Quotation 1: “This imitation is reinforced by the analogies which exist between the painter’s “language” of expression and that of the poet. We can “read” a canvas, notice metaphors, symbols, even spatial or color “rhymes” within it. Conversely we can “look at” a poem, observe its shape on the page, discuss its “imagery” and “texture.” The interrelatedness of these terms underscores their appropriateness in both poetry and painting and makes it easy to relate the two”. (Moramarco, 25)

Comment 1: This quote made me think of how we discuss written works and visual “artistic” pieces. While I understand the first viewpoints discussed in Moramarco’s text, I believe that artistic expression, whether in the written form or painted/drawn/etc, can open new insights into human thought by being compared/contrasted with one another. As Moramarco states above, poetry and painting are easily relatable through terms, once again bringing to mind our conversation of the inherent interdisciplinary aspect of the humanities. Each piece on its own can encapsulate a message and feelings, yet when combined, there’s an added layer of thoughts that one may not have considered by just looking at a single piece. I think, in a way, some people may find the idea of this combination uncomfortable, as it also makes them question their own ideas of originality.

Quotation 2: “This was our world./ I could remake each shaft of grass/ feeling its rasp on my fingers, /draw out the map of every lilac leaf /or the net of veins on my father’s /grief-tranced hand”. (Rich, 7-12)

Comment 2: I was drawn to these lines because of their “humanness”. Based on historical details of the painting, and thus the inspiration of the poem, Effie has passed away and is no longer part of the world. Despite her literal dehumanization, this section of the poem reminds the reader of her connections with the physical world. The intimate details of “each shaft of grass” and the veins on her father’s “grief-tranced hand” allow us to see parts of her world that we may not have been able to see by merely looking at the painting alone. Overall, I just think this is a beautiful section that puts the humanity back into a dead child.

Comment 3: The lines from Rich’s poem directly correlate to the ideas brought about by Moramarco. By being able to regain some of the intimate details that Elmer did not portray in his work, Rich’s imagery adds on another layer of meaning to the work, such as why we can see the father’s hands more clearly than the mother’s.

Question: While I can’t think of any off the top of my head, I’m wondering if there are any downsides to intertwining poetry and visual art. What if, in connecting a piece of prose to a painting, we misinterpret the message that either the author or the painter wanted to express? I feel like that question can stem into the realm of separating the art from the artist, which isn’t one that I have a confident answer to yet.