Great ma'am

Thank you so much for this analysis. I think that with 'faery power', Keats refers to having 'butterflies in the stomach', and he has no time to experience this feeling because his love is unrequited.

I think it's so impressive that you record your annotations on a real book, and with pen! I wouldn't have the confidence that i wouldn't mess up a little.

He feared that he might not be able to write down all the creativity he had and he might never describe the beauty of nature, idealism or who he loved by chance.

Wow, incredible analysis,  very unique.  Thank you

Fucking great. Plus one subscriber.

I love the work you do!

Wow! Excellent explanation

Wooow thank you medam 😍

Thank you.

Thank you needed this fr

I'd give to her my second bed
where only love is made
my first bed went to poetry
where all my prayers were said
to woo her and to win her love
I would burn up every verse  
so lost for words to win her back
my second Adam's curse
and yet by she came chivalry
in unrequited love
and hope that sprang eternal
like a fecund turtle dove
Grow old with me was Browning's plee
in windswept pages past
I hope to say hello to thee
where all regrets are cast

Nice, I am live in India.

"Unreflecting love" has two different meanings. Love that does not have the pondering tendency, and the love that is one sided... Being given but not  being received

Keats wrote, "Till love and fame to nothingness do sink", and also,
  "A thing of beauty is a joy for ever:
  Its loveliness increases; it will never
  Pass into nothingness..."
  He did not really believe what he was writing about. A person has to be sincere in what he writes and also know truth enough to convey it sincerely. Without this, how can one write the greatest poetry?
  There is a poem by Keats which is one of his better poems, called, "To Sleep". It is a sonnet.  
  Keats had an admirable talent. However he was too lacking in the knowledge of truth. He spoke too much of false gods and focusing on mythology is not conducive to writing good and great poetry. Poetry has to be sincere and it is not often that a poet can write a really good and great poem, no matter how great a talent he or she has. For good and great poetry is a thing of the heart and has to be aligned with true knowledge and experience. Poetic ability and skill with words is not enough to produce a great poem.
  It took me years to discover and write the kind of poems that I felt missing in the world of literature. I was wholly dissatisfied except with what could be found in the Authorized King James Bible.
  People think that just the show of skillfully wrought words means that a work is good or great. But that's not so. All the amount of skill with words does not in itself produce a good and great work. For example, Shakespeare did not write good works. Even "Venus and Adonis" which is considered his best poetical work, is a failed attempt at a poem. It is about a man preferring a pig/boar to the goddess of love. A woman of great beauty and love is not able to woo a man from preferring a pig or boar. That's a stupid idea. Shakespeare did not show good sense in his works, even though he had poetical talent. (Also even Leo Tolstoy wrote a lot about Shakespeare's failure as even a "good" writer.) A writer may have skill in writing and poetical talent and still not produce good works. Shakespeare is a false idol set up by people who don't understand.
  There are big truths about poetry that have been missing in the world which has made poets fail to write the kind of works that are really both good and great.  
  Edgar Poe was one who did see certain truths that would revolutionize the way people approached poetry if he was listened to, although he was not entirely correct.
  Edgar Allan Poe’s revolutionary discovery of the PURPOSE of the poem which is to excite and elevate and have an ultimate single poetical effect. I felt this as a poet but did not know or realize it when reading poems or said poems because they failed to achieve this purpose.
  Regarding the PURPOSE of a poem which Edgar stated, he was correct.
  Regarding the LENGTH of a poem which Edgar stated, he was also correct. He saw that poems that could not be read in a single sitting were too long to be poems. As a result of what Edgar stated, and through God showing me, I understood that there are no poems ever written that take longer than 30 minutes to read or that are even over 3,000 words long. (A few come close to being 3,000 words long.) Because the PURPOSE of the poems are destroyed by length when they are so much longer than 30 minutes in the reading of them. They fail as poems and are not poems, let alone good or great ones. The PURPOSE and LENGTH of a poem are something Edgar correctly saw. This was a revolutionary discovery. If the purpose is clearly understood so the length of a poem is understood. For in the understood purpose of writing a poem a person cannot be too lengthy. A poem has to comprehend much in few words or in the fewest possible words.
  Regarding the PROVINCE of a poem which Edgar stated, he was partially correct. He said beauty is the province of the poem, which is correct, but was incorrect in stating that truth is not the province of a poem. For both truth and beauty are inseparably the province of a poem. Without truth a poem cannot be either a good or great poem. No great poem can be a work of fiction, although it can be very imaginative just as if it were fiction. The great poem must be sincere and full of truth. I believe Edgar failed to see this because he saw poems that were attempts at teaching truth and which failed to be beautiful.
  Regarding TONE, Edgar said that melancholy is the best tone for the poem, and this is completely incorrect. For the opposite is true. Joy is the best tone for the poem. I believe Edgar failed to see this because he was attacked by evil seeking to destroy him and he dwelt too much on the dark side of things. The idea of melancholy being the best tone for a poem contradicts the purpose of the poem which is to excite and elevate. While a poem might contain sad events or sad points or sad realities, it can still have the greatest tone which is joy.

What pen do you use in your poetry analysis?

Great im trying to draw a portrait of Keats and listen to these talks while drawing. Subscibed

Rabindranath Tagore was also particularly fond of Keats.

Sometimes only the author of a poem knows the meaning of the words, and leaves it to the reader to interpret them. That's all I know, and apparently all I need to know ;-)

What book is that