English home

Out of Class Paper

The Controversial Questions of Wallace Stevens

In the poem “Sunday Morning”, Wallace Stevens leaves a few questions unanswered. Stevens makes an argument through a narrow perspective with what seems like a limited amount of information. Stevens looks at religion as it applies to a member of the upper class, and ignores the concerns of the rest of the population. He also misunderstands all of the different ways religion can be interpreted and practiced. Knowledge of an issue is important in any dispute. If Stevens truly wanted to make an effective argument for atheism, he should have made it a point to understand all of the different ways and reasons people from all walks of life value religion. Armed with ignorance and a lofty point of view, Stevens can’t help but form a weak argument against organized religion.

Stevens begins to falter right away in the opening stanza. To analyze religion, Stevens presents an upper class woman taking a late breakfast with her pet bird. This immediately causes problems. This woman will be easy to sway from religion. She’s rich. Most people are not rich and one of the biggest draws of many religions is that any person with a pure soul can achieve eternal happiness after death. The thought of this reward keeps people moving through daily lives that can sometimes be difficult. This woman does not need anything to keep her going during the day, because she lives an easy life of comfort.

With this woman in mind, Stevens answers the question of how to live through life day by day with no thought of an afterlife. Through most of the poem Stevens will tell this woman to take as much joy as she can from her lifelong experiences of love and happiness and the landscape around her, because the afterlife does not exist. This answer can only apply to people in a comfortable situation. There are many people on this earth who do not have the time, the energy, the ability, or the desire to take in a forest scene when they’re feeling down. Even if they did have the resources to do so, this remedy would simply not mean enough when compared to the idea of an all powerful God. The woman in the poem has very few difficulties in life to make sense of, but to the average person this is not the case. Most people need to be able to think that there is some sort of grand plan and divine purpose behind their daily hardships. A peaceful walk through nature maybe am adequate remedy for the trivial matters of this woman’s life, but Stevens needs to understand that many people require a more dramatic structure of safety and stability.

After a really tough day, a pretty tree just doesn’t cut it when compared to eternal paradise after death. Stevens does not answer the question that would be asked by most of the world’s population. Does a person who struggles in the present life have nothing to look forward to after death? Many religions would answer that if that person has lived a good life, then they have paradise to look forward to. Many people simply can not believe that they would be forced to go through hardships and difficulties in this life with nothing to reward them in the next. In order to put down their religion and turn to atheism, people would have to accept that the difficult life they are living now would end with no reward in the afterlife. Stevens does not address how a person should deal with this realization. He doesn’t even seem to be aware of the larger segment of the population. Stevens does not take into account the specific difficulties most people would have in disregarding their religion. By avoiding the concerns of the lower classes, Stevens weakens his argument.

Stevens stumbles again in the second stanza, as he continues to give examples that apply to only one specific point of view. He poses the question, “What is divinity if it can come / Only in silent shadows and in dreams?” (17-18). The idea that thoughts of divinity can come only in gloomy times of contemplation would seem ridiculous to some people. Stevens either did not consider, or was not aware of the religious services of Baptists. Sunday mornings in the company of these people is anything but silent or filled with shadows. There are many faiths where singing, dancing, eating, and talking make up the ritual of worship. On these occasions the idea of God is not some figment in a dream but an entirely real and loving figure who stirs up thoughts of joy and hope. Stevens should have made himself aware of all the different religious practices before assigning all religions and beliefs to grave stone churches. His oversight opens up another flaw in his argument.

Everyone does not have to experience religion in this way. When Wallace asks this question, he was probably thinking of a dimly lit church and a solemn service. Sitting for an hour in an environment like this may not seem particularly spiritual to Wallace, but some people find a sense of peace in situations like this. Calm, quiet churches and services may provide a sense of structure and order to a hectic life. Wallace has not made the effort to understand the benefits people gain from their religious practices.

The narrator may also be thinking about the times when a person sits and thinks about death and eternity. These types of thoughts can definitely be seen as quite somber, but these are not the only times people think of God. There are many people who turn their attention towards God at happy times and celebrations. Weddings and christenings are a few examples. Some people also take a few moments several times a day to thank God for any small thing that they might see as a blessing. This question is posed without a complete knowledge of all religious practices, and therefore creates another weak spot in Stephen’s argument.

Stevens’ knowledge of religion again does not seem quite complete in the third stanza. The narrator of the poem points out that there have been other gods in the past that are now considered false and sacrilegious. The narrator seems to be asking why people should put faith in the God of present day religions and so easily disregard the religions of the past. In today’s globalized society, it is just as easy to ask, “Why Islam and not Hinduism?” Many people, especially Americans, can take their pick of almost any of the religions the world has to offer. People believe in religion and take strength in it because of faith. Something in that person’s life has affirmed their belief that this religion or philosophy is the correct way to live. This means that when someone asks this person, “Why this God and not that God?” the person can answer that he or she has faith that this is the God that is real. Faith is a basic building block of most major religions. The fact that Stevens does not grasp the foundation of religion makes this another weak argument.

Through the course of life, most people question their faith. But in the poem “Sunday Morning”, Wallace Stevens can’t seem to ask the right questions. Stevens looks at religion through a tiny scope of life from the upper class. His misunderstanding of why people look to religion for comfort and support forces his argument to be unconvincing and easily challenged. His continued ignorance of the practices, groundwork, and preferences of different religions further weakens his case. If Stevens had truly explored this subject, and asked questions of all the different segments of society and religious organizations, he would have been better equipped to form a solid argument.

In Class Paper

There are many different ways to escape the monotony of everyday life. Finding ways to break out of a repetetive lifestyle can start with an interesting career. I think that I would personally be happy to work for a non-governmental organization in international politics to provide aid and support to developing countries. The travel involved in this would offer the opportunity to learn a variety of things that the average person could not easily discover. Working for an aid organization in the field of politics could offer a career that is far from the ordinary. Travel and politics can both act as diversions to an otherwse boring life. Putting these elements together creates an alternative lifestyle that is both rewarding and interesting.

Travel definitely provides a good setting for an alternative lifestyle. To travel to different places would break me out of the environment that I was born and raised in. Travel would expose me to a world of different opportunities and experiences. Traveling, I would have the chance to different culutres, languages, and foods. I would also have the chance to educat myself through different cultures. All people are different. The groups and societies they form are different too, and I could learn from these differences. Different cultures have different ways of approaching medecine, religion, education, and even the simple act of communication. When you expose yourself to all of these things and learn about all of the different ways there are to do things, you gain a knowledge that sets you apart from the average person.

One of the most important pieces of knowledge that travel could teach me is tolerance. When you travel to a different place, you have no choice but to learn how to deal with the people around you. You have to learn how to function in situations with people who understand and evaluate the world from a different point of view than your own. To build this tolerance takes patience and understanding, but once it is attained it can help you throughout your life.

All of these qualities are valuble when working in politics. Working in politics in general will also break you apart from the average person. Politics is a field where it is important to be passionate and strongwilled while at the

There were three symbols in the creative writing assignment that seemed interesting to me. The first symbol was the meaning of the presence or absence of a companion. I chose to have a companion on my journey with me, and this is supposed to show that I am a social person. I think this is true. I enjoy having friends around me to keep me company. The second symbol I thought was interesting was the container. The container chosen and what was put in it was supposed to show how materialistic the writer is. The container in my story was an old barrel that I threw garbage in and then walked away from. I think that the idea behind the meaning of the symbol is interesting but I don’t think my personal use of a container in my story reveals anything about my character. The third symbol that interested me was the symbol of rocks. The rocks represented obstacles in life. In my story I picked up a few of the smaller rocks and carried them with me, and I left the larger rocks behind. I think this does say something about me. I like to take on challenges, but I am cautious and only attempt as much as I think I can handle.