Perrine Poetry Blog

        Upon picking up the article and reading the first few statements, I already disagreed with Perrine's idea that some explanations for poems are wrong and others are right. I have always thought that a poem was whatever a reader wants it to be. However, after I finished the article I was in general agreement with him. Perrine doesn't advocate that only one interperetation of poetry is right while the rest are wrong. He simply states that logic should be applied to analysis. With this logic should come limitations in the scope of perceptions into the poem's true identity. From this, one correct explanation of a poem or a multitude of explanations may arise. Perrine simply states that some interperations of a well-written poem can be proved implausible.
        Within Perrine's logical idea, I do find myself disagreeing with some aspects of his explanations. Poetry is not always meant to be analyzed for a specific meaning. Therefore, this idea for interpereting poetry is not always applicable. Sometimes, in my opinion, poetry is composed to create a broad spectrum of interperetations in which none should be limited by logical reasoning. However, for the most part, poetry vaguely addresses things in which real meanings can be discovered. Because of this, I think that Perrine's analytical stratagies can be very helpful. They can help me in class by using the process of logical steps in my explanations and interperetations of a poem's meaning. By using these steps, it will prevent me from having conflicting meanings within my own interperetations of a poem as well as serve as a guide and starting point when first reading the poem.