I'm sorry this post is late! But, over last week, we discussed sonnets out of the poetry packet. I especially love Shakespeare's sonnets because they're interesting and complicated all at the same time. They aren't hard to understand, but you don't get the meaning of them right away. It takes time to get to understand them. There are a few sonnets of his that are right to he point, such as, Sonnet 130. He blatantly describes his mistress as ugly, but in the end he wraps up the sonnet by saying that all her ugliness doesn't matter because he still loves her no matter what she looks like. In Sonnet 116, he describes love as if it doesn't exist because anyone can be fooled. The way he writes his sonnets and poetry dumbfounds me. The way he can rhyme and still stay in his chosen pattern along with iambic pantameter is astounding.

Moving onto Ted Berrigan, I love the way he plays with the layout of the poetry, such as Sonnet XV. How he wrote the sonnet to where each line had continued in a mirrored fashion. He made it to where someone had to look closer at a poem rather than just look into it the way it is. Usually, many people seem to believe that poetry is all the same, there is no way to add variety. Ted Berrigan proves that poetry can be played with just as much as any story can. I also love the way he writes poems and builds them off of each other, or off of someone else's quote, like in sonnet LV. I thought it was amazing.

Although I wasn't there all week, I still pretty much got the idea of what we were working on throughout the week. I do not know all of which was discussed on last Tuesday, but I still love the way each author had their own unique way of portraying the message they were trying to get across.