Thursday, May 31, 2007

The Poetic Genius

Although William Blake was not formally educated, he provides some of the most vibrant poetry through his eccentricity and imagination. He work was not appreciated during his life, and his work became more popular as an inspiration for the Beat poets of the 1950's and 1960's. (74)

The most interesting thing that I found in the writings of William Blake was the idea of the Poetic Genius. "That the Poetic Genius is the true man, and that the body or outward form of man is derived from the Poetic Genius." (76) He argues that it is this genius that has created everything so that all religions are simply deviations upon one thought. The reception of the Poetic Genius is the reason that Blake says there are different religions. So the only real difference for Blake regarding different religions is how these people understood the Poetic Genius. The ideas of angels, demons, and spirits all come out of the Poetic Genius. Therefore the religious differences that have endured throughout history are trivial to Blake because these religions are all of one thought.

Blake writes that man could not acquire knowledge from acquired knowledge, so a universal Poetic Genius has to exist. (77) That being said the knowledge that is available is already known, so that to find more knowledge you have to rely on something else. People cannot simply rely on old knowledge to progress but they should look to the Poetic Genius of man to continue their ascension into new ideology. Blake also believes that all men are alike in outward form as well as in the Poetic Genius. So there is some sort of common state of man that is universal and the only real differences are those brought on by the differences of interpretation of the Poetic Genius.

1 comment:

Jonathan.Glance said...

Jeremy,

Good focus on a difficult text by a challenging poet. You make some good comments on Blake's claims for the Poetic Genius. I would suggest, however, that you avoid paraphrasing him and stick to quoting and analyzin specific passages of Blake's own words. He is difficult enough to understand when you start from his words, without risking the complications of setting off from a mistaken or nearly correct paraphrase in your own words. Taken out of context and restated, Blake is almost impossible to analyze successfully. The same is true, to some extent, for all the authors we will read this session.