Topic > Two Kinds of Art in John Keats's Poem Ode on a Grecian Urn

While the countless paradoxes in John Keats's poem “Ode on a Grecian Urn” might lead one to imagine a battle between classical and romantic art, Keats tries to reconcile the two types of art through the form and theme of his poetry. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay The various paradoxes that Keats establishes in his poetry are so complex and seem so impossible that one might assume that Keats is commenting on the irreconcilable nature of Romantic and Classical art. However, upon closer examination, the paradoxes seem to indicate the exact opposite: that Romantic and Classical art depend on each other. In stanza 2, the usefulness of the paradox is illustrated well as the speaker examines the scene between the bagpiper and his lover. The lovers are immortalized on the side of the urn, both frozen in time and free from it. The piper plays a song for his lover, a “handsome young man, under the trees” who “cannot leave / the [piper's] song, nor can those trees ever be bare” (15-16). The speaker describes the lover as "fair", handsome, and young. There is music involved in the scene coming from the piper's instrument, as well as nature in the form of the tree under which the lover sits. The urn attempts to create a scene of perfection: even the nature of the unheard melody played by the piper is believed to be superior to an audible melody because it allows for imagination which, in itself, is yet another paradox (11- 12). Yet the very nature of art – of capturing a single moment and setting it in stone – does not allow for completion, which makes it lacking. The lover sitting under the tree will never see the beautiful colors of the autumn leaves nor hear anything other than the single note played by his bagpiper at the very moment he was memorialized in stone. The speaker acknowledges the flaws that lovers face, stating that lovers “never, never can you kiss, / Even if you win near the goal” (17-18). While the scene is beautiful and seems almost perfect, it is heartbreaking in its conclusion; the repetition of never in line 17 serves to reaffirm the futility of the lovers' efforts to kiss. No amount of time will allow them to consummate their love; it is left severed and unyielding on the side of the Grecian urn. Just as lovers can never unite, romantic and classical art seem worlds apart from each other. However, it seems that there is a reconciliation in sight. The speaker, after articulating the lovers' plight, urges the piper to "grieve not" (18), although the lack of completion brings pain because it is not perfect and offers no satisfaction. The speaker goes on to remind the piper that his beautiful lover, sitting under the trees, "cannot fade away," that she "you will love forever, and she will be beautiful!" (19, 20). The eternal nature of art, while not allowing lovers to unite in a kiss, preserves their youth and beauty, so that they will never grow old, never fade away and can gaze at beauty for all eternity. The compromise appears to be acceptable to the speaker. However, the scene comes so close to perfection, yet remains unfulfilled. To be almost perfect is to be imperfect. The near-perfection of the scene - or the desire for perfection - is typical of classical art, while the incompleteness of the scene, its desire for something more, speaks of romantic art. These two notions fit together perfectly in the complex paradox that immortal lovers must face. Even romantic art andclassical are aligned by the form and theme of the poem. Although Keats is recognized as a Romantic poet, his poems are markedly different from those of Wordsworth or Coleridge in both form and theme. In “Ode on a Grecian Urn” there is no elaborate exaltation of Nature and, furthermore, no perceived goal of aligning Man with Nature. Instead, poetry celebrates art and beauty, subjects often characteristic of classical poetry. In an attempt to bridge the gap, to marry Romantic and Classical art, Keats employs a peculiar form. Lines one through four of each stanza follow the ABAB rhyme scheme; they are intensely structured and the end rhymes involved are almost always perfect rhymes. This structure is characteristic of classical poetry. Lines five through ten of each stanza, however, deviate from this rhyme scheme, following a wilder, but not entirely random, pattern. This lack of structure is characteristic of Romantic poetry. The changes in rhyme scheme could have symbolized the irreparable separation between Romantic and Classical art, yet Keats uses content to bridge the two. For example, stanza 2 begins with the speaker encouraging the piper to play music "not to the sensual ear, but, dearest, / Play to the spirit toneless ditties" (13-14). In the first lines of the stanza, where the structure is more rigorous, the piper is told not to play according to logic or reason, not to the "sensual ear", but to satisfy the "spirit" or imagination. Thus, Keats manages to integrate Romantic ideals into the classical structure, reconciling the two in a strange harmony. The themes that emerge in “Ode on a Grecian Urn” are strange to Romantic poetry – they speak more to classical poetry – yet Keats manages to unite the two art forms. The final lines of a poem often serve as a summary, a culmination, and an area where the theme of the poem is a little more accessible. However, the concluding couplet of “Ode on a Grecian Urn” has always been a point of contention for scholars and, one might argue, is exactly as Keats wanted it. To say that "'Beauty is truth, truth beauty' - that's all / You know on earth, and all you need to know" (49-50), is to say something highly contradictory to Romantic philosophy, which cares about substance more than beauty. To derive an appropriate theme from the concluding lines, you must first identify who the speaker is addressing. There are several possibilities. It would be fair and reasonable to assume that the last two lines are intended to be a message from the urn to the reader, as the context seems to suggest. After all, the speaker addresses the urn as "thou" throughout the poem, and does so directly before the closing couplet in line 48 ("a friend of man, unto whom thou sayest"). Throughout the poem, the speaker constantly asks questions of the urn and investigates its various scenes. The last two lines could very well be the urn's answer to the speaker's countless questions. If the adage “Beauty is truth, truth beauty” is, in fact, uttered from the urn to the reader, then the notion of art is intended to teach and enlighten. Art, therefore, serves as a worthy guide, as an ideological source. If the urn is the speaker in the closing couplet, the poem seems to suggest that art is a source of enlightenment and, therefore, is of supreme importance, which is representative of the mentality involved in classical poetry and art. However, the final lines could be interpreted as the speaker addressing the urn. If the last two lines are aimed at the urn, they become a little condescending. After such a thorough and thoughtful examination of the urn and its inherent philosophical properties, the speaker seems to reduce the complexity.