In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

  • Comprehending Poetry:What Literature Instructors Can Learn from Students’ Strategies
  • Alex Poole (bio)

Possible Solutions to The Decline and Difficulty of Poetry

The recreational reading of poetry is not on the rise; in fact, it seems to be imploding. Census Bureau data reveal that only 6.7% of adult Americans read one or more poems in 2012 while 17% did in 1992 (Ingraham). These numbers are probably skewed by the large percentage of socioeconomically disadvantaged Americans whose exposure to poetry and other art forms is restricted (Iyengar 81). One would therefore expect college graduates to consume substantially more poetry, especially because 49% received some formal instruction (Schwartz et al. 31) and up to 36% took a compulsory literature course (Kempson et al.13) that likely would have included a poetry unit. Nevertheless, a recent study by the National Endowment for the Arts found that even a small percentage of those with undergraduate and graduate degrees read poetry in their leisure time—8.7% and 12.5%, respectively (Iyengar 71).

While instructors have long recognized the challenging features of poetry, only recently have scholars empirically documented them. Joan Peskin found that sentence structures elude straightforward comprehension and frequently suggest multiple interpretations (“Constructing,” 236). Sarah Levine and William Horton (110) discovered that students might not know that their emotional disposition influences interpretations, while Iris Yaron showed that historical allusions and common literary themes yield context (139, 144). Based on his comparisons of poetic and non-fiction texts, David Hanauer concluded that understanding the former often necessitates contemplating the numerous connotations of the vocabulary contained in them (65-6). According to Joseph Shimron, readers must utilize this vocabulary to produce and revise hypotheses about a text’s significance (54, 63). No less important is poetry’s organization, which Peskin asserts generally compels readers to devote more time to reading and comprehending it than to prose of similar length (“Development,” 88–92). Such features undoubtedly contribute to its lack of popularity among both English and non-English majors.

In order to increase poetry consumption outside of the classroom, college instructors must not only promote awareness of these features but also teach students how to use them to interpret and enjoy poetry [End Page 363] inside the classroom. Techniques based on Marxist, Reader-Response, and New Criticism can help achieve these objectives. However, critic Andrew Elfenbein cautions that “literary-critical” approaches presuppose literacy levels not possessed by “less skilled readers” (485), many of whom fill our introductory literature classes and undergraduate literature programs. While maintaining that such approaches produce rich and inspiring interpretations, Elfenbein worries that they emphasize “describing varieties of interpretation” yet neglect “the microprocesses of reading” that cognitive psychology has demonstrated “ground even the most advanced analysis” (484, 485). Elfenbein further argues that scholars who espouse literary-critical approaches employ “routine, automatic, and quasi-mechanical” strategies that permit “sophisticated literary-critical readings” (485). Conversely, those who struggle with poetry presumably cannot approach it critically precisely because they lack such strategic facilities. Not surprisingly, those who struggle to comprehend academic (non-literary) texts are likewise often inept strategy users. Knowledge of these strategies is therefore vital for instructors, for it provides them with insight into actions that make poetry comprehensible that they can integrate into instruction. Students, in turn, will be better equipped to read works through a critical lens in class and might feel more motivated to do so once it has ended.

Reading Poetry Strategically: Sources of Information

Instructors can obtain this knowledge by studying how peers model their own strategic processes for their students. In her introductory literature course, Sandra Lee Tompkins shows how myriad strategies (e.g., using background knowledge and visualizing texts) generate the fluid textual interpretations Reader-Response Criticism seeks: “I then demonstrate my own process of evoking a poem through several readings and what I find in each one through accessing my prior knowledge, adding new knowledge, and seeking patterns in the imagery through the colors, textures, and shapes the words bring forth. Students and I observe how we hesitate over pronoun references, reread passages. . .” (320–21).

Examining the mental processes experts use when reading unfamiliar works is another way to learn about these strategies. James Warren...

pdf

Share