Page 2 of 2

On Why Keats Wouldn't like Wordsworth and Byron

PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2004 1:48 am
by MonroeDoctrine
Byron actually had the audacity to write a pamplet attacking John Keats' style of writing hence I doubt Keats would ever respect Byron.

Second point I want to make is that, Byron's Darkness (from what I can remember) lacks irony and metaphor. Last time I read Darkness I realized it was logically deductive, which means his poetry lacked luster. I saw no method of using irony or paradox like our dear Keats.

Stop worrying about what other people think

PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2004 1:53 am
by MonroeDoctrine
Keatssucks15 you need to know what it means to be a human being, maybe you need Jesus Christ. Try to avoid those televangelist maybe become a Protestant or Catholic or something. Go to church and learn how to love other human beings.

You should also stop worrying about people calling you gay! Who cares what other people think about your sexuality. Be a man and forget about the gossip people have discussed about you it is irrelevant.

Byron and Keats.

PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2004 11:25 pm
by Saturn
First thing to say is that I am fully aware of Byron's cruel and patronising view of Keats as a 'cockney poet'.

All I can say in his defence is that Byron was reflecting a typical view of the time.

It's important to remember that in Keats' lifetime his work (outside of his friends and family) was not as well known and respected as it is today.

The critics and other more 'upper-class' poets thought of the art of poetry as the exclusive domain of the cultured, idle nobleman who wrote poetry in their spare time without hope or prospect of financial gain, let alone to make a living from it as Keats tried to do.

Naturally they would look down on a middle-class guy like Keats who abandoned his chosen profession for the life of an artist.
He would be seen as an impudent upstart, much as in the same way Shakespeare was looked on as an 'upstart-crow'.

On Byron's 'Darkness' - it wasn't supposed to be ironic - it is a terrifying, apocalyptic vision of the end of the world. Not all Byron's poetry was meant to be frivolous and bathetic!

Just on Keats view of Byron. It's true that in his youth he read Byron and was seen cultivating the 'romantic' image - dressed as a stereotypical poet at Coleridge's lectures.

I never said that Keats ever respected him, just that his influence cannot be ruled out earlier in his life.

Of course when he later read Byon's 'Don Juan' he was disgusted, as many were by it's frankness and profligacy.

However, oddly; Keats and Byron shared a similar loathing of cant - both raged against the niceities of the age throughout their lives.

About Wordsworth - look in the index of any biography of Keats and you will see how important he was as an influence on him. In fact he expresses his admiration of his 'Excursion' as one of the 'three things to rejoice at in this Age'. He met him at Haydon's dinner parties, and in the company of Hunt and Hazzlit.

His admiration seemed to wane somewhat later, but his influence is undeniable.

Also for the record I'm not gay - where are all the girls on this site?
Has love of the Muses deserted their human sisters?

I wasn't saying you were gay

PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2004 1:36 am
by MonroeDoctrine
I wasn't calling anyone gay but I was addressing the brilliant guy that writes under keatssucks15 not you Stephen unless you're schizophrenic and in fact you are that guy keatssucks15.

It's not me!!!

PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2004 10:29 pm
by Saturn
Please, I'm definitely not keatssucks15.

I think that guy is just trying to wind people up, and he seems to have succeeded.

At least he has got a good debate going, inserting some much needed passion into the debate on this forum.

I've enjoyed venting my anger on him; it's been very theraputic to exercise ones critical muscles, but I'd like to officialy close this topic forthwith.

Re: john keats

PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 5:34 pm
by delly
This nobody (not in an e.e. cummings or e.d's way) gUy is more into Byron than Blake. And I mean this Byron:

Love and Death

I watched thee when the foe was at our side,
Ready to strike at him--or thee and me,
Were safety hopeless--rather than divide
Aught with one loved, save love and liberty.
I watched thee on the breakers, when the rock
Received our prow, and all was storm and fear,
And bade thee cling to me through every shock;
This arm would be thy bark, or breast thy bier.
I watched thee when the fever glazed thine eyes,
Yielding my couch, and stretched me on the ground
When overworn with watching, ne'er to rise
From thence, if thou an early grave hadst found.
The earthquake came, and rocked the quivering
And men and nature reeled as if with wine.
Whom did I seek around the tottering hall?
For thee. Whose safety first provide for? Thine
And when convulsive throes denied my breath
The faultest utterance to my fading thought,
To thee--to thee--e'en in the gasp of death
My spirit turned, oh! oftener than it ought.
Thus much and more; and yet thou lov'st me not,
And never wilt! Love dwells not in our will.
Nor can I blame thee, though it be my lot
To strongly, wrongly, vainly love thee still.

(Written for Lukas - a young man he met in Greece, where he died in 1824 after joining the Greek revolt against the Turks.)

Homophobia and Ignorance do suck. Keats don't.

Re: john keats

PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 11:26 pm
by Saturn
delly wrote:
Homophobia and Ignorance do suck. Keats don't.


Absolutely, well said.

Welcome delly. Great first post; the first of many I hope.

Re: Clear off Keatssucks15!

PostPosted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 3:07 pm
by zebluepenguin
Saturn wrote
Why don't you take a long walk off a short cliff?


Great! I learnt something new that is not in school today! :D That's very brainy, Saturn. And who's Stephen? This name popped out of nowhere. I have a suspicious suspicion that its you, Saturn. Is it? (Sorry for my ignorance) :?:

And Keats's unccountably loads better than you, Keatssucks15, so get lost and drown yourself. :x :evil:

Re: john keats

PostPosted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 3:33 am
by BrokenLyre
My, my, my... when people get so impassioned in their hatred for Keats (or other poets or subjects), I wonder what the real issue is that drives that train... Meaning of words is not limited to just the grammatical aspects of language. There are other factors at work. Context is bigger than grammatical construction. (It helps to keep this in mind when I read any of these threads).

Re: john keats

PostPosted: Thu May 27, 2010 1:35 am
by Cybele
Oh, my!!!
This was a guilty pleasure, indeed. I enjoyed reading the discussion.
Somehow :) it reminded me of this:

"Though a quarrel in the streets is a thing to be hated, the energies displayed in it are fine; the commonest man shows a grace in his quarrel.”

I almost feel like thanking keatssucks15 for getting things started. :lol:

Almost, but I don't think I will.

Re: john keats

PostPosted: Thu May 27, 2010 1:39 am
by Cybele
And whoops -- if it hadn't been for the spam I would never have noticed this discussion.

I *should have noticed* that this discussion was ages old! :oops: :oops: :oops:

My apologies!

Re: john keats

PostPosted: Fri Oct 07, 2011 10:13 am
by Macbetht
Keats gives his readers the opportunity to enjoy the English language as a work of art..
so how such words can be written?? You don't have a right to charge anyone in such a way