Marriage Poems

Connie Benjamin

Per 4

Marriage

The two poems “A Valediction” and “Conjoined” have the subject of separation happens in marriage and being too close can hinder growth between the couple by using metaphors and diction. The poem “A Valediction,” by John Donne, is about a couple that will experience separation because one of them is leaving. The lover that is leaving consoles his companion by using metaphors to express how their love is much more than physical by using expressive metaphors and having an encouraging tone. In the poem “Conjoined,” by Judith Minty, a wife tells how the marriage that she is in hinders and is a problem by using three metaphors and negative connotation to show the ugliness of the marriage.

The poem “A Valediction” uses expressive metaphors to display how a bond between two people in love knows no distance. The speaker wants the separation to be accepted and for the couple not to mourn. He compares the sadness that they should have to be similar to, “Virtuous men pass mildly away.” The separation is to be accepted because it is inevitable and is not to mourned over. The noble men in the metaphor do not mourn over the death of their friend because death is inevitable and is a fact of life. People do die and although the men are solemn because of the loss of their friend, they do not publicly mourn in the streets or go into a state of depression. The speaker does not want his companion to mourn over his absence because his departure is inevitable. This metaphor consoles his companion and offers hope that they will soon be reunited. They will be reunited just as the noble men will be reunited in Heaven. Their love is of greater value and matured because they can handle the separation. The speaker has a tone of encouragement and loving because of statements such as, "Our souls therefore, which are one" and "So let us melt and make no noise." There is no negative words or harsh words in the poem. However, in the poem “Conjoined,” the speaker believes that the closeness that the couple has is hindering their growth and how there is a need for separation. The speaker uses a metaphor as a comparison to their marriage. The speaker uses a negative object as comparison to the problem in the relationship, “The onion in my cupboard, a monster... Two joined under one transparent skin: each half-round, then flat and deformed.” The couple never got the develop or grow to their fullest because they are under this tough skin called marriage. Their relationship is not working because they are pushing against each other to grow and find themselves. They did not find their individuality because they are in a bound. Thus, separation seems to be the answer to the speaker so they can grow to their fullest. The choice of an onion is negative and gives the reader a sour description because the aroma of an onion is pungent. The speaker sees the problem in her marriage and compares it to a deformed onion because it is unnatural and is very noticeable because of the aroma. The connotation in the first stanza is negative with words like “monster” and “deformed” the speaker is disgusted with how the marriage is working and the reader is disgusted because of how it is described. The speaker sees her marriage as having tow individual people forced to be conjoined under marriage. They have not conformed to one another because they are unwilling. Therefore, they are suffocating each other.

Donne uses geometric metaphors to display how the couple’s love will be strong despite the separation. The speaker must leave his companion and compares his travels away from his companion to a compass, “As stiff twin compasses are two; thy soul, the fixt foot, makes no show to move, but doth, if th’ other do.” The couple is joined by marriage and the compass’ two legs are joined well. With a compass one leg stays is fixed and the other is free to move to make a perfect circle. The speaker sees his marriage as that compass. That his spouse will stay in one spot and where ever he may go, he will always be connected to his spouse and thus creating a perfect circle because of their union. Their love can handle the distance because of the union that they have and that their love transcends the merely physical. This metaphor describes the couple’s relationship as balanced, symmetrical, and beautiful. In “Conjoined” the speaker uses the unnatural as comparison to her marriage and to give a negative connotation. The speaker tells of a two-headed calf and Siamese twins, “An accident, like the two-headed calf rooted in one body, fighting to suck at its mother’s teats; or those other freaks, joined at the chest by skin and muscle, doomed to live, even make love, together for sixty years.” She sees her marriage as an accident and that it was not to be. The couple is conjoined like the calf and the twins but they are not of the same mind. Like the calf, they are fighting to get nourishment so they can develop and grow. Just like the Siamese twins conjoined at the chest and are seemed “doomed” the speaker sees that her marriage is doomed because the only thing that is keeping them together is marriage. They are individuals and in one body and they are fighting for space. The connotation is distasteful because of the words “doomed,” “fighting,” and “freaks.” The negative connotation causes the reader to view the marriage as hopeless and that the couple is suffocating each other by being so close to each other. They are hindering each other and not helping each other to grow because of this bound that they have. It has not helped them to be one in spirit but one in the physical. The speaker knows that in order for this bound to work, the couple must be of the same mind and not just bound physically.

The poems see marriage as a bound that needs to be less about the physical bound and more about the spiritual and psychological bound. Donne’s poem saw that marriage is more than the physical and is that the couple have this emotional aristocracy because they consider their love higher than other couples. The separation will not interfere with their marriage because they are one in spirit. Minty’s poem suggests that marriage needs to be more than a physical bound and a couple needs to be one in understanding. If they are individuals and are bound only physically, then they will fight each other and their marriage will seem like an accident or freak.

Article

So the article that was about The Things They Carried was pretty interesting. Like the author sees that O'Brien is having this internal conflict about telling the truth and twisting it a little. O'Brien talks about in his novel that sometimes the truth isn't that exciting. He says "in a true war story, nothing is exactly true" (88). People see things differently and take sides. In his novel he tells the same story twice but differently. He tells it as if its true and he's in it. And then he changes it to where he is talking about a handsome boy in the war. People are captivated by the story about the boy. They can make the character come to life and do whatever their mind want to. If its true, then no imagination can take place and what is said is final. I also, like in the article that it talked about how past wars were like a novel in that it was everything about it was known to everyone. Everyone knew about what the sides were about and what was happening. But with Vietnam, not everything was clear. Like postmodernism. Vietnam is considered a postmodern war. People did not understand why America was over there and what each side was about. I kinda think that the article is criticizing O'Brien in that he doesn't tell anything true and that he just tells the gore and bad things that happened in Vietnam. Reflecting on the past and wanting the reader to sympathize with him. With the title of the book to be considered, I can see this. The Things They Carried. They carried stories that were sad and crazy. Like the the guy that killed himself in the book. He could be a totally not a real character or he could be real and that he may not taken his life but its might be what the soldiers felt like. They had this burden about what they saw in the war and they wanted to tell it to others to get relief. Because many people are not interested in war stories, the soldiers change the story to make it interesting to people. Or so the people can understand what they went through.

Things they carried

So I find this new book very interesting. its like autobiography but it doesn't just tell about things chronology or one event after author. You get into the author's head and see how he views things. Like in the beginning, he is talking to his military buddy about the past and his friend tells him how he wants to be viewed in his book. "Make me out to be a good guy, ok? Brave and handsome, and all that stuff, best platoon leader ever (30). I kinda got something out of this quote. That history takes sides and there can't be an absolute truth. The focus in history might be on one thing instead of the whole picture. People have opinions on historic figures and may write about them in a praise worthy manner or in a negative manner. We can twist a story pretty well. Like in class we were talking about the game telephone. The sentence can be twisted pretty bad. So you can't regard this author's book as history because it may be twisted. YOu can't really trust any history book, therefore. (If you want to take it to the extreme). There s no absolute truth and its totally ok. I personally like seeing people's viewpoints. See how maybe a solider on the Confederate viewed the Civil War or how the Germans' felt about the World Wars. Do we always have to take the side of the good guy? Does the good guy always have to get attention and glory in textbooks and bad guys are viewed as slugs? Its something to look at. I'm totally ok with believing that Columbus was a good guy and just got a little confused when he traveled across the sea. Not that he was a jerk and a crazy man sailing three little wooden things in the ocean.

Postmodernism

ok, so postmodernism has been the central thought for this whole semester with all the books and articles we have read. In my humble opinion I kinda think postmodernism is a selfish way to justify your actions. But I won't get into that. In Cat's Cradle we see that people are unhappy with the present day world. Technology has taken over and is causing more problems than solving. We also see that in 1984, seeing that Winston is not happy with what he is seeing with a controlling government that uses technology to inflict justice. And in Brave New World, we see that productiveness is not always the best. Sometimes it causes the product to lose its quality and uniqueness. The people in the novel were a dime a dozen. No one was really that special and when they met the native they saw someone that was different than all of them and then they were just creepy people watching this unique person...weird. And in Maus, we see that the author was trying to go against the norm and tell a TRUE story about the Holocaust through a comic book. He believed that you wold get a different look into the Holocaust. And he succeeded. Its different from novel because there are pictures, words, and many other things. So postmodernism is looking at the world and being unhappy with it and wanting to do something different. I think thats what its about, doing something different. All those crazy people we learned in the Postmodernism book, were just people doing something totally different for their time. Its also seeing the aftermath of modernism and seeing that it was not the best. that many things and people were lost because of modernism. Technology failed its people and the people need to control the power of it. In that video earlier in the year we saw many stats about the affect technology has on the people. I thought it was pretty crazy. Seeing that a social network on the internet could be the largest country in the world. And Americans are not the #1 country speaking english. It just makes you think. Postmodernism seeks to make the person think about the present world and do something about it.