Of Modern Poetry - Conclusion

Conclusion

The ironic part of Stevens’ poem is how much it coincides with the theories of Romantic poetry without actually being a Romantic poem. The poem even lists some events that you might find in a Romantic work, but “Of Modern Poetry” is ultimately self-reflective. Stevens’ work is reflecting on itself and what it means to be a poem. The poem reaches many Romantic conclusions. Then when comparing Stevens’ work to Wordsworth's definition of poetry it becomes apparent that it is not a spontaneous overflow of emotions, but a well thought out idea. While you might enjoy the poem, it also seems to fall short of having the return quality that Coleridge speaks of or the unchangeable diction. As a theoretic work “Of Modern Poetry” is fairly at home amongst Romantic thoughts, but as a poetic work it fails to meet the requirements set down by Wordsworth and Coleridge.

“Of Modern Poetry” is another step forward for literature, much like the work of Wordsworth and Coleridge. Coleridge was among the first to begin merging literary theory and criticism to bring about implementable ideas. In Stevens’ work we find an increased application of theory through its unison with literature. This analysis of “Of Modern Poetry” as Romantic literature shows how modern theory spawns from its predecessors. The poem contains many modern characteristics but in the end sides heavily with Wordsworth and Coleridge. “Of Modern Poetry” fails to fit in with other Romantic poems because it is a Romantic poem in theory and a modern poem in reality. The poem is “the act of the mind” and as such it only seems fitting that present day poets would develop ideas out of the remnants of the great poetic minds that preceded them.

Read more about this topic:  Of Modern Poetry

Famous quotes containing the word conclusion:

    The source of our actions resides in an unconscious propensity to regard ourselves as the center, the cause, and the conclusion of time. Our reflexes and our pride transform into a planet the parcel of flesh and consciousness we are.
    E.M. Cioran (b. 1911)

    Human affairs are so obscure and various that nothing can be clearly known. This was the sound conclusion of the Academic sceptics, who were the least surly of philosophers.
    Desiderius Erasmus (1469–1536)

    The conclusion suggested by these arguments might be called the paradox of theorizing. It asserts that if the terms and the general principles of a scientific theory serve their purpose, i. e., if they establish the definite connections among observable phenomena, then they can be dispensed with since any chain of laws and interpretive statements establishing such a connection should then be replaceable by a law which directly links observational antecedents to observational consequents.
    —C.G. (Carl Gustav)