Bruce Bond is great, and any of his numbered “Fables” are particularly good. When I teach poetry, I like to take the approach with a triangle of form, content, and meaning. Then the most straightforward thing to do is see how a poem matches tradition/expectations at each point, and how it subverts tradition/expectations. Calling it a “fable” immediately draws the questions of what a fable is, the history of fables, how they operate, their purpose and commonalities, and then how this poem both fits in the tradition of fables but also subverts it. That’s where you could crack into the meaning portion, academically speaking.
Also, sometimes poems are just awesome little pieces of writing, and that’s why I like them too.
Bruce Bond is great, and any of his numbered “Fables” are particularly good. When I teach poetry, I like to take the approach with a triangle of form, content, and meaning. Then the most straightforward thing to do is see how a poem matches tradition/expectations at each point, and how it subverts tradition/expectations. Calling it a “fable” immediately draws the questions of what a fable is, the history of fables, how they operate, their purpose and commonalities, and then how this poem both fits in the tradition of fables but also subverts it. That’s where you could crack into the meaning portion, academically speaking.
Also, sometimes poems are just awesome little pieces of writing, and that’s why I like them too.
thanks, that does help.
while I was reading it the first time, I did think “it’s good he labeled it a fable, that will help frame the construction of my understanding of it”