W. K. Wimsatt, “What to Say about a Poem,” in Hateful Contraries: Studies in Literature
and Criticism (Kentucky: University of Kentucky Press, 1965), 215-244 (240-1).
In the statement provided, Wimsatt focuses on the second step of his process of close
reading a poem: Description. He points out to us that it is never enough to just state a poem
is presented a certain way through the form it holds or other poetic grammar that goes into
its making. One must be able to link the aforementioned back to the poems explicit and
implicit meanings.
When referencing the 'gramma of poetry', Wimsatt means to describe the set of technical
tools used to make up a poem - the ways words and phrases are sown together. For
example, through personification, metaphor and/or imagery. He notes the importance of
being able to recognise these but stresses that "simply a report on appearances" [1]of a poem
is not enough to construct a meaningful reading of it. One must establish how these
techniques are used as tools to convey the meanings and the messages the poem attempts
to set out. Wimsatt attempts to highlight the importance of relating how a metaphor, for
instance, plays into the larger messaging of the poem. One cannot simply presume that the
mention of a "blue curtain", for example, is an instant allusion toward depression due to the
common connotation the colour blue has with that emotion if there is not even the slightest
hint that poem tackles the theme of depression.
He goes on to point out when a poems gramma can engage with the meanings (both explicit
and implicit) presented, then that poem has a greater value. In other words, if a successful
close reading can be done using his three-step process, then that automatically makes it a
good poem. This utilitarian view of attributing value to a poem brings about certain issues
that mainly concern themselves with what should be considered thusly meaningful - as this
is something that can be deeply personal for each person and is thusly subjective.
Therefore, when bearing in mind Close readings role in the establishment of making the
subject of English literature more examinable, it brings the question of who gets to have
ultimate say over what should and shouldn't be considered meaningful in these situations.
This leads to the suggestion that there is something akin to high valued taste and low valued
taste. Eagleton goes on to criticise Wimsatt's method of close reading and its further use in
and Criticism (Kentucky: University of Kentucky Press, 1965), 215-244 (240-1).
In the statement provided, Wimsatt focuses on the second step of his process of close
reading a poem: Description. He points out to us that it is never enough to just state a poem
is presented a certain way through the form it holds or other poetic grammar that goes into
its making. One must be able to link the aforementioned back to the poems explicit and
implicit meanings.
When referencing the 'gramma of poetry', Wimsatt means to describe the set of technical
tools used to make up a poem - the ways words and phrases are sown together. For
example, through personification, metaphor and/or imagery. He notes the importance of
being able to recognise these but stresses that "simply a report on appearances" [1]of a poem
is not enough to construct a meaningful reading of it. One must establish how these
techniques are used as tools to convey the meanings and the messages the poem attempts
to set out. Wimsatt attempts to highlight the importance of relating how a metaphor, for
instance, plays into the larger messaging of the poem. One cannot simply presume that the
mention of a "blue curtain", for example, is an instant allusion toward depression due to the
common connotation the colour blue has with that emotion if there is not even the slightest
hint that poem tackles the theme of depression.
He goes on to point out when a poems gramma can engage with the meanings (both explicit
and implicit) presented, then that poem has a greater value. In other words, if a successful
close reading can be done using his three-step process, then that automatically makes it a
good poem. This utilitarian view of attributing value to a poem brings about certain issues
that mainly concern themselves with what should be considered thusly meaningful - as this
is something that can be deeply personal for each person and is thusly subjective.
Therefore, when bearing in mind Close readings role in the establishment of making the
subject of English literature more examinable, it brings the question of who gets to have
ultimate say over what should and shouldn't be considered meaningful in these situations.
This leads to the suggestion that there is something akin to high valued taste and low valued
taste. Eagleton goes on to criticise Wimsatt's method of close reading and its further use in
