i dunno if i posted this yet or not, but i wrote an analysis of wallace stevens' "the plain sense of things" and the grader said it was good analysis but based on an "indefencible premise" because i had said that "turban" was synecdoche for an elderly woman instead of a prince. (I wrote about how the poem was an expression of someone at the end of her life trying desperately to achieve oblivion/senility, but the power of imagination and the working of the mind is too strong) i thought poetry was supposed to be infinitely interpretable.
the good news is that i was allowed to retake it today and i am pretty sure i passed (i did a phillip larkin poem, "talking in bed"). 'course, i was pretty sure i passed the last time, too.
the good news is that i was allowed to retake it today and i am pretty sure i passed (i did a phillip larkin poem, "talking in bed"). 'course, i was pretty sure i passed the last time, too.