She Had Some Horses by Joy Harjo

When reading "She Had Some Horses", I felt like the poem was almost song-like from the repetition used throughout. She constantly repeats the idea of "she had horses", which makes the reader understand that this idea was very important. The first stanza of the poem acts as a representation for her heritage. Harjo describes the horses as "bodies of sand" (2), "skins of ocean water" (4), and "the blue air of sky" (5). These images Harjo invokes an earthy and environmentalist tone. Considering her Native American ancestry, it definitely had influence on her style of writing. The constant repetition of horses can be seen as a catalyst for Harjo's different aspects of herself. The second stanza speaks of her physical part of her, describing her physical features and activities she did. The third stanza talks of her history and personality. After all the stanzas, I feel as if I almost know and understand the author personally. "She had horses who who were much too shy, and kept quiet in stalls of their own making" (20-21). Just with the one sentence, I understand a part of her that was self-conscious and timid. "She had some horses she loved. She had some horses she hated. These were the same horses" (59-61). Harjo also explains that she isn't perfect, by stating she had parts she hated. With so many revealing details told by the author, the poem's tone seems very intimate and personal.

Incident by Amiri Baraka

When reading this poem, I felt like Baraka was very indifferent towards the subject. The tone throughout the poem is almost careless. But, it would be more towards being indifferent. "He came back and shot. He shot him" (1). Baraka explains the situation so simply and literal. It seems as if Baraka may not be connected to the subject at all, or maybe so connected he is trying to disassociate himself so he doesn't feel pain for his death. "When he came back, he shot, and he fell, stumbling, past the shadow wood, down, shot, dying, dead, to full halt" (1-3). Baraka goes through how the man dies, from when he was shot, to when he was fully gone. The way he phrases it, almost seems like he's making different stages for being shot. "He died then, there after the fall, the speeding bullet, tore his face and blood sprayed fine over the killer and the grey light" (4-6). This vivid image the author uses supports his indifference. He explains perfectly almost as if  he was there. "We have no word on the killer...We know the killer was skillfull, quick, and silent, and that the victim probably knew him" (11-12, 14-16). Again, Baraka shows indifference, almost as like a crime scene investigator explains a murder. Very distant and unconnected to the victim. At the very end, Baraka states "we know nothing" (18). However, this final phrase acts as a paradox. Throughout the poem, Baraka had explained the murder thoroughly, but he finally states he "knows nothing".