50 Generative AI Model Essay

“Interpreting Nature and Love in John Donne’s ‘The Canonization’: An Ecocritical Perspective”

In the tapestry of English literature, John Donne’s poetry emerges as a complex interweaving of passion, intellect, and metaphysical inquiry. Situated against the backdrop of 16th century England—a period marked by profound shifts in scientific, religious, and philosophical thought—Donne’s work reflects the tensions and transformations of his time. This essay employs an ecocritical lens to explore “The Canonization,” revealing how Donne’s meditation on love extends beyond the realm of the personal to offer insights into the relationship between humanity and the natural world. Through this analysis, I argue that Donne’s poem critiques the emergent anthropocentric worldview of his era, advocating for a more integrated and reciprocal understanding of human and natural systems.

Aside from the use of the word “tapestry” (which has become something of a ChatGPT trope), I like how this introduction establishes the framework for the analysis and provides some background information that I think is essential to an ecocritical approach to the poem. As we learned in our first chapter, ecocriticism can be applied to any text from any time. In Donne’s time, pastoral poetry was popular. If I were writing this paper, I would probably mention this and perhaps even attempt to situate this poem and Donne within that genre. Information that is important to ecocriticism includes 1) establishing the period when Donne wrote (16th century England–you would cite a source for this); 2) mentioning metaphysics (often associated with Donne’s work–metaphysics is literally “about nature.”); 3) discussing the scientific discoveries occuring during Donne’s lifetime. This background information establishes that ecocriticism is a good choice for analyzing this text.  I would remove phrases like “through this analysis, I argue” because they are redundant, but this is an interesting and effective ecocriticism thesis statement for the poem: Donne’s poem critiques the emergent anthropocentric worldview of his era, advocating for a more integrated and reciprocal understanding of human and natural systems.

At the heart of “The Canonization” lies Donne’s portrayal of love as a force of nature, both transformative and transcendent. The poem’s speakers, defiant in the face of societal scorn, assert the sanctity of their love, drawing upon natural imagery to convey its power and purity: “we in us find the eagle and the dove.” This juxtaposition of the eagle, symbolizing sovereignty and transcendence, with the dove, emblematic of peace and love, underscores the multifaceted nature of love, mirroring the complexity of the natural world. Furthermore, the reference to the phoenix—a mythic bird that dies in flames only to rise anew from its ashes—serves as a potent metaphor for the cyclical processes of nature and the regenerative power of love. Through these images, Donne suggests a symbiosis between the human and natural realms, challenging the notion of humanity as separate from or superior to nature.

This first body paragraph focuses on the imagery of nature in the poem. This is a good approach. As we learned, identifying and analyzing natural imagery can help us to understand more about the relationship between humans and the natural world. I think the discussion of the phoenix representing the cyclical processes of the natural world is particularly good, though I might go even further and talk about how this image also represents the speaker’s love. The decision to use speaker vs. the author’s name (Donne) depends on the approach you are taking. If  you are sticking to the text, I think using “the speaker” is more appropriate than something like “Through these images, Donne suggests.” Another reason I feel that way is that I disagree with the LLMs apparent argument that Donne was doing this on purpose. Focusing on the text instead of the author makes more sense when analyzing an older poem like this one through a newer lens like ecocriticism. 

The ecocritical perspective illuminates Donne’s implicit critique of anthropocentrism—the belief that human beings are the central or most significant entities in the world. In 16th century England, the dawn of the Scientific Revolution began to reshape perceptions of nature, increasingly viewing it as a resource to be studied, controlled, and exploited. Against this backdrop, Donne’s poetic celebration of love’s indomitable spirit can be read as a subtle rebuke to the reductive view of nature as mere backdrop or commodity. Instead, “The Canonization” champions a more holistic view, where human experiences like love are intertwined with the natural world, each reflecting and reinforcing the value of the other.

This is where the paper got interesting for me, and I hope you pay attention to this paragraph. In ecocriticism, it’s quite common to see scientific processes and insights applied to literary texts. The overlap with biological and environmental sciences (and sometimes even physics) is one of the more fascinating aspects of ecocriticism for me personally. I can’t decide (as with the previous paragraph) whether Donne is actually engaging in a subtle critique of reducing nature to a commodity though. Stressing more about his metaphysical background might strengthen this section.  

In the poem’s concluding stanzas, Donne envisions the lovers’ story as “fit for verse,” a testament to love’s enduring legacy that transcends physical monuments: “And by these hymns, all shall approve / Us canonized for Love.” Here, the act of canonization serves as a metaphor not only for the elevation of love but also for a re-sanctification of nature. By immortalizing their love in poetry—a form of artistic creation that mirrors nature’s own creativity—Donne posits art and love as means to recognize and reverence the natural world. Thus, the poem itself becomes an ecocritical text, advocating for an awareness of and engagement with the intricate connections between human emotions and ecological systems.

I don’t actually think that Donne saw canonization as “the resanctification of nature.” I think he was using the metaphor to implicitly critique the church and society. But I do think that the poem can be understood this way. If this paragraph were written to say “In the poem’s concluding stanzas, the speaker envisions the lover’s story…” I would be more willing to accept this as support for the overall argument. Also, I think acknowledging what Donne (and most critics) probably thought was meant by the canonization metaphor is important. The idea that the poem becomes an ecocritical text is super cool though. 

In conclusion, “The Canonization” emerges under ecocritical scrutiny as a rich exploration of the interdependencies between love, humanity, and the natural world. By weaving together the personal and the universal, the human and the non-human, Donne challenges the nascent anthropocentrism of his time, advocating for a view of nature imbued with mystery, beauty, and intrinsic value. This ecocritical reading not only enriches our understanding of Donne’s work but also offers timeless insights into the role of literature in reflecting and shaping our relationship with the environment. In a world facing unprecedented ecological challenges, Donne’s poetic fusion of love and nature serves as a poignant reminder of the need for a harmonious coexistence with the world we inhabit.

This conclusion reeks of ecocriticism. The LLM has pulled out all the stops here in focusing on the relationship between humans and the natural world that is at the heard of ecocriticism. I think this conclusion is a little boring though, and as I mentioned above, I am not convinced that Donne was challenging “nascent anthropocentrism” in this poem, though I do think that this is a reasonable ecocritical reading of the text. With some editing, more background, sources, and a more clearly explicated argument, this could be a decent ecocritical analysis.