When it came to reading Sylvia Plath's Mirror the first time around, I loved how the poem was one big personification of these objects, the lake and the mirror, and it was the idea that they are reflecting on what they literally reflect. I've always thought it to be very difficult to write a something in the perspective of an inanimate object but now that I think it about it, it might not be so bad because they would be capable of doing whatever it is you write them to do. It was a bit hard, at times, to visualize the images they were depicting, like when the mirror says, "The eye of a little god, four-cornered" or when the lake says, "Rises toward her day after day, like a terrible fish". What I question is if whoever is speaking is this abstract idea of reflection or the actual mirror and lake.
Reading it again helped me to focus more on the structure of the poem and the different elements that the author uses to put it together. It also gave me a chance to try and identify any patterns or rhymes that it might consist and if so, where they are at.
Answering the questions was very hard for me because I realized some were asking things that I had either completely missed within the text or disregarded as a major detail. Also, some questions have answers where more than one can fit, it's just that one usually more literal in meaning while the other is abstract. It makes it hard to answer what the author means by something when you have choices like that, so I think I would need more instruction about those types of questions.
No comments:
Post a Comment