The Oxford Book of Modern Verse and W.B. Yeats' Rejection of War Poetry

In 1936, twenty years after the Battle of the Somme, The Oxford Book of Modern Verse 1892–1935 was published. It purported to be a collection of the finest poetry in our language produced in modern times. (Oxford book is good poetry book) The editor was W. B. Yeats. He decided that the book should contain no poetry of the Great War. (oxford book has no poetry of Great War) In his introduction, Yeats was quite candid about his decision to proscribe war poets. He had a distaste for certain poems written during the war: “In poems that had for a time considerable fame, written in the first person, they made suffering their own. I have rejected these poems for the . . . reason that . . . passive suffering is not a theme for poetry. . . . If war is necessary, or necessary in our time and place, it is best to forget its suffering as we do the discomforts of fever, remembering our comfort at midnight when our temperature fell.” (Oxford book has no poetry of war because editor, yeats, does not think poetry about suffering/discomfort is appropriate, better to forget bad things about war) Purpose of paragraph: Introduction to Yeats and Oxford book of poetry. Yeats does not like war poems because he thinks the suffering from war should be forgotten With a superior wave of his hand, Yeats dismisses such giants of twentiethcentury literature as Wilfred Owen, Robert Graves, Siegfried Sassoon, and a host of others who attempted to render the experience of 1914–1918 in poetry. Yeats anti-war poem stance means these authors arent included (they must write about war) Yet, in all charity, we may make some effort to understand the reason Yeats found war poetry so difficult to accommodate. This seems to be a potential main point: author is going to defend yeats/reason for him being anti war poems. This sentence also seems to be setting up reasoning. So I should be prepared to read about the reasoning the author has in order to defend Yeats. He was a victim of his own period and the limitations of his reading. There had been nothing like the poetry of the Great War before; there had been no war like the Great War. Reason seems to be based on the fact that there was nothing like the Great War before so he never experienced anything like it. In the present day, the poets he so peevishly and grandly dismissed from his collection are considered to be among the greatest of modern poets, and his theory of poetry, of the appropriateness of particular subjects to poetic treatment and the avoidance of others, now seems affected. This clarifies it, that Yeats’ time had never really experienced anything like the great war and so what he finds appropriate (war poem sadness is not) is skewed Yeats, however, simply could not accept what the poets of the Great War had to offer; his generation was quite unprepared. War had been a subject for poetry, but never like this. Again, makes the argument that he had never experienced anything like it Purpose of paragraph: Tries to defend Yeat’s reasoning for excluding war poems/authors who wrote about the great war. He does so by saying the Great War was a novel experience. This is something that was mentioned, but not deeply addressed in the first paragraph. Before 1914, when poets dealt with war it was to render it exotically or historically removed from immediate experience. Expanding on the reasoning, the author says that poets had distanced war from its expeirence, different type of writing. War had all the conviction of modern television costume drama. There were two outstanding exceptions—Rudyard Kipling and Thomas Hardy. Author mentions these two guys as exceptions so they must have written war poetry differently. Kipling made a serious attempt to reproduce the voice of the ordinary soldier and to get away from the bardic commentaries on the glories of the nation’s victories. Hardy wrote honestly and movingly about the Boer war, but most impressive is his epic treatment of the Napoleonic war, The Dynasts. Okay so they wrote differently in these ways. Point of this paragraph: Passage author continues his reasoning that people never experienced a war quite like the great war. Also brings in some writers that were exceptions. Georgian poetry, which appeared just before the Great War, also found inspiration in the exotic, counterbalanced by romantic rhapsodizing about the English countryside. Okay, new topic in Georgian poetry. Some background info on it where they talk about the english countryside. Honestly, not quite sure what this is getting at. On the face of it, the generation that faced the catastrophe of 1914 was ill-equipped poetically to express itself, having neither tradition to draw upon nor worthwhile models to imitate. Okay this is similar to the argument made before, that new experiences are to blame At first, poets aped anthology pieces or relied on well-established forms, but gradually the really original poets found their own voices. Author is saying that poets relied on previous poetry at first but then became more original. Point of this paragraph: Continues to build on argument made before about new experiences are hard to judge correctly In the version of literary history academically accepted until very recently, there was a long lull during which little of value was created in English poetry. Historically, it seems that English poetry was not valued but now it is We can now see this for the pernicious nonsense that it is, in the just recognition of Graves, Sassoon, and Owen, and the numerous—possibly lesser—poets who tried to portray the indescribable and express the unthinkable during the years 1914–1918. Brings up authors that apparently made good poetry Yeats could not have been more mistaken. Okay so this is his main point, that Yeats was wrong to exclude poetry. Before was just to try and reason out Yeats’ logic. War is not necessary, but if it comes, then it is the poets’ duty to make sure we never “forget its suffering as we do the discomforts of fever, remembering our comfort at midnight when our temperature fell.” Passage author seems to be in favor of poets writing about war Point of this paragraph: To say yeats was wrong and that poetry about war should be written So the main point is to explore poetry during the great war and how yeats excluded it but it shouldn’t have been excluded Question 1: The main point of the passage is that A. poetry dealing with war should not be considered in the same class as other poetry. B. English poetry prior to 1914 depicted war as exotic. C. Yeats was wrong to dismiss the works of the Great War poets. D. it is the duty of all poets to portray the sufferings of war. This is clearly the main point as the passage explores Yeats’ reasoning then concludes that he should have included them Question 2: The passage implies that Yeats would have been most likely to agree with which of the following statements about English poetry? A. Much outstanding poetry was produced between 1892 and 1935. B. Little valuable poetry was written prior to 1914. C. The war poetry of 1914 through 1918 is among the finest England has produced. D. Kipling and Hardy were the premier English poets of their generation. This is referring to the oxford book in which the passage states that it was a collection of good poetry Question 3: The author of the passage suggests that if a contemporary literary critic were to agree with Yeats about war poetry, that critic’s view would probably be: A. welcomed by most readers of poetry as a voice of reason. B. influential in directing attention to the poetry of later wars. C. taken into account in the compilation of poems for the next edition of the Oxford anthology. D. dismissed by most devotees of contemporary poetry. The passage author disagrees with Yeats (clear in the last paragraph) Question 4: The author of the passage quotes Yeats’s introduction a second time (final paragraph) in order to: A. illustrate Yeats’s evocative use of imagery. B. show that they are in agreement on some minor points. C. acknowledge that Yeats’s attitude was understandable in the context of the period. D. contradict Yeats’s characterization of the relationship between poetry and war. The last paragraph is the author’s conclusion that Yeats should not have left out war poetry. The author uses this quote to say that war poems should be used to remember war Question 5: It is reasonable to conclude from the information presented that poets were constrained in writing about their experiences in the Great War because: A. few had been able to complete their education due to their military obligations. B. the poets who might have served as their models wrote in a style inappropriate to wartime subjects. C. they knew very little about the poetic traditions that had preceded them. D. they were intimidated by the style of the previous generation of poets. The author brings up the reasoning for why poets may have struggled in writing: by saying there was nothing like the Great War and that there were no models or traditions that applied to it Question 6: The passage suggests that the poetry of Kipling and Hardy was unusual at the time they wrote because it: A. recounted individual acts of heroism. B. contained moving elegies to the dead. C. celebrated the glories of contemporary battles. D. depicted the squalor and futility of war. The author mentions these poets are doing the unusual- which is the opposite. So they must have talked about the suffering/bad things of war Question 7: The passage suggests that literary historians changed their assumption that there was a “long lull” in English poetry (final paragraph) because of: A. a reevaluation of the poets of the Great War. B. the advent of modernism in literature. C. the publication of Yeats’s Oxford anthology. D. a new emphasis on the contributions of Kipling and Hardy. The last paragraph lists poets that have recently been given due credit for their poetry. Passage 6 The ants are tiny and usually nest between rocks in the south coast of England. Transformed into research subjects at the University of Bristol, they raced along a tabletop foraging for food—and then, remarkably, returned to guide others. Time and again, followers trailed behind leaders, darting this way and that along the route, presumably to memorize landmarks. Background info on ants? Not really sure what the point is yet, but something to keep in mind I guess. Once a follower got its bearings, it tapped the leader with its antennae, prompting the lesson to literally proceed to the next step. Researchers said the careful way the leaders led followers—thereby turning them into leaders in their own right—marked the Temnothorax albipennis ant as the very first example of a nonhuman animal exhibiting teaching behavior. Ants teach each other through a process- animal exhibiting teaching behavior. Seems to be like the thesis statement, something about ants teaching? Not positive but will keep it in mind. “Within the field of animal behavior, we would say an animal is a teacher if it modifies its behavior in the presence of another, at cost to itself, so another individual can learn more quickly,” said Nigel Franks, Franks defines teaching as modifying its behavior in the presence of another, at the cost to itself, so someone else can learn faster. So at this point, it seems like the main point will be about teaching behavior professor of animal behavior and ecology, whose paper on the ant educators has sparked debate over what constitutes learning and teaching in the nonhuman world. Opening up a discussion as to what teaching is (Defines it) and then acknowledges there is a debate about it. Will this passage discuss the debate? Maybe Franks claims that careful analysis and a great many hours of videotape proved that the ants were teaching one another. If the leaders were to race to the food on their own, he said, they would reach it four times as fast as if they had a follower tagging along. Franks reasoning for why he thinks ants are teaching, because clearly ants would do it faster if they were not teaching. Even grabbing a follower by the mouth and physically lugging it to the food, as the ants are sometimes prone to do, was three times as fast as the teaching exercise. But the ants persisted with the tutorial, Franks said, presumably because followers that were carried were trucked with their heads turned upside down facing backward—an impossible vantage point from which to master a new route. Further elaborates on the ants teaching point with some reasoning. Franks defends his point of view that the ants are teaching The leader ants appeared to follow pedagogical techniques that good human teachers have used for centuries. The lesson was highly interactive and proceeded at a pace set by the followers. So the ants teach by being highly interactive and a pace set by the learners. If the gap between leader and follower increased too much, the leader slowed down. If it was too close, the leader accelerated. More information on how ants teach (similar to humans) in that the lesson is interactive and proceeded at a pace set by the followers. However, scientists disagree about whether the ants learn a new skill or merely acquire new information. This could be the debate that was mentioned earlier in the passage Marc Hauser, a Harvard psychologist and biologist, argues that mere communication of information is commonplace in the animal world. Seems like hauser vs franks, hauser thinks most animals communicate how these ants are, so these ants are not teaching but communicating. He notes, for example, that many species use alarm calls to warn other members about the presence of a predator. Sounding the alarm can be dangerous because the animal may draw the attention of the predator to itself. But it allows others to flee safely. So this paragraph Introduces a new guy who opposes the view point of Franks from earlier. Says that a lot of species just communicate naturally. Has example of alarm call that most animals do without “teaching” “Would you call this teaching?” Hauser asks. “The caller incurs a cost. The naïve animals gain a benefit and new knowledge that better enables them to learn about the predator’s location than if the caller had not called. Elaborates/spells out the point previously made This happens throughout the animal kingdom, but we don’t call it teaching, even though it is clearly a transfer of information, because it doesn’t involve a ‘theory of mind.’” Continues with Hauser’s point that ants dont teach. Introduces a new definition that teaching involves a theory of mind. So Hauser’s definition says teaching my involve a theory of mind Hauser insists there must be an element of awareness by a teacher that the students don’t know something, if an animal’s behavior is to qualify as instructional. Hauser’s definition of teaching is different than Franks, his definition is that the teacher must be aware the student doesnt know something Whether Franks’s leader ants actually know that their followers are ignorant, or are simply following an instinctive rule to proceed when a follower ant taps them on the legs or abdomen with antennae, has not been, and might never be, determined. Tying Hauser’s definition back to the ants, saying the ants may just be following some rule as oppose to teaching. Question 1: Assume that the description of teaching behavior in the second paragraph applies to a human context, not just to the animal world. Which one of the following scenarios would qualify as teaching behavior, according to the criteria Franks adopts? A. A toddler complains that the sun hurts his eyes, and the teacher takes off her sunglasses and shows the child how to put them on. B. A toddler says she is cold, and the teacher shows her how to button her sweater. C. A child incorrectly draws a square on the blackboard, and the teacher corrects her by drawing a figure with four equal sides next to it. D. A student of French watches as a teacher points to objects in the classroom that are masculine nouns in that language. The second paragraph has franks definition as sacrificing oneself to teach someone else faster Question 2: If one assumes that the ants are exhibiting teaching behavior, as the Bristol researchers maintained, the pace at which the leader ant moves would likely be influenced by: ● A. its sense of urgency. ● B. its capacity for movement. ● C. its estimate of the time its follower needs to learn something new. ● D. the relative speed of other ants performing the same task. Paragraph four talks about how the ants teach similarly to humans by the leader following the pace set by the learners Question 3: In the context of the passage, the comparison between how fast the leader could go and how fast it does go when paired with a follower ant is LEAST reliable as an index of how much: A. restraint is exercised by the leader. B. help the follower ant appears to need. C. effort the task being performed should take. D. effort is made to orient and instruct the follower. The passage states that the leader goes at the pace of the follower and uses the proof of the ant leader could finish the task much faster if he/she wasn’t teaching. Answer C is the opposite of this Question 4 Which one of the following groups of people is likely to find support for their educational ideas in Hauser’s distinction between learning and information? A. Opponents of classroom discussion and debate B. Opponents of rote memorization C. Proponents of team teaching D. Proponents of case study approaches Hauser says that teaching isn’t just a transfer of information Question 5: It would be consistent with Hauser’s views in the passage to regard threats to survival as catalysts for animal responses that are: A. aggressive. B. unique. C. acquired. D. automatic. Hauser argues that there needs to be a theory of mind for something to be teaching. In his argument he says there needs to be a theory of mind as many animals alert others about a predator even if it costs them something. This implies that these are automatic responses (not learned)