Analysis of Criticism of "The Raven"

I chose the criticism "The Self-Deconstruction of 'The Raven'" by Leland Person to analyze. This was the first criticism I saw on Bloom's Literary Reference that was of substantial length and actually looked a little bit more interesting than some of the others. Leland points out first that Edward Allan Poe does not approach writing like a lot of other authors do. Instead, Poe is broad, and therefore the reader has to make some of their own conclusions for the poem or story (Person). The biggest problem with this style of writing, which I do agree Poe uses, is that the story and its' meaning can be interpreted in a lot of different ways, and the reader will never know the true answer. However, Person also says that maybe Poe wanted it to be like this, and I agree that Poe wanted people to read further into the literature so that they could derive their own theories about the peom or story. I personally think that Poe wanted the mystery to continue far after the writing was actually done.

In "The Raven", the reader has to determine what the meaning is of the repeated use of the word "nevermore", spoken by the raven that is tormenting the narrator of the story. Because Poe does not tell the reader what this means, they have to try and make it up for themselves and determine the truth. Person says that there is a possibility that Poe never meant for the word to have a real meaning, but used it to make the reader think and develop some of their own ideas. The poem can also be interpreted in a lot of different ways, making it harder to tell what a lot of the little references mean, or if they are significant at all.

I think Poe is a wonderful author, and this method he uses, to allow the reader create their own philosophy and meaning to the story, makes him even better. However, the idea that "nevermore" has absolutely no meaning in the story (Person) is a little hard for me to accept. Unlike Person, I do think that Poe had a purpose and meaning behind this repated word, other than to force the reader to think. There is a chance that Poe's meaning is really insignificant, but I think that there is definitely still some kind of meaning hidden there that Poe may not intend for others to totally understand.

Person goes on in his criticism to say that the reader is sort of able to control the story, which I definitely agree with, but not on all levels. Poe gave the reader a room to interpret the story however they wanted, but still had a set ending and beginning. The main point that Person tried to get across in the analysis was that Poe allowed the reader to give their own edge to the story, but I think that Poe also did not let the reader stray too far from what he actually had planned for the story. Overall, this criticism seemed to be pretty well-researched, and had a lot of opinions that were backed up with thoughts and evidence, and Person made a lot of good points that I agreed with, and some that I did not.

Person, Leland S., Jr. "Poe's Composition of Philosophy: Reading and Writing 'The Raven,'" Arizona Quarterly 46, no. 3 (Autumn 1990): pp. 1-2, 8, 12. Quoted as "The Self-Deconstruction of 'The Raven'" in Harold Bloom, ed. Edgar Allan Poe, Bloom's Major Poets. Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishing, 1999. (Updated 2007.) Bloom's Literary Reference Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://www.fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?ItemID=WE54&SID=5&iPin= BMPEAP25&SingleRecord=True (accessed November 22, 2010).