I'm Not Crying, You Are -- Breanna Poole
I'm Not Crying, You Are by Breanna Poole
I am not okay. I am really not okay, because "The Dream of the Rood" has left me with an inability to describe what it is I am feeling in regards to it -- it is amazing and I actually cried while reading it because oh my fairy godmother I am in love with it. It's a fantastic piece of poetry, and that's coming from someone who normally dislikes reading poetry (I've always been more of a prose person, sue me), but "The Dreams of the Rood" really struck something in me.
From a diction standpoint alone, it's a very nice read. Everything flows really well and the word choice is very telling of not only the speaker's character and how the speaker sees and respects God, but also allows us to peak into the author's view point as well because of the deliberate word choice.
The word choice is super important because it helps with the context of the poem. The Anglo-Saxons were a people that loved a good hero, they loved a good story, and this poem delivered that. It combined the story of Christ (the ultimate hero) with that of the heroes normally seen in Anglo-Saxon poetry -- someone who is humbled before a victory (which God already is, but I think you see my point). It's taking the idea of God and fitting it within a pre-existing culture, not by changing the story of the Resurrection but by explaining it in a way that a culture removed from the lands Biblical stories and events took place in. It allows these people to identify quickly with the story.
Is this a good or a bad thing? I'm not quite sure that's up for me to say. On one hand, this poem's intent was probably very good -- tell the story of Christ in a way the Anglo-Saxons could identify based on pre-established stroy-telling techniques in their culture. But at the same time, an argument can be made it's a damaging thing since people might read the actual Bible expecting to see more things common in their culture and be surprised to find something that doesn't, and turn away from God because of it, feeling betrayed and lied to.
On a side note, it's very interesting how the speaker dwells on God's taking on a human body and the suffering He had because of that. Obliviously it's something very important that should be talked about, I just thought it was interesting because from my experience people tend to shy away from what the physical aspects of God taking a human form entails. Not sure really how to feel about it, just thought it was interesting.
So, in conclusion, this poem is fantastic and I loved reading it.
My reaction after reading the poem^^^.
P.S. I commented on AnnaKate and Kayla's posts.
I am not okay. I am really not okay, because "The Dream of the Rood" has left me with an inability to describe what it is I am feeling in regards to it -- it is amazing and I actually cried while reading it because oh my fairy godmother I am in love with it. It's a fantastic piece of poetry, and that's coming from someone who normally dislikes reading poetry (I've always been more of a prose person, sue me), but "The Dreams of the Rood" really struck something in me.
From a diction standpoint alone, it's a very nice read. Everything flows really well and the word choice is very telling of not only the speaker's character and how the speaker sees and respects God, but also allows us to peak into the author's view point as well because of the deliberate word choice.
The word choice is super important because it helps with the context of the poem. The Anglo-Saxons were a people that loved a good hero, they loved a good story, and this poem delivered that. It combined the story of Christ (the ultimate hero) with that of the heroes normally seen in Anglo-Saxon poetry -- someone who is humbled before a victory (which God already is, but I think you see my point). It's taking the idea of God and fitting it within a pre-existing culture, not by changing the story of the Resurrection but by explaining it in a way that a culture removed from the lands Biblical stories and events took place in. It allows these people to identify quickly with the story.
Is this a good or a bad thing? I'm not quite sure that's up for me to say. On one hand, this poem's intent was probably very good -- tell the story of Christ in a way the Anglo-Saxons could identify based on pre-established stroy-telling techniques in their culture. But at the same time, an argument can be made it's a damaging thing since people might read the actual Bible expecting to see more things common in their culture and be surprised to find something that doesn't, and turn away from God because of it, feeling betrayed and lied to.
On a side note, it's very interesting how the speaker dwells on God's taking on a human body and the suffering He had because of that. Obliviously it's something very important that should be talked about, I just thought it was interesting because from my experience people tend to shy away from what the physical aspects of God taking a human form entails. Not sure really how to feel about it, just thought it was interesting.
So, in conclusion, this poem is fantastic and I loved reading it.
P.S. I commented on AnnaKate and Kayla's posts.
Agreed on all fronts!! I usually don't have many tears to shed over poetry I'm required to read, but this one is unique. I liked what you said about making the Gospel story make sense to a culture removed from Bible times. I think it's something really important to keep in mind when trying to reach the lost (as long as we don't stray from the Biblical truth, of course). But yes, I'm glad to hear I wasn't the only one weeping over Anglo-Saxon poetry this weekend.
ReplyDeleteYou absolutely nailed everything in your descriptions about this masterful piece of poetry! Honestly, the passion confined in the lines of the poem is unmatched in every way. It not only provides amazing imagery, it makes you feel everything on a deeper level! Great Blog, B!
ReplyDeleteI like how you described this story as putting it in a context the Anglo-Saxons could understand. Well written. But, I agree. This is kind of why I do not have a problem with translations of the Bible that arent King James. They are used to tell the stories of the Bible that a "non-scholar" or a child could understand. I'm not sure way people get too upset about the translations anyways considering King James was also a translation given to the people to help them understand...
ReplyDelete