There are several things you can do here:
- identify what you find striking or interesting or puzzling in the way Jones represents her poetic abilities and aspirations, or
- define or identify the view of poetic creation against which Jones appears to be arguing, or
- skim the oeuvre of "your" poet to see if she published a similar sort of poetic credo, and tell us about it, or
- disagree (kindly and collegially, of course) with the remarks of a classmate, offering alternative evidence to support your view.
3 comments:
Jones is critiquing the practice of gaining favor and patronage at court through the writing of flattering poetry. Throughout the poem she continually asks not to be in the spotlight: "I'd live unknown, unenvy'd too," "I ask no more, but in some calm retreat, / to sleep in quiet, and in quiet eat." She does not want to "smile lies, eat toads, or lick the dust," instead she wants to be appreciated for her own worth. She does not want to simply be part of the fashionable trend of patronage among the wealthy nobles: "To be the very creature I despise? / With face unmov'd, my poem in my hand, / Cringe to the porter, with footman stand?" Overall, Jones simply craves to know "an honest heart" so that her work may be appreciated for what it is, a hobby that she enjoys and likes to share with her friends: ""What's fame to me, who pray, and pay my rent? / If my friends know me honest, I'm content."
I think it's interesting to see a poet who feels that their audience need fall under some specific guidelines. Maybe that's being a bit obtuse, but it seems as though Jones is saying "I don't want to write for people who can't appreciate it or are not worthy of poetry." She explains how she has "Resolv'd no more to offer up my wit,/ Where footmen in the seat of critics sit." Which comes after discussing how a vassal approached her to ask her business with the king. The vassal explains that the king doesn't read, but the vassal knows something about poetry and if he likes what Jones has to say, he'll recommend it to the king (who probably wouldn't have an opinion of it anyway).
All of this searching for the perfect lord to be her patron, a concept which I don't really understand in the first place. It seems like there's a lot of name dropping, possibly in response to Pope's poem. The little blurb before "An Epistle to Lady Bowyer" mentions that this poem was modeled after Pope's "Epistle to Dr. Arbuthnot" which is a prologue to his satires. I get a bit of a sarcastic vibe from this poem as well, especially in the lines "My Patron's name" 'O choose some Lord at Court. / One that has money which he does not use, / One you may flatter much, that is, abuse." It seems a weird contrast to the search for a lord who would be worthy of her poetry that comes later in the story. So which is it for, a worthy reader or the money?
To show that the opinion of her audience is important to her, Mary Jones addresses the reader of “An Epistle to Lady Bowyer,” saying that if “Charlot should smile, or You approve my lay, / Enough for me.” Jones does not want to address her poetry to people who are not going to appreciate it. Instead, she wishes that readers approve of and enjoy her verses. Due to the fact that the poet has “not learnt to flatter, ev’n the Great,” she prefers an audience who values her writing on a purely literary basis and who does not need insincere praise in order to esteem her work. Her distaste lies in writing a poem dedicated to a lord or lady who would then allow the paper on which it was written to be used “To curl a Fav’rite in a dressing-room,” or “To mend a candle when the snuff’s too short.” Such actions are the opposite of appreciative, and Jones views the dutiful dedication of her work to someone so disrespectful as absurd.
Post a Comment