Kerry Xu
1/22/2018 06:10:17 pm
I feel like because there are so many unfinished phrases that are comprised of such exotic and bizarre words and the poem is executed through first person point of view, the author must be looking at the piece of painting and jotting down her very first thoughts and connections. I am guessing that there are so many broken thoughts and sentences because her eyes have moved on to different parts of the paintings, resulting in a new flood of thoughts that take over her writing before she could finish her old thoughts. I feel like visual art is too subjective so that a poem written on visual art is almost impossible to follow along because everyone makes different connections even when looking at the same thing. The imagery in the poem is also so difficult to understand because of her staggered ideas. Her use of enjambment sort of suggests ambiguity of some form, like when she ends with “globe” or “tongues”, it sort of makes me question its significance. So, initially in close reading, I had zero idea what the poem was about, even after reading it 5 times. I then decided to search up “Denise Riley”, the author of the poem. It turns out she is an English poet, so I search up “English 1963.” This is when it hit me, that she was most likely describing the newfound pop culture that happened in 1963. Additionally, the only thing I really absorbed were her descriptions of bright and poppy colors. It makes me think that her extensive use of color imagery must relate to the pop culture she was describing and that it was probably a time where people started to express themselves through the colors they wore. But then the title is “Lure”, so maybe these bright colors were luring people to a specific type of developing culture or to take on a more daring persona.
Reply
Fatema Yasini
1/23/2018 09:25:12 am
Denise Riley’s poem, “Lure 1963” is very difficult in deciphering the meanings. Riley expresses thoughts on the painting based on what she sees. While looking at it, she notices the right colors evading the dark. For example she writes, “navy near-black cut in with lemon, fruity bright lime green.” What stands out is the description of the bright colors in the poem. The descriptions of the colors are expressed with words like, “barbaric pink singing”, “lime brilliance”, and “clean red”. The structure of the poem seems to be very sporadic and scattered. I assume this is because she is writing as she is looking at the painting; all her thoughts are documented, without a filter. The poem is written in first person point-of-view, which means that the speaker is a person looking at the painting and documenting it. It can also mean that the speaker is relating the poem to their life, on a personal level. There is no present perceivable rhyme scheme, but that adds to the sporadic culture of the poem. The randomness of the the rhyme schemes the poem a broken structure. The poem also consists of many unfinished phrases. An example would be from the fourth line where it says, “... radiant weeping When will I be loved?” The speaker changes from describing the colors to an existential-type question. The speaker’s thought about the colors is interrupted with a distracting idea as she is looking at the painting. There is also repetition that occurs. For example, in line two, the word “around” is repeated four times. This can be interpreted as a parallel between the words of the speaker and her mind. In terms of the relationship between visual art and poetry, they seem to be similar in a sense. Poetry, like art, can be interpreted in many ways. Comparing the meaning of a poem to one of a visual piece of art, that gets interesting. Many people have different views with their unique experiences which influences the way they see the art. In the poem, the speaker jumps around with the description of the painting to certain questions pertaining to life. What interested me was the title, and its influence. The title includes the year 1963. Knowing that the author in English, I googled “1963 in England” to get some background information. What I found is that in 1963 is that the leadership of the major political parties in England changed. This year was also the rise of The Beatles. The year included many instances of change, whether it was political or cultural. This change may have been the muse of the poem. Her scattered thoughts parallel the state of the country with the surrounding change that was taking place.
Reply
Luca Deza
1/23/2018 04:24:13 pm
The relationship between the painting and the poem is such that the focus of both is colors. The painting, through the lens of a typical viewer, is not one of much complexity. By simply looking at the painting in a museum I would think that it is just a painting with colors and simply walk away because it is not very intriguing. However, in the poem, the way colors are described sucks an reader in to really try and understand what the author means. When the author discusses the nature of colors it is talked about deeper then usual, adding more complexity to color. I would say that visual art can be interpreted differently by every individual that views it while a poem cannot be interpreted as openly all the time. Because there is no story written to a painting most times, a viewer is able to often times make up what that painting means to them.
Reply
Andrea Hernandez
1/23/2018 05:16:52 pm
Denise Riley's poem is an ambiguous yet fascinating documentation of the painting "Lure 1963." The scattered and sporadic structure of the poem reflects almost the same theme of irregularity throughout the painting itself. Riley's poem describes the different colors and schemas of the painting by developing a narrative of her own. Riley gives the painting substance by adding adjectives and actions to the various colors, like "fruity bright lime green," "barbaric pink," or "broad stinging blue". Her poem reflects the creative interpretation and analysis of the Lure painting by creating her own narrative through her first-person point of view. The written language (poem) gives substance to the painting that the painting itself may not project. It allows the painting to have a character, an emotion, or a story. From reading the poem closely and analyzing the choices of syntax and structure, such as the small use of rhyme towards the end, I think the poem is about the colors that surround us every day; the colors that remind us of moments in our lives. How we interpret these colors allows us to create our own narrative, as Riley has done. Each person has a unique story to tell and therefore each color can represent something different to each one of us.
Reply
Erica Clay
1/23/2018 09:28:27 pm
The poem is a different kind of approach to visual art, because the descriptions and comparisons provide a vehicle for understanding the emotional reactions caused by the paintings and where they come from. The written word gives almost explicit explanation of the effect on an observer. On the other hand, the visual art provides the observer the freedom to react in their own way. At its core, the poem is about a story of unrequited love and how the painting stirs up those emotions in the author.
Reply
Yvie Lock
1/23/2018 10:01:16 pm
I think that this poem was incredibly difficult to understand and the painting was challenging to decipher. I thought Riley herself was confused about the painting. For example, she writes, “that’s where it is, indigo, oh not, it’s in his kiss.” It is as if she is deciding whether or not to withdraw the “indigo” from the statement. Furthermore, she also uses a lot of negative phrases such as, “oh no”, “wont”, “never” and ”don’t”. This supports the view that she either doesn’t understand the painting or, doesn’t agree with the painting. I think she tries to reflect the painting through the structure of her poem. It is very disorganized. There is often more than one sentence on a line and at other times the sentence overflows to the next line. Riley is trying to show that there is no organization in the picture and has demonstrated this in the configuration of her poem. In addition, she has used colors and imagery to reflect the lack of structure of the image. She has done this by placing very different colors side by side. For example, in one line she has “near black” besides “bright lime” and the color that follows “barbaric pink” is “deep violet”. The speaker copy’s this idea of placing opposite words side by side in the adjectives she uses to describe the colors. For example, in line 3 she uses the adjectives “slashed” followed by “flowing”. Again, by placing words with almost opposite meanings side by side, creates a very muddled and uneven image for the reader. The use of the word “I” shows that the speaker is talking directly to the reader. This engages the reader. Riley uses the word “I” to absorb the reader into her poem and this emulates the title of the painting: “Lure”.
Reply
Hallie McManus
1/23/2018 10:30:10 pm
Riley's poem creates a backstory to the painting. She takes us on a journey throughout “Lure 1963”, color by color. She roams “around around around around” the painting, forcing us to notice little details in the work. She describes these colors with astounding specificity that evokes emotion--the painting alone cannot do this. Riley describes the pink as “barbaric,” the oranges as “burning,” and the red as “clean.” She compares the white canvas to shores and the painting a wave unlike the ones in the ocean that “could never move that way.” She makes us feel and reminisce on past memories, and keeps revisiting colors over and over to make us view them in a different light. The description of the poem is interjected with cries of her unrequited love. The poem ends with “And you’re not listening to a word I say”. It’s as if the colors are drowning out her feelings.
Reply
Raya Mahony
1/23/2018 11:15:15 pm
Riley’s interpretation of Gillian Ayres’ painting “Lure 1963” dwells on the colorful imagery but quickly devolves into lost and lonely sentiments. Her poem is reminiscent of a focused scholar who can’t shake the feeling of a recent romantic trauma. The lense with which she interprets the abstract painting is tainted with repeated mentions of being alone, unlovable, and “pretending.” She uses long lines, erratic line-breaks, and gumbled descriptions of emotions to portray her longing to be understood but inability to communicate. Her obsessive tone changes from finicky description of “around around around around” to finally the plain and painful last line that encapsulates her confusing mentions of “his kiss” and “When will I be loved?” from the beginning of her poem. The duet of scholarly description and emotional baggage cross together for a clever moment in the 15th line: “flower, swell, don’t ever make her blue.” By using “blue,” a color, something she employed extensively as a scholarly tool, suddenly as an emotion finally brings the tipping point of her ability to conceal her underlying thoughts. The poem becomes something entirely different than the painting it initially and nobly sought to describe.
Reply
1/23/2018 11:24:51 pm
In the poem based off of the painting “Lure 1963,” it is apparent that many of the colors in the painting are reflected throughout the poem. The poem takes the description of the painting further, by describing each color in vivid detail. There is often a focus on the shade of the color (“bright lime green” line 1) or even giving the colors actions such as “scarlet flowing” or “pink singing” (line 3 and 4). The author interprets the painting freely which is why there may be some added elements and the story that we see in the poem. Similarly, the relationship between visual art and poetry is very interesting because they can either stand completely alone or reflect one another. In this way, visual art has the ability to allow each person to have a perspective, even if they are different. The author of this poem seems to look at the painting and assigns emotions to each color. At certain points, the speaker uses “I” making it more personal and allowing the reader to connect the colors to emotions. In the sentences using “I” the speaker seems to be asking questions about finding love, but the speaker also uses “you,” which seems to address the person who is not loving or listening to them (“And you’re not listening to a word I say” line 18). All in all, there is a theme of searching for love mixed with all the emotions (colors) that are felt on that journey.
Reply
Kamryn Lanier
1/23/2018 11:43:56 pm
While I was reading the poem I felt like I was reading someone's thoughts due to the choppy sentences that gave off the impression of unfinished ideas. This is exactly what I was reading - an interpretation of a piece of art. I feel like the art and poem both make you so vulnerable, but in different ways. The author using their words to make a poem can be more exact with how they feel, than a painting. This poem is about relating to the colors of the painting. The author thinks they see themselves in a few of the colors, but then the author decides they are bland and not special. I also felt like the author attributed positive characteristics to the brighter colors, versus more negative characteristics to the darker ones.
Reply
Sai Kapuluru
1/24/2018 01:46:04 am
Riley's description of "Lure 1963" is extremely extensive and includes a repetitive theme of describing the simple colors in the painting to have much greater meaning. For example she uses the phrases "fruity bright lime green" and even "globe oranges burning" to explain what seem may just view as blobs of colored paint. The obvious part that was interesting to me and was probably evident to others, was the way that Riley inserted her statements that did not pertain to the physical elements of the painting. The first time she includes one of these statements is when she first questions her chance at love. It comes after an elongated description of the painting and seems as if it is meant to contrast everything going on in the painting. I believe that Riley made her sentence structure so choppy and confusing in order to create an overwhelming environment that has so many things going on. She is pretty much getting despondent because of her inability to receive love or attention in such a busy and active environment. She seems to feel as if she is the only one that is lonely in such a vibrant society. The continuous descriptions in my opinion are used as a way for the author to slowly open up her own feelings. What I noticed specifically is that she started to express more of her emotions towards the end of the poem after she was able to open up with the painting. The last four lines contribute to this observation as she states that "flower, swell, don't ever make her blue" and talks about how she is a "great pretender." She wants to believe that she is fine with the way her life is going but she is not able to feel a complete satisfaction without this love that she is unable to find.
Reply
Andre Gutierrez
1/24/2018 09:11:38 am
Denise Rileys poem greatly compliments and adds depth to the painting "Lure 1963". During the first reads, this poem may seem sporadic and random. However, this poem is telling a story (seemingly in first person) of the feeling a person experiences when they are rejected and not loved by others (mostly their crushes). Each color in the poem is described in detail right before Riley states something like "When will I be loved". Statements like this are expressed at seemingly random. However, Riley does this on purpose because she is trying to convey her thought process upon viewing "Lure 1963". While she analyses the painting she sees aspects of her life (particularly the love part) represented by the colors. Riley is trying to describe how our brain interprets colors and objects in relation to our own lives, such as how many relate rain with sadness.
Reply
Isaac Merritt
1/24/2018 10:20:13 am
I think some of the most interesting (essentially) subliminal ideas my free write encouraged were the parallel disorder of the poem and the artwork alike. Where both at first glance appear to be jumbled and unorganized, with time, both find delight in disorder. The burden of message clearly falls on the viewer, not the artist. Both break the normal ideology of their art forms. No rhyme scheme and no clear figures/characters. No stanza breaks and no scene changes. Dynamic word flow and a dynamic color scheme. Unclear, but targeted imagery and unclear but targeted shapes. In this way, the poem speaks volumes about the painting without even yet saying a word in terms of analysis.
Reply
Frank Ye
1/24/2018 11:53:18 am
Riley's 'Lure 1963' contains some extensive descriptions in the colors in the painting. What caught my eye the most when I first read it was the long phrase 'globe oranges burning, slashed cream, huge scarlet flowing anemones, barbaric pink singing, radiant weeping When will I be loved?'. It gives so much personification to the painting that there is a great sense of vividness coming out of the art, which is not how we normally interpret painting, thus makes the poem harder to read and understand. Yet, in these personifications, there are moments where I thought Riley could be relating the painting, for as how she describes it, to her own inner emotions. What I couldn't put together, as if this poem was puzzle, is the last three lines that she states that she is a great pretender. Through that, I also got a feeling of she could be pointing at how people view art as valuable when they don't seem to understand it... these are just some jumbled thoughts after reading it...
Reply
Daniel Frise
1/24/2018 11:55:18 am
Upon first reading Denise Riley’s poem “Lure 1963”, I was under the impression that the poem itself was telling a sort of story, or even a narration. I thought I was reading some sort of failed romance, whether a date or a whole relationship, as evident by the final line of the poem: “And you’re not listening to a word I say.” There were other lines from the poem which supported this interpretation of the poem, such as “I’m just a crimson kid that you won’t date.” I believed the speaker to be a teen girl or a young adult; the audience her lover. However, there was one thing which I couldn’t quite put my finger on — the extensive usage of colors as descriptors and adjectives for the imagery of the poem. Almost every line seemed to include a color, whether it was “crimson” or even “pear”. And then I finally opened a tab for Ayres’s painting — and I did not see anything that resembled what I had interpreted from the poem. I did not see a tragic love story; a failed romance; a botched relationship. All I saw was blobs of colors on top of one another, a white background behind them. The only similarity I saw between her poem and the painting was the colors. So I do not know if I misinterpreted her poem, or if it can be interpreted a variety of ways, much like the abstract painting it was written about. The variation in the style of each line, just as each blob is different. Regardless, I still immensely surprised and confused by the seeming disconnect between the painting and the poem.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
Archives
April 2018
Categories |