John Kinsella (An uncanny reading of A. D. Hope's "the death of the bird" vs
Henry Weinfeld (ROMANTIC SYMBOL AND MODERNIST ANTI-SYMBOL)
“The Death of a Bird” by A. D. Hope is a famous and timeless piece of Australian Poetry that has been analysed and studied thousands of times by hundreds of different people from students to Professors of English. Two such analyses have completely different interpretations and styles to one another but are both founded around the same centre point. John Kinsella having a more informal structure with a more critical tone and Henry Weinfeld with a professional structure and admiration of A. D. Hope’s work.
Both authors of the two discussion pieces have completely different qualifications and backgrounds to each other. John Kinsella is a well-known Australian poet, novelist, critic, essayist and editor whereas Henry Weinfeld is a American poet, translator and literary scholar with a PhD and works as a professor of English at Notre Dame University. Kinsella is a self-made, award winning poet and writer and Weinfeld and educated, professional lecturer and poet.
Kinsella’s structure of writing on A. D. Hope’s work is informal and does not connect smoothly; instead of analysing the poem based on topics he takes apart the meaning of the poem line after line with descriptions from his journal as he follows the poem. He describes the poem through images taken from his own life experiences and tries to correlate them with the meaning of each line of the poem. He also sets his analyses out as if it were a page taken from his notebook, helping to make it more personalised. Each description of the line is done in short “dot-point” like sentences which vary in length from short singular sentences to extended paragraphs. With Kinsella’s strange use of structure and writing, he conveys his points clearly making criticisms after criticisms but in doing this does not try to please anyone with his points. His points are...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document