Stevens and Moore

This is the most confusing moment of my entire life. So I sign on and I read the assignment and right away I'm confused. Great. Another time where I am going to feel like I half-assed it due to my inferiour knowledge of the topic. So I'm going to try this out and whether or not I'm right...well right now I figure it doesn't really matter. Probably no one is going to get this right and I'm okay with that.

Differences: As far as I can tell Stevens wrote with a cause. He has a lot of, what seems to be anyway, layers. It isn't just superficial nonsense spewing out onto the page. If you sit there and read a bit harder it seems as though there is something underneath all of the kind of hookey lines at times. Moore on the other hand doesn't seem to really be a rebel with cause. She's kind of going with the flow which is perfectly fine. She's more of a let's live in beauty type of girl. Not only that but she's more...structured? She pays attention to the endings of her lines and how to begin each new stanza. I don't get that with Stevens. He ends each line with a period. Once the stanza is over it's over. Moore won't do that. She put 'a' to close a sentence and began with 'high-sounding' for the next stanza. So perhaps she's pays more attention to that fact or maybe less attention...pick one. Either or I don't really know. Stevens makes me stutter over his lines. I feel like I'm back in the first grade trying to read a chapter book all over again. His word usage is inane. He invents names? So he made up Ramon Fernandez just to make me stop and think what the hell kind of name is that. Thanks Stevens. Moore is more of a let it flow girl. I wonder if she ever even revised. Seriously, it feels natural to say her lines almost like they flow right out of her pen nub. Though she must cause the breaking of her stanzas feel deliberate unlike Stevens who almost makes it feel like oops that's how it goes I suppose.

Similarities: Well, I suppose there are a few between them. They love their animals. Of all the things they celebrate it's animals. I have nothing wrong with pets but I am not in love with them. I like puppies and cats just as much as the next girl but let's not go overboard here. They don't over use rhymes and in fact I would say Stevens rhymes on accident sometimes but yet he still uses it as does Moore. Moore much more often and I think more deliberate than Stevens does but otherwise I think they both ryhyme which is another similarity. Their languages seem to suggest to something bigger. With Moore I'm not sure there IS something bigger to get but there COULD be. I think she writes to write but if you really wanted to read 'more' into it (yes, ha I made a pun aren't I clever) you can and Stevens obviously has a deeper meaning.

Sound: Sound? What are you talking about? Just to clarify I'm sure if you mean sound as in the way they are spoken aloud or in which you say to yourself. Same thing? No, no they aren't. So sound...I actually read them aloud and Stevens uses more of the sound to his advantage I think. I feel like I'm repeating myself A LOT but he does emphasize the word characters a lot more in his stanzas because he stumbles and make us fumble through it. Moore is more of a pretty flow that could put someone to sleep. Not that they would I'm just saying...right. I mean you stumble a wee bit but the words aren't hard to say. They're simpler in the basis of the words themselves while Stevens makes them more complicated. I'm not sure if he has an ego problem where he needs to sound intelligent or what but mmmhhmmm.