Week 1 DQ

Week 1 DQ
4. Compare/Contrast the two versions of “True Love”. You can go a number of places with this question, but you should focus on the effect that each poem produces given its true use of diction, tone, general structure, imagery, and the like.
Szymborska’s “True Love” in my interpretations is that the speaker, has been passed-up by “love”, also sounds bitter in the sense that she must been hurt before and the speaker is someone who envies other people in love and does not really have the idea of what love is all about. She questions the validity and the existence of true love.
In addition, when the speaker addressed the happy couple, she has doubts in her tone that the happy couple’s actions are mere “show offs”. The speaker’s negative attitude towards love, the happiness and the effects of it on the people in love, are being scrutinized. Szymborska said “Let the people who never find true love keep saying that there’s no such a thing”. So in essence, it is more about a person, who have not felt the meaning of true love, really wonder what true love is all about (the effects of being in love). For the non-believers, they can believe whatever they want to believe.
On the other hand, with Sharon’s version of True Love, she speaks the words of a person so consumed with love. In all aspects of her poem, it shows how love overpowered her existence. She sees love everywhere and what she feels and sees around her are reflections of happiness, contentment and love. Sharon’s True Love has set no boundaries, one that freely express what she feels about love.
Although the two are both poems of love, the differences are shown of two different individuals where one has found true love (Sharon’s True Love) while the other is still questioning the validity of the existence of true love because she has not found true love at all (Szymborska’s True Love).

5. Compare “To His Importunate Mistress” to Andrew Marvell’s famed “To His Coy Mistres”. What kind of statement do you think De Vries is making about Marvell’s classic?
Devries is mocking Marvell. The first two lines would clearly describe the affirmation that his coyness was a crime. The whole coying has been too costly that even creditors have haunted him. His love for the mistress is more of impressing her than himself. He is showing that he can show him the world even if he is taking risks of ruining his finances. It is also sad that even a man without the financial means to support a mistress, would still go out of his way to support this vice. The irony is, when he ran out of resources (finances) to support their rendezvous, the mistress left him without showing any kind of feelings. Devries’ poem also shows that when the “mouse is playing”, there are always consequences and most of the time, there is a winner and a loser. That money talks in every aspect of life (especially in this time of age). For Devries, he knew what he was going into; the temptress was too hard to pass.
In contrary, Marvell’s “To His Coy Mistress”, this was more of a man professing almost like an eternal love for the mistress. Marvell’s is more on true love rather than just a fling. He said that, “Of Humber would complain. I would Love you ten years before the Flood. And you should, if you please, refuse Till the conversion of the Jews.” This depicts time. That also said, in line 13 to 17, this is when even when they are old, wrinkly and no longer attractive, his love for her does not rely on the outside image but of what is in her heart.
These two poems talks about the persona’s mistress, the different kinds of love, the lessons learned of having to “play” around, and what true love should be.