacks or credibility.

Herrick’s poem, “Delight in Disorder”, also has an emphasized line, “Do more bewitch me, than when art.” I think ‘Do’ and ‘more’ are stressed syllables, combining to form a “Spondee.”’ Focusing on that line, Herrick highlights the idea a woman who is too precisely sweet, fine, and neat cannot captivate his mind. The only thing that appeals to him is a slightly disheveled, a bit tousled beauty. Throughout the poem, Herrick vividly describes the kind of beauty he appreciates and goes into the details about why disheveled beauty resonates much more with him than perfectly neat beauty. In this meticulous detailing, readers can keenly feel how much he cherishes the slightly disheveled beauty. I think that being genuinely honest with oneself is the nature of art. Therefore, when comparing Johnson and Herrick’s poems, Herrick’s poem effectively represents the nature of art.

Jisoo Jang

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

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