Forum Replies Created
Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)
Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)
I have to agree with you, Harrison. I think the fact that Yeats’ words can suggest one meaning while his form may suggest the opposite is one possible reason as to why he may have gone through his transitional phase — it wasn’t always the best way to show what he actually wanted to show. He moves away and even abandons his ideal portrayal of peasant life after finding that he did not accomplish exactly what he wanted. He was convinced that the peasents were the key to revitalizing Ireland while they were not in the best place in society to do so. He realizes in this phase that a turn to the aristocracy is nessassry because the peasents of a true Ireland were in somewhat of a catch 22, and unable to affect change (well, they could have, but they didn’t). He also decides to become more explicit and outright, so that his messages are clearer in a sense — still not entirely, as Harrison points out, but I would argue more so than before. The language changes and so does his idea of what makes and who can appreciate true art. Yeats’ “A Coat” is a good example of this shift. In the past, he used “embroideries/ out of old mythologies,” he then refers directly to his idea of aritocratic ideals and not looking like you are trying: “”For there’s more enterprise/ In walking naked.” So he is no longer embellishing his work in favor of trying to look like he’s not trying a la artistocracy (a new paradox). He feels that this art is more dignified and a clearer way to get his message out to aritsotcrats and make himself a part of that group.