I'm not so sure whether it's a good idea to start a lecture about C. Rossetti with all the misconceptions which Victorian male writers published about her texts. Unfortunately, your lecture itself accepts one of the misconceptions about C. Rossetti's poetry - at least for the first quarter of an hour of the lecture and ... in the title of the lecture! - namely the claim that her texts are simple. I would have loved to hear a lecture about the utter complexity in which the poem "The Lowest Room" deals with the topic of war and with the "the female sphere" / "a room for one's own" . Another example is the formal and thematic trickiness of the poem "Amor Mundi". This would have dispelled any misogynic ideas about this literary work from the start. Anyway: as Niklas Luhmann and his system theory shows us or Jacques Derrida and deconstructionism, a text is always as "simple" or as "complicated" as you want it to be - it depends on the focus which you are reading it with and the communication which ensues. It's a bit sad that these postmodern literary theories have been bypassed in your approach. It's also not state of the art and maybe simply wrong to constantly identify the entity addressing the reader in a poem with the poet themselves. This is actually not done any longer in literary theory since the 1950s (Hamburger's debatable "lyrical I"). Last remark: Two of the poems discussed in your lecture, "Linnet in a golden cage" and "A toadstool comes up in the night" have actually expressly been categorized and published by Christina Rossetti not as poems sui generis but as verses to be used by nannies and nurses. They are from a book with nursery rhymes C. Rossetti "dedicated without permission to the baby who suggested them" (as the book's subtitle humorously states). So, the brevity and linguistic simplicity of these two texts are simply due to the fact that they are addressed at very small children. This should have been mentioned. Best wishes
What are Ladues' Monica,...do you mean 'women'? And to greet the audience as...you 'guys' !! as an introduction to a poetry lacks. It's slang and guys are male. Words are important. Especially when discussing poetry. kristinebyrnepoetry,ie.
![Monica Cure: How to Read Poetry [Torrey Honors Context Lecture]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/6irYRriLvgA/mqdefault.jpg)
![Monica Cure: How to Read Poetry [Torrey Honors Context Lecture]](/img/tr.png)
I wish all educators had as much knowledge, enthusiasm and passion as this professor. Remarkable. Thank-you!
Monica Cure reads these poems beautifully, and encourages the students so kindly.
Indeed.
Thank you. I got a lot from your presentation video on Christina Rosette and her poetry etc. 😊😊
The looking glass poem was phenomenal.
Thank you for letting me know more about Christina Rossetti.
Excellent. Thank you Monica!
Your expression is very good
👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
She is lovely.
She's gorgeous.
sick
I'm not so sure whether it's a good idea to start a lecture about C. Rossetti with all the misconceptions which Victorian male writers published about her texts. Unfortunately, your lecture itself accepts one of the misconceptions about C. Rossetti's poetry - at least for the first quarter of an hour of the lecture and ... in the title of the lecture! - namely the claim that her texts are simple. I would have loved to hear a lecture about the utter complexity in which the poem "The Lowest Room" deals with the topic of war and with the "the female sphere" / "a room for one's own" . Another example is the formal and thematic trickiness of the poem "Amor Mundi". This would have dispelled any misogynic ideas about this literary work from the start. Anyway: as Niklas Luhmann and his system theory shows us or Jacques Derrida and deconstructionism, a text is always as "simple" or as "complicated" as you want it to be - it depends on the focus which you are reading it with and the communication which ensues. It's a bit sad that these postmodern literary theories have been bypassed in your approach. It's also not state of the art and maybe simply wrong to constantly identify the entity addressing the reader in a poem with the poet themselves. This is actually not done any longer in literary theory since the 1950s (Hamburger's debatable "lyrical I"). Last remark: Two of the poems discussed in your lecture, "Linnet in a golden cage" and "A toadstool comes up in the night" have actually expressly been categorized and published by Christina Rossetti not as poems sui generis but as verses to be used by nannies and nurses. They are from a book with nursery rhymes C. Rossetti "dedicated without permission to the baby who suggested them" (as the book's subtitle humorously states). So, the brevity and linguistic simplicity of these two texts are simply due to the fact that they are addressed at very small children. This should have been mentioned. Best wishes
What are Ladues' Monica,...do you mean 'women'? And to greet the audience as...you 'guys' !! as an introduction to a poetry lacks. It's slang and guys are male. Words are important. Especially when discussing poetry. kristinebyrnepoetry,ie.
i disagree about the urge to find resolution in Goblin Market. that is not what poetry is about😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡
😂