[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 1.39 MB, 2260x2329, 19CF9029-D700-440C-ADEA-2980E1E1CDDD.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17737712 No.17737712 [Reply] [Original]

I see this poetry chart posted often when people ask for poetry recommendations. Why these particular poets? Why no Yeats, for example?

>> No.17737730

>>17737712
Because some people with questionnable tastes in poetry think that the English romantics were the best poets ever. Yeats wasn't a romantics but he's obviously far more interesting than Coleridge for instance.

>> No.17737737

>>17737712
I post this in every poetry recc thread. Why? Because I think they’re cute poets. Yes, I said it.

>> No.17737746

Most /lit/ charts are just filled up with whatever is mentioned first

>> No.17737748

>>17737737
Based.

>> No.17738087

>>17737737
My nigga
>>17737712
Those are the most important romantic poets. Not the best. Wordsworth isnt all that good to read for pleasure, and byron gave coleridge the smoke in english bards and scotch reviewers pretty well. Coleridge isnt really that great beyond individual poems and moments like kubla khan, ancient mariner, and a couple others. The rest of them are great (but not consistent)

>> No.17738164
File: 2.14 MB, 4032x3024, 2DA386CE-6DC6-4BCA-B5C4-100C2B13E4F8.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17738164

>>17738087
I found byron giving wordsworth and coleridge some smoke (even though byron would go on to add a footnote about how they didnt deserve it) and its genuinely hilarious.

>> No.17738185

>>17738164
>white people find stuff like this "genuinely hilarious"

>> No.17738498

>>17737712
It's a chart of English Romantic Poetry. Yeats is great, but he wasn't part of that movement, so he's not included.

>> No.17738518

What’s a good poetry anthology
>could be any time period

>> No.17738532

>>17738087
>Wordsworth isn't all that good to read for pleasure
speak for yourself pseud

>> No.17738545

>>17738185
Shut up crakcer

>> No.17738555

>>17738518
John Williams has a decent renaissance poetry collection. Quite good really

>> No.17738586

>>17738555
Thanks and
>checked

>> No.17738605

>>17738518
norton anthology is a good reference guide, gives you the good and bad from important moments in the history of poetry

>> No.17738625

>>17738586
what does
>checked
mean

>> No.17739255

>>17738532
Wordsworth is a trash poet. The nigga tortures christmas songs into rhymes

>> No.17739263

>>17738185
Nigger

>> No.17739327

>>17738518
William Harmon's collection "The Top 500 Poems" (1992) was a gateway for me. He took the 500 most anthologized poems in English and provided some basic commentary on each one. It's out of print but you can find used copies.

What I liked about it is that it does well representing an approachable and mainstream history of poetry in English. Compared to the sort of anthologies I assign in my poetry classes now, it is an old boy's club. But I've always resented equity inclusions in anthologies and syllabi.

>> No.17739356
File: 1.77 MB, 312x234, implying in 2013.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17739356

>>17737712
>Wordsworth
>Selected Pooems
>Coleridge
>Complete Poems
>not lyrical Ballads
>Blake
>Complete Poems
>not Songs of Innocence and of Experience
>Byron
>Selected Poems
>not Don Juan

>> No.17740515

>>17737712
poetry is fucking gay. no one actually likes it.

>> No.17740553

Leopardi > the 6 English romantic poets >>>> French romantics >>>>>>>>>>>>> German romantics

>> No.17740672

>>17740553
Bad bait