The way this is written is a little confusing. It makes it seem as if these are separate people but most likely is just one person stuck in between. They died but not really, they continued to exist like a ghost but they got tired of being a ghost and when dofind our how to just straight up go?

Brings attention to people who are dismissed by society. They aren’t taken care of, often forgotten, often mistreated and misunderstood, and left to fend for themselves despite not having the resources and/or support to do so. I’m assuming this speaks about the homeless. They’re the ones can often be seen carrying dreams and not being able to fulfill them due to circumstances.

Very Harlem-esque. “What happens to a dream deferred?” (Hughes, 1951) Up to this point talking less about the dream and more about the people who held them. Great minds being those who weren’t able to get recognition for their work due to addiction, poverty, their overall environment. Varying factors led to dreams dying, getting lost, or just deferred.

The repetition of the word “who” at the beginning does two things for me. 1) gives off serious bible vibes, similar to how the Bible repeated who begat who. 2) serves to emphasize the specific great minds that were lost. This creates a sense of passion, as if they’re trying to prove a point or hype something up.

The mother is nurturing her baby to grow strong against those who have wronged her and her husband. The part that I don't quite get is "You mustn't know my fears." Why teach your baby your beliefs and not express how fear engages them. I'm wondering if she ultimately fears that the baby will turn on her in the future...

This is talking in support of the spread of communism. Physically dead but Lenin lives through his legacy and through the people with similar views and ideals. Playing with the limbo of being between life and death.

Only to be remembered as a number, a casualty at most. Shows the significance of lives in this situation.

Dempsey appears to represent a type of person who is probably stuck in a particular mindset post war. Men and boys who go to war are expect to do things for people. It is a kill or be killed environment for some and they have to see and experience things that really mess them up. I think this is what this line is getting at. People getting close to death, continuing to live knowing death.

Right off the bat, we see a contrast between "The Waste Land" and "Poem for May First"'s interpretations of seasons. In "The Waste Land" spring is frowned upon for showing off life in front of the dead, whereas "Poem for May First" is hopeful and celebrates its arrival.

Shows the lack of human activity.

I get this image of wanting to be swept away by a current, however still reluctant because you have obligations. This line is contradictory because the narrator is asking the Thames to wait for the duration of a song but still telling it it wont take long.

Water is life. Since there is only rock here, there is nothing available to help people live. They are to the point where they can't even stop to think about the possibility of being alive. The amount of dryness at this point lets them know its over. However, they are still moving somehow.

People here are moving from life to death. With little patience to not be in between the two? To not have to physically suffer and be mentally tormented?

in this section, nature is alive and personified. I think this helps contrast the state of the man's bobbing body in the water. cruzjuan's idea of being kept in a cycle is interesting, but I'm wondering if Phlebas' life is flashing before his eyes and that is what the whirlpool is...?

Here they are bringing up two contrasting ideas. Not only in the nature of the two words, but these are man made concepts existing among nature.

The status of in between being alive and dead is brought up here again. There is a possibility that the person is in shock or confused by the status to the point that they cannot respond.

What is the point of asking these questions when there is an answer expected? Is it a confirmation of nothing?

Again, they mention being in between a state of life and death. Since they were in neither, there is confusion that they seem uncomfortable with.

From this first section, there is a lot of mixing and blending of things. Whether it be of seasons, activities, or living status, the narrator seems to have disdain towards things that are existing in between.

This line almost embodies everything. I don't really understand what is going but I think this piece really playing with sounds and the mind. If you take your time going through each word or phrase, you kind of just read it to read. If you're trying to get through the piece, I found it that mind would insert words that it found missing, changing the word completely, or even rearranging the order of words. Could Sacred Emily actually be Scared Emily and this just her losing herself in thought, I don't know.

The choice in repetition in the words push and sea is beautiful. Push is going into the word sea, so much so, it almost creates a wave coming back and forth. It's repeated enough that after a while it looks like sea push and not push sea.

"This is just to say," for starters sounds like something you would leave as a memo to someone. Up until the point when the speaker says "forgive me," everything seems sincere. As if they were really hungry and couldn't help themselves. When they say "They were delicious so sweet and so cold," it almost changes the tone of the poem because it's showing that despite taking something that wasn't theirs, they almost thoroughly enjoyed it.

At first I thought this was going to refer to manufactured products from America but as I continued to read it seems that the products refers to American people with an American mindset. Everyone wants something they can't have and it drives them to do things that isn't normally expected from them.

It's interesting to describe an image as a representation of something intellectual and complex yet wanting to view it superficially by looking at it for what it is and not for what it does. Henry Adams, would be upset.

This is an interesting comparison used to describe how life is momentary. In passing of the subway, how often do you really see who you're walking past? In similar scenes, directors typically display this by blurring peoples faces or just increasing their shadows. But the petals on wet, black bough just have the right saturation for the same effect.

I'm interested in knowing more about the rhyme scheme of this poem. The rhyme in the third line within each stanza is what dictates the following rhyme in the upcoming stanza. This follows through until the end, when all four lines rhyme. Since the rhyme is chained, I'm also wondering how far that carries into the meaning of this poem.

Even though these roads were similar to one another, the road that was ultimately taken seems to be more unconventional which is why it had be traveled on less by other people. It could not only be traveled on less but also, more difficult.

From Petit, the Poet to Lucinda Matlock, the amount of livelihood increases. The more each narrator is present in their lives, their "ghost" in the poem isn't as intense.

This definitely gave, old town witch vibes. Where the narrator, was more involved than the average "witch", spent their lifetime trying to improve the town by making literature accessible to them. It seems that their efforts were unappreciated and the town seems to be okay being kept in the dark. After a lot of effort from the narrator, they've just given up trying to provide for them. I am out of your way now, is portrayed as an annoyed comment as if they're going to follow up with, "are you happy now?!"

Mr. Flood seems to be different versions of himself. When first mentioned that he approached this town, Mr. Flood is a poet returning home. When he starts drinking and talking to se secondary Mr. Flood, it seems as if he spoke to a past self before fame and forgetting his roots. It could be that no one celebrates him like they used to and he is humbling himself and returning to himself. It's a little hard to tell.

By calling poets and kings the clerks of Time, Robinson suggest that their work and legacy is remembered beyond their years. Even though poets and kings are normal mortal human beings, they have an everlasting impact that allows them to continue to live past their lifetime.

I don't understand the purpose of this line because it goes against what was previously said. If love is not anything that is truly essential to your functioning, and once gone if it causes you so much pain, why not just let it go. That is the kind of intention that the poem initially gives off. I think it just tries to show instead that maybe no matter how hard you try, love is all...?

"Nor" is being followed by things that are essential to humans, one way or another, and by saying that love isn't those things, the poem shows how much people depend on love or how much they expect from it. It seems as if the narrator has had their heart broken and is starting to move one from the person they were in love with. You can still sense some levels of disdain coming from the piece. You get to the point, I feel, where you just want to say, "Calm down, drama queen." But that is just me.

Du Bois tells the audience that we need to recognize the origins of American history and culture. People often forget the amount that African slaves, and later African American and Black people, have contributed to what is America. Traces are seen throughout peoples daily lives yet no credit is given. Instead Black people, continue to get pushed to the margins as other appropriate their culture.

The overall wish is to exist as a person. A wish that an individual is seen for who they are and being African and American is just a plus. It is a wish to coexist with his counterparts without being judged by the color of his skin. He is proud to be black but it's hard to be when the people in power will only hate you for that.

People often talk about how black children, predominantly, are forced to grow up faster than other children because of the world that they have to face. Du Bois illustrates how the simple injustices that he faced as a child made him realize that he wouldn't be able to enjoy simple pleasures in life the same way that his white counterparts can.

I think this generally says that religion has no business in science, science has no business in religion. You ultimately can't succeed in either if you bring one into the other.

The idea that the planet can't offer anything of interest drives people to create things not only to occupy themselves in the moment but to enhance what is already present in front of them. The movement away from religion, that is mentioned later, makes sense when people start taking the place of the CREATOR and there is no longer a need for a higher being.

The comparison between technological advancement and religion is interesting esp. in the previous paragraphs. I think No American had ever been truly afraid of either. shows not only the lack of rigorous religious interest that Americans tend to have but also displays the American spirit to not give a fuck and pursue their goals no matter what, and in this case it's just science.

At this point the narrator is always int the room, it seems, but how was it that Jennie wasn't able to tell that she was there?! It's as if the narrator herself is becoming a part of the room. Additionally, the yellow stains on her clothes suggest that she is/could be becoming part of the wallpaper.

As mentioned earlier, by putting her in the old nursery, John is making the narrator more child-like. pushing her to infancy and attempting to remove the ability for her mind to grow through writing. Her early childhood connection to finding comfort furniture was probably triggered by his actions and pushed her to feel further discomfort in a dysfunctional room.

At this point she is really starting to see herself in the wallpaper. She describes seeing a woman creeping about the pattern, yet as that moonlight hit it she felt creepy herself. There is a truly a reflection of herself there and an acknowledgement that the woman in the wallpaper wants to leave the wallpaper as much as she wants to leave the room that she is in.

Her mind tends to flourish whenever she describes the room that she is in whether is be it haunting her or just keeping her mind busy. Whenever she speaks of John it seems as if her thought is inhibited and there is frustration and dread.

Barred windows start showing her mental imprisonment. Also the nursery is almost making her childlike and deepens her dependence on John.

John at this point had engrained in her that everything she is feeling is in her mind. He isn't listening and taking into consideration how she actually feels and, i think, that fuels the anger she has towards him.

The mentioning of her high standing physician brother helps validate her belief in what her husband beliefs. Eventually adds to her doubt about her mental state.