Jess Headley’s Blog

The final scenes of Hamlet resonate the enormity of his family’s tragedy but the scenes leading up the the final massacre is monumental.

One of the first discussions is Ophelia’s tragic death and the way in which it was handled. Consequently although Polonius thwarted Ophelia’s seeing Hamlet because of his royalty yet as Ophelia is being laid to rest Gertrude remarks on the fact that she thought Ophelia was to be her hamlets wife. Which is interesting, did Shakespeare do that on purpose, did Gertrude not care about Ophelia’s class rank and/or did Polonius know about the plot to kill Hamlet from the beginning so he wanted to keep Ophelia away from that mess?  I also find it appalling that anyone could consider the fact that Ophelia doesn’t deserve a Christian burial. Whether she did or didn’t commit suicide it should be unquestionable that in the present state of mind she was prior to her death that she no longer had control over herself or her actions. If the Ophelia that was lucid, happy, and sane was the one that threw herself in the water that would be one thing but it was obvious that if someone lets their clothes drag them to the bottom of a lake they have given up the will to live through some terrible occurrence. 

Unfortunatly once again Hamlets actions have only left him more unfortunate as he discovers the owner of the new grave. In a moment of ”lucidity” through his madness he crys out for the love he had for Ophelia

“ I loved Ophelia. Forty thousand brothers could not, with all their quantity of love, make up my sum. (Act V Scene 1 Line 282-284) ”

 

His profound confession is the first time that Hamlet speaks without holding back although he was supposed to be hiding from the King until he attacked. This moving speech only once again lands Hamlet in deeper water as everyone now knows where he is. His outcry during her burial is representative of the predicatble madness that Hamlet experiences as he “acts” mad throughout the play. He realizes the conmsequence of his action and he is paying the reprecussions. In actuality none of the “plans” Hamlet makes actually end up being successful, however in moments when he looses all rashionality he seems to act powerfully and vigourously. The stabbing of Polonius was unplanned and only presented the lethal vengance Hamlet was penting up for the supposed recipient of his sheath.

What is interesting was the huge role Horatio holds in the final scenes although his appearences were minimal in the beginning of the play. I believe the importance of his friendship with Hamlet was emphasized by his monumental impact on the final scenes. For Hamlet he is essentially the only one left that he can trusr and has remained by his side regardless of skeptisim on everyone elses part. I believe part of their closeness was the fact that they both experienced the ghost of Hamlet’s father so all of Hamlets madness was never actually real for Horatio because he knew everything that had occured prior to his acted madness. However, the fact that Horatio is appropriatly the “last one standing” relays the importance of his alliance with the main character. Although he appears to be only be a side character he is in fact a huge impact on Hamlet and by proxy on the novel. Horatio is left to tell Hamlet’s “story” and appropriatly the only one that would tell it correctly placing him as a good man left with unfavorable circumstances.

Finally, although Horatio is the last Denmark kingdom character the final words of this play are from the mouth of Fortinbras instead. This I believe was done purpose by Shakespeare to finalize the end of the era. The Denmark Kingdom was taken over after the massacre of its king, queen, and prince so it was left unruled and appropriatly Fortinbras came to rule at just the right time. Although he did take over the kingdom he payed respect to Hamlet thanks to Horatio and Hamlet’s death was handled like it would be if the kingdom was still his own.

“Let four captains bear Hamlet like a sodier to the stage; for he was likely, had he been put on, to have proved most royally; and for his passage the soldiers’ music and the rites of war speak loudly to for him. (Act Five Scene 2 Lines 400-405)

Fortinbras’ works resonate the what throughout the entire play Hamlet was trying to achieve and as in all tragedys he did not recieve what he wanted until he too was dead. To be beared royally was what Hamlet had wanted and in death he establishes his rightful birthplace as next to inherit the throne.

I loved this play!!! Thanks Mrs. Hazle, without digging and the movie I get this weird inkling that I don’t think I would be able to appreciate this play in all its glory.

Act IV is even more frustrating if possible, in the very beginning Hamlet’s own mother betrays his trust by blatantly telling King Claudius that Hamlet has murdered Polonius. Why does she act as though she is the only one he has left on his side yet she makes it her duty to betray him and enforce his exile to England?  As Hamlet is questioned about the whereabouts of the body he enforces the fear of everyone that he has gone completely insane. Which even to the readers that are on his side appears to be so. The conversation between Rose and Guild is also very insulting and aloof as he cleverly relates the two to a sponge that quite literally soaks up all the Kings orders and jobs.

What confused me was Hamlet’s conversation with Claudius about his sending off to England as Hamlet so readily agrees to the departure. Why doesn’t he fight Claudius and declare his birth rights as Prince of Denmark? Also why does all of Hamlets family and friends seem to be turning on him? Is insanity [whether real or acted] so terrifying that they must cast him away? However, we are sure that from this time on Hamlet’s thoughts will be “bloody” so he will soon have his revenge.

The scene with Fortinbras was easily predictable when they first allowed his army to march through Denmark. I predict that this will inevitably end in his easy and swift attack on Denmark’s kingdom and his own throne.

The most tragic and moving scene of the play so far is the moment that Ophelia takes the stage and she is readily pitied. How could Hamlet so easily brush off his murder of her father without thinking of her and the effect it has on her? Obviously Ophelia was going to loose it when he had already pushed her away and claimed he had nothing left in his heart for her. But is he really that selfish that he has no remorse even if it was for the fact that he hurt her?

Could Hamlet actually be insane or has he been driven to a complete emotionless state from the murder of his father and the “whoring ” of his mother ?

Act III provides an interesting individual analysis of a few main characters and the turmoil they are experiencing due to their actions. The beginning of this act is the discussion of Hamlet’s continuing madness which has become a common topic of discussion for the castle’s royalty. However, within act III there was a monumental exchange between Hamlet and Ophelia that distiguishes for the reader, Polonius, and Claudius that Ophelias neglectance has in fact driven him into a state of withdrawl and anger.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUdVVnk3m24

I found this BBC 1980 production of the scene between Hamlet and Ophelia, which seems to take a different approach to the lines than the movie we are watching in class. Hamlet appears to automatically react negivitely to Ophelia’s presence and his anger and sarcasm resonates from every line, where as in our movie he is happy at first only to find that she is returning their memories. WHAT IS SHE DOING?!?! Once again we see Ophelia playing the pawn in her fathers faithful game with the King, and this time at the expense of her own feelings. Literally she had her heart ripped out by the love of her life in the presence of her father and the King of Denmark where she could do nothing but continue their demands. This exchange is the first time that I experienced uncovered fratility from Hamlet as he is battered by Ophelias break up and this could quite possibly be the point where his “acted” madness has evolved to reality.

Hamlets soliloqy “to be or not to be” is significant because his mind unravels the misfortunes that have occured in his life as he considers suicide as an alternate way out. Although I do believe Hamlet has suffered a great deal with the death of his father and the disloyalty he experiences in the wake of his grief, I think the idea that he considers suicide is weak and pathetic. Although the idea of the thematic play was creative and did recover evidence I don’t believe Hamlet is trying his hardest to be dynamic in the take down of his uncle. He should be driven by vengance not madness which would ultimatly propel him into acts of complete brutality against his uncle. As the play did expose Claudius to Hamlet, it still leaves him with limited time to act. If he plans to jump to action he should do it before he is swiftly sent to England.

The final scene between Hamlet and his mother is one of the first time we have seen them speak in such intamacy ( or thought to be because Polonius is hiding out). After watching the movie in class today I was frustrated by how the director displayed the way Hamlet interacts with his mother. He seems to be violent and unruly but I interpreted him to be angry and violent with his words not his hands. especially when he says to himself…

“I will speak daggers to her, but use none” (Act III Scene II Line 412)

When he is portrayed like that he appears to actually be insane, instead of simply an act. The stabbing of Polonius seemed to hold little remorse for Hamlet which could be looked at as he has in fact been consumed in “ectascy” instead of vengance. Although, he acted swiftly which in my opinion could only be driven by complete vengance and anger towards his uncle. The conversation is softened by the appearence of his father, which for me made the scene slightly absurd. I would have thought Shakespeare would have let Gertrude also see the King and suddenly be comsumed with remorse and together she and Hamlet would take down Claudius. Of course it never plays out like that because his females appear to be consistenly lifeless. It also weirded me out that Hamlet refers constantly to the fact that his mother is sleeping in this
“incestuous” bed which when mentioned more then three times because a little gross to be reminded of. I mean shouldn’t Hamlet be concerned with killing Claudius not thinking about his mother and uncle sleeping together? (GROSS OUT)

As far as I am concerned if Hamlet waits any longer he’s going to be just like one of Shakespeares woman, helpless and pathetic. However, I see a bright future after the murder of Polonius that he can actually do it and take his rightful throne back! We shall see……

Act II really focuses on Hamlet and the perceptions of him, his own feelings, and how others try to change him. Thankfully, I don’t have to yell at Ophelia quite yet because she only really appears in this act for a short amount of lines between Polonius and Gertrude. At this point Hamlets “madness” has progressed to a worrying state which essentially means he has fooled many of the people around him. The significance of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern’s random arrival is the first we see of the King and Queen attempting to intervene before he becomes encapsulated in his own madness. However, Hamlet always seems to be one step ahead of them as he figures out immediately that their arrival isn’t for a friendly reunion. He plays along and allows the two friends to never actually find out the purpose or reason for his madness as they were sent for. Their conversation only assures Hamlet of one thing, that no one can be trusted within the castle and he is all on his own. Hamlet says “to me it is a prison” on pg 59 which shows his deep distaste for his home and that he feels trapped without his father.

The most monumental plot turn was the arrival of the “players” because this is the first plan that Hamlet carefully devises in order to find out two things: whether Polonuis is guilty and by proxy if the ghost is really his father stuck in purgatory or possibly a demon. After the impressive performance of the players Hamlet is distraught by the fact that the actor can convey so much emotion and compassion for a long dead person and he cannot seem to even be able to redeem his own father. Hamlet seems to hold himself together in front of the people that judge him but much of the time when hes alone (or thinks hes alone) he seems to break down in soliloquys of mourning, sadness, revenge, and anger.

We also see Polonius devise his plan to use Ophelia as a pawn in order to discover whether or not Hamlet has actually gone mad for Ophelias lack of communication or some other reason. The trust that Hamlet once had will ultimatly be broken when he discovers that even the love of his life has decieved him. As far as I am concerned Ophelia needs to stop being a submissive servant to her father and save Hamlet from the doom of his own turmoil because we all know that her neglect has only increased his madness. Hamlet quite obviously loves her and this plan will break him with the audience of her father and his. WHAT IS SHE DOING?!?

I have never been fond of literary pieces that portray women as sluts, idiots, or toys; and although I’m no feminist advocate I can vouch for my distaste of these false personalities. Coincidentally, although Shakespeare is one of my favorites, the era he wrote in was characteristic of these illusions and so much of his works portray the women as either bad guys or submissive mutes. Unfortunately for Ophelia I already dislike her character and personality. Usually I don’t refer back to Sex and the City for my blog post reinforcement however the exchange between Carrie and Miranda is characteristic of Shakespeare’s female roles.

Miranda Hobbes: The only two choices for women; witch and sexy kitten.
Carrie Bradshaw: Oh you just said a mouthful there sister.

When Ophelia is introduced to the readers she seems to hold an even relationship with her brother, however the roles change when he becomes slightly condescending in his tone towards her romantic relationship with Hamlet. Ophelia playfully jests that he should take his own advice, but this doesn’t alter the power he holds as the elder male. Later, Polonius regards his son highly and affectionately as he bids him goodbye, however his tone and demeanor changes significantly when left alone with Ophelia. Although society during this era was characteristic of little to no female say or power, it is obvious that both Ophelia and Hamlet are characters that are capable of great love. I doubt Hamlet’s ability to leave her due to her role of society especially in the coming time of uproar and violence that will erupt over his fathers murder. Therefore, how can she possibly be so submissive and blatantly reply with ” I shall obey, my lord”. Ophelia deserves this love and its obvious that Hamlet needs a little TLC considering his current situation. What is also frustrating is the jerk reaction to blame Hamlet’s mother for her short mourning period and quick marriage. Although this appears to be “incestuous” and uncaring, no one thinks to consider her position with the death of her King. She is left very vulnerable when she is simply a queen with no king, so if Claudius takes over the throne she could very possibly loose her stature. Quite frankly I think she was also considering Hamlet in order to continue the insurance of his heir to the throne.

Usually the word “apparition” in any story is characteristic of child’s tale or pirate story, however the idea of Hamlet’s father soul remains in unrest creates the drama that was needed in the plot line. Without the reappearance of the King, readers would be considerably lost in the very dangerous and violent story that occurred. The family dynamic is obviously very Shakespearean in its dysfunctionality, Hamlet appears to be of less importance than Polonius’ son Laertes, as if he would be the heir, and the family has shifted to almost exclude Hamlet and his fathers existence. Hopefully, we see Hamlet man up a little and take control of his own life instead of taking a backstage to his uncles new empire.

Although it was difficult at times, using the blogging world to explore a my poet was quite an enjoyable experience. Comparing the hard copy research paper of last semester to this semesters web based one has considerable differences but the web allowed this research and anlysis project to be relaxed. Although there was time expectations, the timeline was convinient and flexible. I did not feel rushed doing this project and I felt that I got to examine my poet on a deeper level in many different ranges of her work. I actually enjoyed the posts and found that I wanted to put more time into my work and make an effort to really dig deeper. Although learning the blogging system was slightly difficult it didn’t hinder my ability to turn out a good post even on a basic level. The only part that I felt I didnt’t enjoy very much was having my writing on display for about 50 other students. Usually, I only share my work between my parents, mrs. Hazle, and a peer I feel comfortable with. However, overall I did enjoy this project.

Comments

http://natalieegr1.edublogs.org/2009/04/16/final-post-ii/#comment-12

http://ariegr1.edublogs.org/2009/04/01/poem/#comment-9

{Student Blogs}

http://www.questia.com/googleScholar.qst;jsessionid=JC4fNP0YQNfYhlfb9y90mLP2xyFYFgTLJL7H4vWXV1f7dyyZf08c!1295391886!1017736722?docId=5009142677 

http://www.poetry-chaikhana.com/blog/2009/02/27/denise-levertov-scraps-of-moon/

{Other bloggers & Scholar Comments}

I thought I was growing wings—
it was a cocoon.

tide swings you away before
I know I’m
alone again long since,

My wedding-ring lies in a basket
as if at the bottom of a well.

for the marriage was good in its own
time, though that time is gone.

I dance to it on my riverbank.

Those groans men use
passing a woman on the street
or on the steps of the subway
to tell her she is a female
and their flesh knows it,

and I felt
the weight of you on my shoulders,

We look for communion
and are turned away

One step beyond the world, that can’t
be looked for, only
as the eye wanders,
found.

When we were assigned this particular blog post, I sat for a good time before I could come up with anyway to capture the essence of Denise Levertov’s intricately woven poems. So instead of trying to recreate her, I made a patchwork poem that used her own lines from various poems to capture the main themes and ideas that come from her poetry.  Through this poem I used the majority of the lines from her poems that describe fallen relationships, female power, and the ability to survive. This one captures the feelings of a women who is no longer married and the feelings and emotions she feels when she finally realizes that she can live without him. Levertov has very central feminist ideas in her poetry and this poem captured the flaws in relationships and hurt that comes from breaking apart, but the realization we can in fact keep going. I decided not to title the poem because it belongs to Denise Levertov so I want the reader to simply enjoy my placement of her work. I really enjoyed this blog post because it was open ended and wasn’t overwhelming.

It all started with the letter she sent, and from there blossomed an intense relationship between two of the greatest poets in American history.

[Oct./Nov.1951]

8 via Cavour

SORI

NR. GENOA

Italy.

Dear William Carlos Williams,

I stopped myself from writing to you for a long time because of a self-concious idea that it might seem my motive was to draw attention to myself, collect your autograph, or something like that. But I’ve decided this is silly. If a man is a force in one’s life, as you are in mine & my husband’s, if his work has given not only great pleasure & excitement but is felt to enter the fabric of one’s thinking & feeling & one’s way of trying to work, he certainly ought to know it. So, thank you.

your sincerely,

Denise Levertov Goodman.

Although this letter would be one of the many that lead to the friendship between the Levertovs and Williams, it was the most monumental because Levertov expressed her love of WCW’s work and her desire to thank him.

WCW’s style of poetry is characteristically his own and is evident in Levertov’s work and significantly after their first few letters. His style

Not ” What does it mean?”

rather

“What does it do? What is it?”

-concrete imagery

-playful treatment of subject

The American Voice

-Simple vocab

-Colloquial expression

His style is intertwined with Levertov in numerous poems, however the one I seemed to see the greatest corrleation between was Levertov’s “The Mutes” & William’s “The Young Housewife”.

These poems both examine human nature and sexuality using the questions that are asked when studying William’s work.

The Mutes

Those groans men use passing a woman on the street or on the steps of the subway to tell her she is a female and their flesh knows it, are they a sort of tune, an ugly enough song, sung by a bird with a slit tongue but meant for music? Or are they the muffled roaring of deafmutes trapped in a building that is slowly filling with smoke? Perhaps both. Such men most often look as if groan were all they could do, yet a woman, in spite of herself, knows it’s a tribute: if she were lacking all grace they’d pass her in silence: so it’s not only to say she’s a warm hole. It’s a word in grief-language, nothing to do with primitive, not an ur-language; language stricken, sickened, cast down in decrepitude. She wants to throw the tribute away, dis- gusted, and can’t, it goes on buzzing in her ear, it changes the pace of her walk, the torn posters in echoing corridors spell it out, it quakes and gnashes as the train comes in. Her pulse sullenly had picked up speed, but the cars slow down and jar to a stop while her understanding keeps on translating: ‘Life after life after life goes by without poetry, without seemliness, without love.’

The Young Housewife

AT ten A.M. the young housewife

moves about in negligee behind

the wooden walls of her husband’s house.

I pass solitary in my car.  

Then again she comes to the curb

to call the ice-man, fish-man, and stands

shy, uncorseted, tucking in

stray ends of hair, and I compare her

to a fallen leaf.  

The noiseless wheels of my car

rush with a crackling sound over

dried leaves as I bow and pass smiling.

These poems are blunt in their sexuality over the subject of men stuying women and a man examining a women. The concrete imagery is evident and used to compare the subject to nature and emotion in order to convey the desire or want, whether it be the mutes in the burning building or the young women being compared to the leaf. The American voice is present too because both poems lack any complex vocabulary. The questions of “What does it do? and What is it?” is examined as the subjects are examined carefully so that the onlooker can absorb every part of these women. Levertov and William’s both describe what is occuring and a common happening for women using poetry to convey the message gracefully.

Not only does their poetry weave together but after the letter Levertov sent their lives began to as well. After only a few letters Denise and her husband, Mitch and William and his wife Florence has become very close friends. Williams often described Levertov with the utmost respect and described her incredible craftmenship within her works.

“[I]…was immediately struck by their [poems] freedom of composition &knack of getting the domestic scene down on the page. Their humanity & dignity together with their portrayl of life immediately about her in the terms of her art immediately won me as a listener or reader”

- William Carlos Williams on Denise Levertov

Denise frequently sent her works in progress to Williams for insight and improval not only because she respected him as a writer, but because as one of her closest friends he often had the greatest understanding of what she wanted to convey vs. what she had written. Their letters began to transform from formal to very affectionate, they soon began to talk not only of poetry but the times which they had discsed getting together and events occuring in their own lives.

Dear Bill & Floss,

We’re back-in grimy chilly New York. Back at that ole’ sink washing up it’s as if two years had never been-but they were true all right & very full years. t’m looking forward so much to seeing you & hope I may, if you have time to see me, about 2 weeks from now………

Love From

Denise.

As their relationship developed as friends Denise’s poetry began to take quite an American turn for the best. She soon began to loose all ties with her English childhood and picked up the American voice in her work, which she took to like a natural. Just as William’s poetry was very American in his subjects and analysis, her work began to become feminist, anti-war, and American; all of which Williams continued to support and encourage her about.

“They [her poems] are original & unconventional in their though & express a view of life that is sound in the terms we have to face today”

Not only did his style affect her poetry but so did the relationship they had, as evident in the poem “For Floss” that was directly written for Florence Williams in order to lift her spirits.

Dear Flossie,

I just finished this poem, which is for you, yesturday. It was a long time a-brewing. Perhaps it is a kind of flower-sketch of Bill….

For Floss

Brown and silver, the tufted

rushed hold sway

by the Hackensack

and small sunflowers

freckled with soot

clamber out of the fill

in gray haze of

Indian summer

among the paraphernalia

of oil refineries, the crude industrial debris,

leftover shacks

rusting under dark

wings of Skyway-

tenacious dreamers

sifting the wind

day and night, their roots

in seeping waters;

and fierce in each disk

of coarse yellow the archaic

smile, almost

agony, almost

a boy’s grin.

Even after the death of William Carlos Williams, Florence and Denise continued to exchange letters. Other poets discussed the relationship between the two poets and the reflection it held in their works:

” For me Denise Levertov is the best of the organic form poets. She has that so important ability that Williams had: she knows where to end the line… Almost immediately she figured out from Williams how to write a good free verse”

-James Laughlin

Denise Levertov and William Carlos Williams were both best friends and also great admirers and collegues of one another. Their work reflected the admiration for the other poetry and although not contempory William’s work held a very large impact over the ideas and structure of Levertov’s work.

“Her knowledge about the art of verse & her willingness to embrace the freer rhymes coupled with her courage and flawless sense of time made her a winner whenever she came to grips with anyone who challenged her”

-WCW

Mrs. Hazle, I’m posting my comment because this particular blogger has to accept your comments and can modify them based on what they want to see on their site, so in case the comment changes, this is what I wrote the first time and the link to the bloggers site.

I’m continually entralled by the work of Denise Levertov and her ability to capture you for the short amount of lines and then leave you with questions. I agree that this poem is depicting the human mind, the feeling of frustration or serenity of mind are common in everyday life. However, Levertov grasps this concept and evolves it, using the moon as a symbol for our minds. She builds on the idea that all of our minds are connected as Ivan describes..”But when the mind is brought to a state of serene stillness, it then reflects the wholeness. Even the moon itself is not separate from the sky, but a part of the single continuity that is the sky-moon.”
I agree that the reason she uses the moon as the metaphor for the human mind is because although we know about it, it still remains mysterious and unfolded for many. The mind is infinitively complex as is space and the moon so each expirience is new and our minds are ever-changing. As usual Levertov leaves the reader with something to ponder, in this case she provides her own advice.
…Try
to acknowledge the next
song in its body-halo of flames as utterly
present, as now or never.

She wants the reader to graps the idea that nothing is ever completly the same and we should appreciate and understand that in order to fully attain each and every experience.

 

http://www.poetry-chaikhana.com/blog/2009/02/27/denise-levertov-scraps-of-moon/#comment-4253

Scraps of Moon
by Denise Levertov

Scraps of moon
bobbing discarded on broken water
but sky-moon
complete, transcending
all violation
Here she seems to be talking to herself about
the shape of a life:
Only Once

All which, because it was
flame and song and granted us
joy, we thought we’d do, be, revisit,
turns out to have been what it was
that once, only; every invitation
did not begin
a series, a build-up: the marvelous
did not happen in our lives, our stories
are not drab with its absence: but don’t
expect to return for more. Whatever more
there will be will be
unique as those were unique. Try
to acknowledge the next
song in its body-halo of flames as utterly
present, as now or never.

This poem is Denise Levertov’s interpretation of our minds and how different moods allow us to see the heavens or see real life in all of its chaos. The blogger our I found studied this poem similarly to the ideas I had based on the imagery Levertov uses.

She is building on the meditator’s metaphor of the mind being like water reflecting the vision of the heavens. When the mind is agitated, it reflects an image of reality that is fragmented, chaotic, broken into separate objects. But when the mind is brought to a state of serene stillness, it then reflects the wholeness. Even the moon itself is not separate from the sky, but a part of the single continuity that is the sky-moon.

Her idea of the water being similar to the water was directly how I interpreted the poem. The difference between the harsh realities of life and the calm that is held by a person who allows serenity into their minds is portrayed by the waters surface and the reflection of the moons which could be applied as the heavens. The transcendent visions are allowed to be seen by the serene mind however those are discarded when the waters surface is choppy with bobbing scraps of moon

The blogger then goes on to describe time in relation to Levertov’s poetry just as I studied the work myself

And from that starting point, Levertov drops into the awareness that “the shape of life” is “Only Once.” Within this wholeness, the present moment is always unique, a profound mystery, and never to be missed. Each glimmering upon the surface of awareness, each experience, each moment is unfolding now — not in the past, not in the future — and therefore it is occurring only once. Never repeated.

Living in the present could possibly be what Levertov was trying to portray, as she describes the uniqueness of every moment she gives the reader a profound realization that acknowledging the present will give us the opportunity to grasp those moments and cherish then and soon move on to the next.

Levertov tries to convey the importance of living in the now and the experiences you grasp will never be completely the same and the uniqueness will be something to cherish and hold onto because it is rare to find that same thing happen twice, so grasping it once will provide you with the experience. The end of the poem is unique because she provides the reader with her own advice, as if she were a friend of the reader. ” Try to acknowledge the next song in its body-halo of flames as utterly present, as now or never”. Levertov literally says “Carpe Diem” as poetically as she possibly can, she wants the reader to understand through brilliant imagery and analogies that grasping things “utterly present” will provide you with every “flame and song and granted us joy”.

http://www.poetry-chaikhana.com/blog/2009/02/27/denise-levertov-scraps-of-moon/