Another of the Weary Blues
R. Thomas Thompson
Although James Mercer Langston Hughes entitled a poem of his The Weary Blues, I have notice a place where, not by hearsay, neither by critique but by popular bio, this relates in Hughes own words Weary Blues -- the song, itself: these two words are capitalized as if referencing some other title put within said poem. In addition to this essay crier’s discovery The Weary Blues, Langston Hughes’ 1926 poem found Weary Blues, (1915) which is a song, words of Mort Greene, George Cates and music by Artie Matthews. Yet what may not appear so unusual is that I find these two considerations of black and white novelty to be of a decade timetable calculation, which is within Hughes’ lifeline. Rather, what -- hardly lit, pertains to poetical frame of reference, the poetical rule of thumb; such considerations are pawed upon as if phrased ‘close enough for government work.’
Two queries, which follow, inasmuch, ought to be wrought considerations of the above. Could these have any heir apparent denotation of other commonality? Additionally, the former work of 1915 as a literal object cited in Hughes’ poem of 1926 was directly reference by Hughes, himself, in “The big sea,” an autobiography/ Langston Hughes, Arnold Rampersad, introduction, New York, Hill and Wang, 1963, c1940. Consequently, I began to wonder if by residency, whether a reasonable acquiescent preference is also possible. As such: could an object -- be it poeticized specifically, be especially, clearly, and contain unity surly, so as its occasion, whether popular, may preserve itself intrinsically by a written era? Said, it has been that often times, an author tags incident or tone to artistry for province when comes aesthetic beauty, and with comes what establishes that that object can be common to any time and place in space. What follows is argument of Poe and Thompson (two un-papered hopefuls) verses Beavers, Cooke and Tracy (specialists in their field of endeavors). O’ yes, I have entered throes of Baruch De Spinoza to level the field on both sides of this gamey scrimmage line.
I prefer commencing with the consideration of an effect. Keeping originality always in view- for he is false to himself who ventures to dispense with so obvious and so easily attainable a source of interest- I say to myself, in the first place, "Of the innumerable effects, or impressions, of which the heart, the intellect, or (more generally) the soul is susceptible, what one shall I, on the present occasion, select?" Having chosen a novel, first, and secondly a vivid effect, I consider whether it can be best wrought by incident or tone- whether by ordinary incidents and peculiar tone, or the converse, or by peculiarity both of incident and tone- afterward looking about me (or rather within) for such combinations of event, or tone, as shall best aid me in the construction of the effect.
Edgar Allan Poe, “The Philosophy of Composition,” , The Complete TALES AND POEMS OF Edgar Allan Poe, New York, Barnes & Noble Books, 1992, pp. 978, 979.
The rest of Thompson’s essay evolves by Poe premiss. It revolves about the depiction if a character not too unlike ‘Stepin Fetchit’ (Lincoln Perry, of the vaudeville ‘Chitlin Circuit,’ who became known in 1927). It also briefly portrays literary object as Spinoza substance. And this essayer’s argument shed light on poetical intrinsic value to defend honors bestowed James Mercer Langston Hughes. This first paper commits itself to this one item: giving credit where credit is due.
Poe, Thompson and perhaps Spinoza’s opponents: Steven Tracy explains that the object song is close to Texas Worried Blues and then goes further into detail to explain the renditions of others with blues music &c.. Art’s intrinsic manner contains, of course, Cooke’s paradoxical sense, yet it is because of that that amongst its other elements of wisdom the epitome of Hughes’ poetry meets its reader with a snarking or metonymical approach. As insulting to Hughes’ sense might Cooke’s essay be, its touch never humors or reaches to grab poetical liberty entrenched by The Weary Blues slant. Beavers’ introductory sentence -- as the rest of the essay, has taken issue with reckless intent. The chief goal, Beavers’ introduction, hardly lends direct credence to organic poetry, because it disregards Hughes’ poetical ideation of intrinsic substance.
In conclusion, of first essay Thompson briefly explains that: Poe discussed the province of poetical effect. Effect supposes purpose. And purpose expects its direct relational response to be an indirect cause. Such a direction of implication is logically one way, and any recourse stems from object of the poem. This object (normally) argues or suggests one scheme, like it or not, it warrants vizard direction or orchestration. The composition ends with a remark of how the consortium discussed, which supports opposition to the acclamation of good literature, saddens its essayer.