论文部分内容阅读
【中图分类号】H31 【文献标识码】A 【文章编号】2095-3089（2013）09-0119-02
“Beginning with happiness， ending with wisdom” can be the best description of Robert Frost’s poems which are seemingly simple but are in fact full of meanings. He is good at describing country scenery and country life in New England with his concise， simple， and humorous language which fascinated both readers at home and abroad. So， many critics tend to call him optimistic “country philosopher” and his poems are considered ordinary and simple natural poems. This paper is going to make some interpretations on Mending Wall to illustrate this point.
I. Different views on Mending Wall
In terms of the process of poetic creation， we may think： if a poet himself is a great artist， the poem itself may have different facets of meanings. The critic David A. Sohn and Richard H. Tyre once proposed that the poem be a political propaganda， social analysis， and revelation of the poet’s attitude toward human relations and the relation between people and work. American psychoanalyst Norman N. Holland interpreted this poem with his psychoanalytical approach like this： “breaking the wall of alienation in infancy in order to return to the state of intimacy…” Obviously， different people drew different conclusions from this poem. What impressed me most are the structural and rhetorical devices used in this poem.
II. The structural and rhetorical devices in Mending Wall
The poem tries to show people’s mixed emotions toward the wall in nature or the wall in their mind and also reveals their longing for understanding， peace and freedom. Frost himself showed his great ingenuity in arranging the structure of Mending Wall and led readers to read between the lines.
For the coherence and unity of the whole poem， the poet adopted a device—the arrangement of syntactic construction while he was creating his poem. His purpose was to attract reader’s attention by such an emphasis and help them better understand the theme and meaning of this poem. The structure of Mending Wall was carefully arranged to form a unity， which stresses the theme by dramatic contrast. At first， we may see these two lines：
1. Something there is that doesn’t love a wall.
2. “Good fences make good neighbors.”
We may find the privilege of the position of example 1.（Line1）. Here “something” is put in the dominant place， that is， it functions in a prominent position instead of being in the normal order.（The normal order of the sentence should be： There is something that doesn’t love a wall.） We may guess whether the topic is related to the word “something”. But if we go on searching， we may find that the unclear and even mysterious word “something” is exactly the factors—the completely negative attitude toward mending wall which resulted in the conflicts. Just as Northrop Frye stated， “It is not a question of ‘Good fences make good neighbors’， the task is to identify the meaning of ‘something’.” Besides， the word “something” shifted from the normal position， breaking the normal sentence order and making it loose but the whole poem was written in smooth and conversational language and it was natural. Thus， this line seems unique and as line 1 in the whole poem， it becomes one of the most important lines to reveal the topic. Compared with example 1， example 2 was neatly written and placed at the end of the poem which was in great contrast with example 1. This sentence also tells us the theme of the poem. As is said before， the purpose of the poem is to show the conflicts between two strikingly different attitudes toward wall which， accordingly， this sentence told us： one liked the wall but the other didn’t. So， Frost’s careful plan and highly selected sentences gave us the sense of sharp contrast and emphasis on the theme.
Frost introduced “contrast devices” to stress the topic and he adopted the “parallelism” as the main skill. Here are some examples：
3. No one has seen them made or heard them made.
4. To each the boulders that have fallen to each.
5. Some are loaves and some so nearly balls.
6. He is all pine and I am apple orchard.
7. What I was walling in or walling out.
In example 3， the poet used parallelism to stress the power which made the wall crack， echoing the central ideas in the line 1“Something there is that doesn’t love a wall.” In example 4， “to each” at the beginning and end sit in parallel structure， making the whole sentence balanced and full of lingering charm and expressed the meaning like this： the wall lessened the intimacy between neighbors. Example 5 includes 2 parallel sentences and apart from the rhythmical effects， it implied 3 facets of meanings： it was hard to build wall with round stones； the narrator in the poem considered mending wall as an open air activity， so he called those stones “loaves” （common food ready for activity） and balls （things usually used in games） which was natural. Here， the narrator had mixed emotions： on one hand， it was hard to place stones， and it was better not to mend wall， because “There where it is we do not need the wall”； on the other， the narrator liked mending wall， because he referred to it as a game， a chance for better communicating with his neighbors. That is why the narrator let his neighbors know beyond the hills to mend wall.
This point was further interpreted in example 6. In this line， the poet broke the grammatical rules or so?called selection restriction rules. Here， two predicative nouns are inanimate which can not have normal collocation with “he is” and “I am”. The narrator wanted to convey the meaning that he tried to convince his neighbor that they did not need wall， because he had his own apple garden and his neighbor had pine trees. He said， “My apple trees （in fact himself） will never get cross/And eat the cones under his pines！” Here the parallel structure and contrast between “pine” and “apple orchard” possibly implied a punning—“pineapple” which symbolized hospitality and friendliness between neighbors， so there should be more friendliness and understanding rather than the barrier or the wall. The device of parallelism and contrast can also be applied to revealing poet’s image， thoughts and motive. Example 7 again expressed the poet’s attitude toward mending wall. The narrator asked himself the question as well as wanted his neighbor to think about why “Good fences make good neighbors.” Although the narrator thought that the wall was unnecessary， he raised the question—whether the wall was necessary—to help his neighbor think about. The two people knew that good fences make good neighbors， but only one of them made sense of it. Or we can say the wall is more than a barrier between neighbors.
In Mending Wall， two neighbors were close to each other when they worked， and even could touch the hands， but they behaved like strangers and did not talk to each other and they were only busy with their work—mending wall. That wall has already been a symbol—a barrier between people physically and mentally. The wall in nature will collapse as well as the wall in this poem and every year it does so. However， there exists between the two neighbors and among many people in this world a wall which is gradually built by fixed behaviors and habits and strengthened by cultural traditions， personal upbringing， and living environment and is insurmountable in some way.
Ⅲ. Conclusion
In Chinese and western cultures， a wall is a symbol for a barrier， tangible or intangible， between people， between people and society and between people and nature. Some tangible walls exist like the Great Wall in China and the Berlin Wall in Germany； some intangible ones like culture?built walls. Both Chinese and western people have mixed emotions toward the two kinds of walls. Since the wall itself has double facets： tangible walls include intangible ones； tangible barriers include intangible ones.
Thus， people not only love but also hate walls. Walls on the one hand can protect us from danger and keep our dignity and status but on the other， obstruct mutual understanding and communication between people. Frost himself in this poem also held this mixed attitude. And this is just what we can learn from Mending Wall. But this is not a finish； it leads us into deeper thinking about the wall. What we can do is to build up our free， peaceful and happy life on the basis of mutual understanding and mutual respect in such a world with many walls around us.
References：
[1]Elliot， Emory. Columbia Literary History of the United states（New York： Columbia University Press，1988）， p.944
[2]Frye， Northrop. “Literature Criticism” in The Aims and Methods of Scholarship in Modern Languages and Literatures， edited by James Thorpe（New York，1963）.p.65
[3]Holland， Norman N. “The ‘Unconsciousness’ of Literature： psychoanalytical Approach” in Contemporary Criticism（London： Edward Arnold Publishers Ltd.， 1970），p.139
[4]Longo， Lucas. Robert Frost， Twentieth Century American Poet Laureate（story House Corp.，1972）.pp. 25—26.
[5]Montgomery， Morion. “Robert Frost and His Use of Barrier： man vs. Nature Toward God” in A Collection of Critical Essays， edited by James M.Cox（New Jersey： Prentice-Hall， Inc.， 1962）， p.147
[6]M.L.Rosenthal， The Modern Poets， A Critical Introduction.p104. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[7]Sohn， David A. and Richard H.Tyre， Frost： the Poet and His Poetry （New York：Bantam Pathfinder Editions， 1969），p.101.
“Beginning with happiness， ending with wisdom” can be the best description of Robert Frost’s poems which are seemingly simple but are in fact full of meanings. He is good at describing country scenery and country life in New England with his concise， simple， and humorous language which fascinated both readers at home and abroad. So， many critics tend to call him optimistic “country philosopher” and his poems are considered ordinary and simple natural poems. This paper is going to make some interpretations on Mending Wall to illustrate this point.
I. Different views on Mending Wall
In terms of the process of poetic creation， we may think： if a poet himself is a great artist， the poem itself may have different facets of meanings. The critic David A. Sohn and Richard H. Tyre once proposed that the poem be a political propaganda， social analysis， and revelation of the poet’s attitude toward human relations and the relation between people and work. American psychoanalyst Norman N. Holland interpreted this poem with his psychoanalytical approach like this： “breaking the wall of alienation in infancy in order to return to the state of intimacy…” Obviously， different people drew different conclusions from this poem. What impressed me most are the structural and rhetorical devices used in this poem.
II. The structural and rhetorical devices in Mending Wall
The poem tries to show people’s mixed emotions toward the wall in nature or the wall in their mind and also reveals their longing for understanding， peace and freedom. Frost himself showed his great ingenuity in arranging the structure of Mending Wall and led readers to read between the lines.
For the coherence and unity of the whole poem， the poet adopted a device—the arrangement of syntactic construction while he was creating his poem. His purpose was to attract reader’s attention by such an emphasis and help them better understand the theme and meaning of this poem. The structure of Mending Wall was carefully arranged to form a unity， which stresses the theme by dramatic contrast. At first， we may see these two lines：
1. Something there is that doesn’t love a wall.
2. “Good fences make good neighbors.”
We may find the privilege of the position of example 1.（Line1）. Here “something” is put in the dominant place， that is， it functions in a prominent position instead of being in the normal order.（The normal order of the sentence should be： There is something that doesn’t love a wall.） We may guess whether the topic is related to the word “something”. But if we go on searching， we may find that the unclear and even mysterious word “something” is exactly the factors—the completely negative attitude toward mending wall which resulted in the conflicts. Just as Northrop Frye stated， “It is not a question of ‘Good fences make good neighbors’， the task is to identify the meaning of ‘something’.” Besides， the word “something” shifted from the normal position， breaking the normal sentence order and making it loose but the whole poem was written in smooth and conversational language and it was natural. Thus， this line seems unique and as line 1 in the whole poem， it becomes one of the most important lines to reveal the topic. Compared with example 1， example 2 was neatly written and placed at the end of the poem which was in great contrast with example 1. This sentence also tells us the theme of the poem. As is said before， the purpose of the poem is to show the conflicts between two strikingly different attitudes toward wall which， accordingly， this sentence told us： one liked the wall but the other didn’t. So， Frost’s careful plan and highly selected sentences gave us the sense of sharp contrast and emphasis on the theme.
Frost introduced “contrast devices” to stress the topic and he adopted the “parallelism” as the main skill. Here are some examples：
3. No one has seen them made or heard them made.
4. To each the boulders that have fallen to each.
5. Some are loaves and some so nearly balls.
6. He is all pine and I am apple orchard.
7. What I was walling in or walling out.
In example 3， the poet used parallelism to stress the power which made the wall crack， echoing the central ideas in the line 1“Something there is that doesn’t love a wall.” In example 4， “to each” at the beginning and end sit in parallel structure， making the whole sentence balanced and full of lingering charm and expressed the meaning like this： the wall lessened the intimacy between neighbors. Example 5 includes 2 parallel sentences and apart from the rhythmical effects， it implied 3 facets of meanings： it was hard to build wall with round stones； the narrator in the poem considered mending wall as an open air activity， so he called those stones “loaves” （common food ready for activity） and balls （things usually used in games） which was natural. Here， the narrator had mixed emotions： on one hand， it was hard to place stones， and it was better not to mend wall， because “There where it is we do not need the wall”； on the other， the narrator liked mending wall， because he referred to it as a game， a chance for better communicating with his neighbors. That is why the narrator let his neighbors know beyond the hills to mend wall.
This point was further interpreted in example 6. In this line， the poet broke the grammatical rules or so?called selection restriction rules. Here， two predicative nouns are inanimate which can not have normal collocation with “he is” and “I am”. The narrator wanted to convey the meaning that he tried to convince his neighbor that they did not need wall， because he had his own apple garden and his neighbor had pine trees. He said， “My apple trees （in fact himself） will never get cross/And eat the cones under his pines！” Here the parallel structure and contrast between “pine” and “apple orchard” possibly implied a punning—“pineapple” which symbolized hospitality and friendliness between neighbors， so there should be more friendliness and understanding rather than the barrier or the wall. The device of parallelism and contrast can also be applied to revealing poet’s image， thoughts and motive. Example 7 again expressed the poet’s attitude toward mending wall. The narrator asked himself the question as well as wanted his neighbor to think about why “Good fences make good neighbors.” Although the narrator thought that the wall was unnecessary， he raised the question—whether the wall was necessary—to help his neighbor think about. The two people knew that good fences make good neighbors， but only one of them made sense of it. Or we can say the wall is more than a barrier between neighbors.
In Mending Wall， two neighbors were close to each other when they worked， and even could touch the hands， but they behaved like strangers and did not talk to each other and they were only busy with their work—mending wall. That wall has already been a symbol—a barrier between people physically and mentally. The wall in nature will collapse as well as the wall in this poem and every year it does so. However， there exists between the two neighbors and among many people in this world a wall which is gradually built by fixed behaviors and habits and strengthened by cultural traditions， personal upbringing， and living environment and is insurmountable in some way.
Ⅲ. Conclusion
In Chinese and western cultures， a wall is a symbol for a barrier， tangible or intangible， between people， between people and society and between people and nature. Some tangible walls exist like the Great Wall in China and the Berlin Wall in Germany； some intangible ones like culture?built walls. Both Chinese and western people have mixed emotions toward the two kinds of walls. Since the wall itself has double facets： tangible walls include intangible ones； tangible barriers include intangible ones.
Thus， people not only love but also hate walls. Walls on the one hand can protect us from danger and keep our dignity and status but on the other， obstruct mutual understanding and communication between people. Frost himself in this poem also held this mixed attitude. And this is just what we can learn from Mending Wall. But this is not a finish； it leads us into deeper thinking about the wall. What we can do is to build up our free， peaceful and happy life on the basis of mutual understanding and mutual respect in such a world with many walls around us.
References：
[1]Elliot， Emory. Columbia Literary History of the United states（New York： Columbia University Press，1988）， p.944
[2]Frye， Northrop. “Literature Criticism” in The Aims and Methods of Scholarship in Modern Languages and Literatures， edited by James Thorpe（New York，1963）.p.65
[3]Holland， Norman N. “The ‘Unconsciousness’ of Literature： psychoanalytical Approach” in Contemporary Criticism（London： Edward Arnold Publishers Ltd.， 1970），p.139
[4]Longo， Lucas. Robert Frost， Twentieth Century American Poet Laureate（story House Corp.，1972）.pp. 25—26.
[5]Montgomery， Morion. “Robert Frost and His Use of Barrier： man vs. Nature Toward God” in A Collection of Critical Essays， edited by James M.Cox（New Jersey： Prentice-Hall， Inc.， 1962）， p.147
[6]M.L.Rosenthal， The Modern Poets， A Critical Introduction.p104. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[7]Sohn， David A. and Richard H.Tyre， Frost： the Poet and His Poetry （New York：Bantam Pathfinder Editions， 1969），p.101.