Contact Form * Contact Form Container */ .contact-form-widget { width: 500px; max-width: 100%; marg


Email *

Message *

No poem, even Anecdote of the Jar - can be innocent of political involvement,

Anecdote of the Jar
 I placed a jar in Tennessee,
 And round it was, upon a hill.
 It made the slovenly wilderness
 Surround that hill.

 The wilderness rose up to it,
 And sprawled around, no longer wild.
 The jar was round upon the ground
 And tall and of a port in air.

 It took dominion every where.
 The jar was gray and bare.
 It did not give of bird or bush,
 Like nothing else in Tennessee.
"Anecdote of the Jar" is the story of a jar placed in the wilderness and the effects that jar has on the wilderness. The jar becomes a symbol of civilization, all that is man-made, which stands up against the natural world. Throughout the poem we are left to wonder which side the speaker is on. At the end, we see that, though the jar may overpower the wilderness in the speaker's point of view, the wilderness still has the power of growth and procreation, which the jar does not, and can 

This famous, much-anthologized poem succinctly accommodates a remarkable number of different and plausible interpretations, as Jacqueline Brogan observes in a discussion of how she teaches it to her students.[2] It can be approached from a New Critical perspective as a poem about writing poetry and making art generally. From a poststructuralist perspective the poem is concerned with temporal and linguistic disjunction, especially in the convoluted syntax of the last two lines. A feminist perspective reveals a poem concerned with male dominance over a traditionally feminized landscape. A cultural critic might find a sense of industrial imperialism. Brogan concludes:

Wallace Stevens’s ‘Anecdote of a Jar’, probably chosen for its apparent remoteness from politics, ‘sharpens our awareness of the structure of power’; and in principle there is no poem that cannot do likewise, for ‘no reading is, or should desire to be, innocent of political involvement,

Source: London Review of Books

No comments: