Modern British Drama

Professor Saccioو Princeton University, Dartmouth College

Waiting for Godot. The Importance of Being Earnest. Rosencrantz and Guildernstern Are Dead. Since Shakespeare's time, no period has produced more brilliant and varied theater in Britain than the last 100 years.

Changes in British society affected and were reflected in the theater of the times. Playwrights reacted to the social circles, governmental constructs, and economic conditions around them, using the essential elements of theater—characterization, set, dialogue—to exaggerate, parody, manipulate, or deconstruct them.

In modern London, plays matter. They are part of the cultural dialogue of the nation. They are important for Britain's idea of itself and for its self-presentation to the world. They have been exported with great success to America and the rest of the English-speaking world.

Professor Peter Saccio has selected the major British playwrights of the past century to cover in this course: Wilde, Shaw, Coward, Beckett, Osborne, Pinter, Stoppard, Churchill, and Hare. His reasons for selecting them vary:

·         Some wittily celebrate (or satirize) the manners of an elite class.

·         Some explore the large or subtle changes in a kingdom that once ruled a quarter of the Earth and now produces royal soap opera.

·         Some assault the socio-political establishment.

·         Some probe the existential anxiety of the modern age.

·         All of them are enormously articulate, exploiting the verbal resources of the English language and the visual resources of the contemporary stage to hold up the mirror to our times.

"Unlike other media, dramatic art occurs in a certain place and time, in the 'here and now,'" states Professor Saccio. "The subject matter need not be visible or realistic. It can be historical, fantastic, or allegorical."

Social Interaction: The Root of British Theater

Professor Saccio finds the root of theater in social interaction. "It is the most immediate of the arts, displaying human situations through living actors before a present audience," he maintains.

He suggests that early 20th-century Britain found its best theatrical expression in the comedy of manners, the drama of upper-class drawing rooms. He goes on to argue that subsequent playwrights adapted, displaced, rebelled against, and revived the comedy of manners, thereby revealing changes in personal, family, and national life.

"British theater is uniquely in touch, not only with the conversation of our parlors, but also with the institutions of our public life and the back alleys of our minds," says Dr. Saccio.

Professor Saccio (Ph.D., Princeton University) is the Leon D. Black Professor of Shakespearean Studies and Professor of English Emeritus at Dartmouth College. As hundreds of students at Dartmouth have attested, Professor Saccio is a lecturer of rare passion and gifts. He was honored with Dartmouth's J. Kenneth Huntington Memorial Award for Outstanding Teaching. He is the author of Shakespeare's English Kings (1977), a recognized classic in its field, as well as other books and dozens of scholarly articles.

Explore 100 Years of British Theater

This series of eight lectures examines the role theater has played in British culture and society over the past 100 years. You witness the evolution of the stylistic conventions of the British play, from the genteel drawing-room comedies of the late 19th century to the radical political theater of the last decade.

Through this brief survey of some of the great innovators of the dramatic arts of the modern era, you begin to understand how and why the play has changed so dramatically, and you realize the importance of the political and social context in which these works were written.

The first lecture provides a general overview of the important works and authors of the past century, and it introduces you to the interactive nature of theater itself. You touch on continental and American influences upon British play writing and examine the effect of governmental involvement in the theater over the years. You begin to understand what a vital part of British culture the theater is, and how important it is to understand the political and social framework in which each play was written.

The second lecture introduces you to two authors whose works are true keystones of British theater: Oscar Wilde and Noel Coward. The comedy of the upper-class drawing room was created and perfected by these two legends of theater; you are introduced to the character of the "dandy" and appreciate two of the greatest wits of the written word.

In Professor Saccio's third lecture, you study George Bernard Shaw, who changed the dramatic form from entertainment to didacticism. Socioeconomic conditions in England changed the role of the theater from pastime for the leisured class to forum for an exploration of moral and economic issues.

After World War II, theater was partly subsidized by the government; high art became a matter of national prestige. An important archetype in literature emerged, and in Lecture 4 you consider the origins of the "angry young man," whose voice emerged from John Osborne's play, Look Back in Anger.

In the next two lectures, 5 and 6, you explore the works of two of the most important and innovative playwrights of the modern era: Samuel Beckett, whose dark dramas of alienation forever changed theatrical conventions and the way you perceive our relation to the universe; and Harold Pinter, whose portentous pauses and dramas of defensive aggression left audiences with a chilling sense of unidentifiable menace.

Tom Stoppard, the subject of Lecture 7, created his own category—the thinking man's play. The more rigorous and traditional an education an individual has had, the more likely he or she is to understand and delight in Stoppard's clever parodies and ingenious manipulations of classic works.

The final lecture focuses on two authors who represent an entire body of work—the political drama. Caryl Churchill aggressively questions standard stereotypes of gender, sexuality, and family; David Hare boldly addresses a wide variety of political issues while displaying his strong gift for characterization.

Comparative literature

is an academic field dealing with the literature of two or more different linguistic, cultural or national groups. While most frequently practiced with works of different languages, comparative literature may also be performed on works of the same language if the works originate from different nations or cultures among which that language is spoken. Also included in the range of inquiry are comparisons of different types of art; for example, a relationship of film to literature.

Students and instructors in the field, usually called "comparatists," have traditionally been proficient in several languages and acquainted with the literary traditions, literary criticism, and major literary texts of those languages. Some of the newer sub-fields, however, are more influenced by critical theory and literary theory, stressing theoretical acumen and the ability to consider different types of art concurrently, over high linguistic competence.

The interdisciplinary nature of the field means that comparatists typically exhibit some acquaintance with translation studies, sociology, critical theory, cultural studies, religious studies, and history. As a result, comparative literature programs within universities may be designed by scholars drawn from several such departments. This eclecticism has led critics (from within and without) to charge that Comparative Literature is insufficiently well-defined, or that comparatists too easily fall into dilettantism, because the scope of their work is, of necessity, broad. Some question whether this breadth affects the ability of Ph.D.s to find employment in the highly specialized environment of academia and the career market at large, although such concerns do not seem to be borne out by placement data that shows comparative literature graduates to be hired at similar or higher rates than their compeers in English.

The terms "Comparative Literature" and "World Literature" are often used to designate a similar course of study and scholarship. Comparative Literature is the more widely used term in the United States, with many universities having Comparative Literature departments or Comparative Literature programs.

Comparative literature is an interdisciplinary field whose practitioners study literature across national borders, across time periods, across languages, across genres, across boundaries between literature and the other arts (music, painting, dance, film, etc.), across disciplines (literature and psychology, philosophy, science, history, architecture, sociology, politics, etc.). Defined most broadly, comparative literature is the study of "literature without borders." Scholarship in Comparative Literature include, for example, studying literacy and social status in the Americas, studying medieval epic and romance, studying the links of literature to folklore and mythology, studying colonial and postcolonial writings in different parts of the world, asking fundamental questions about definitions of literature itself. What scholars in Comparative Literature share is a desire to study literature beyond national boundaries and an interest in languages so that they can read foreign texts in their original form. Many comparatists also share the desire to integrate literary experience with other cultural phenomena such as historical change, philosophical concepts, and social movements.

The discipline of Comparative Literature has scholarly associations such as the ICLA: International Comparative Literature Association and comparative literature associations exists in many countries: for a list of such see BCLA: British Comparative Literature Association; for the US, see ACLA: American Comparative Literature Association. There are many learned journals that publish scholarship in Comparative Literature: see "Selected Comparative Literature and Comparative Humanities Journals" and for a list of books in Comparative Literature see "A Selected Shortlist of Comparative Literature (Text) Books in English, French, and German"

Early work

Work considered foundational to the discipline of Comparative Literature include Transylvanian Hungarian Hugo Meltzl de Lomnitz's scholarship, also the founding editor of the journal Acta Comparationis Litterarum Universarum (1877) and New Zealand scholar H.M. Posnett's Comparative Literature (1886). However, antecedents can be found in the ideas of Johann Wolfgang von Goethe in his vision of "world literature" (Weltliteratur) and Russian Formalists credited Alexander Veselovsky with laying the groundwork for the discipline. Viktor Zhirmunsky, for instance, referred to Veselovsky as "the most remarkable representative of comparative literary study in Russian and European scholarship of the nineteenth century" (Zhirmunsky qtd. in Rachel Polonsky, English Literature and the Russian Aesthetic Renaissance [Cambridge UP, 1998. 17]; see also David Damrosch, "Rebirth of a Discipline: The Global Origins of Comparative Studies," Comparative Critical Studies 3.1-2 [2006]: 99-112). During the late 19th century, comparatists such as Fyodor Buslaev were chiefly concerned with deducing the purported Zeitgeist or "spirit of the times", which they assumed to be embodied in the literary output of each nation. Although many comparative works from this period would be judged chauvinistic, Eurocentric, or even racist by present-day standards, the intention of most scholars during this period was to increase the understanding of other cultures, not to assert superiority over them (although politicians and others from outside the field used their works for this purpose).^{[citation needed]}

French School

In the early part of the 20th century until WWII, the field was characterised by a notably empiricist and positivist approach, termed the "French School", in which scholars examined works forensically, looking for evidence of "origins" and "influences" between works from different nations. Thus a scholar might attempt to trace how a particular literary idea or motif traveled between nations over time. In the French School of Comparative Literature also influence studies and the study of mentalities dominate(d). Today, the French School practices the nation-state approach of the discipline although it also promotes the approach of a "European Comparative Literature."

German School

German Comparative Literature has its origins similar to the French School in the late 19th century. After World War II, the discipline developed to a large extent owing to one scholar in particular, Peter Szondi (1929–1971), a Hungarian who taught at the Free University Berlin. Szondi's work in Allgemeine und Vergleichende Literaturwissenschaft included the genre of drama, lyric (in particular hermetic) poetry, and hermeneutics: "Szondi's vision of Allgemeine und Vergleichende Literaturwissenschaft became evident in both his policy of inviting international guest speakers to Berlin and his introductions to their talks. Szondi welcomed, among others, Jacques Derrida (before he attained worldwide recognition), Pierre Bourdieu and Lucien Goldman from France, Paul de Man from Zürich, Gershom Sholem from Jerusalem, Theodor W. Adorno from Frankfurt, Hans Robert Jauss from the then young University of Konstanz, and from the US René Wellek (Harvard), Geoffrey Hartman and Peter Demetz (Yale), along with the liberal publicist Lionel Trilling. The names of these visiting scholars, who form a programmatic network and a methodological canon, epitomise Szondi's conception of comparative literature. German comparatists working in East Germany, however, were not invited, nor were recognised colleagues from France or the Netherlands. Yet while he was oriented towards the West and the new allies of West Germany and paid little attention to comparatists in Eastern Europe, his conception of a transnational (and transatlantic) comparative literature was very much influenced by East European literary theorists of the Russian and Prague schools of structuralism, from whose works René Wellek, too, derived many of his concepts, concepts that continue to have profound implications for comparative literary theory today" ... A manual published by the University of Munich lists 31 departments which offer a diploma in comparative literature in Germany, albeit some only as a 'minor'. These are: Augsburg, Bayreuth, Free University Berlin, Technical University Berlin, Bochum, Bonn, Chemnitz-Zwickau, Erfurt, Erlangen-Nürnberg, Essen, Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt an der Oder, Gießen, Göttingen, Jena, Karlsruhe, Kassel, Konstanz, Leipzig, Mainz, München, Münster, Osnabrück, Paderborn, Potsdam, Rostock, Saarbrücken, Siegen, Stuttgart, Tübingen, Wuppertal. (Der kleine Komparatist [2003]). This situation is undergoing rapid change, however, since many universities are adapting to the new requirements of the recently introduced Bachelor and Master of Arts. German comparative literature is being squeezed by the traditional philologies on the one hand and more vocational programmes of study on the other which seek to offer students the practical knowledge they need for the working world (e.g., 'Applied Literature'). With German universities no longer educating their students primarily for an academic market, the necessity of a more vocational approach is becoming ever more evident" (Oliver Lubrich, "Comparative Literature – in, from and beyond Germany," Comparative Critical Studies 3.1-2 [2006]: 47-67)

American (USA) School

Reacting to the French School, postwar scholars, collectively termed the "American School", sought to return the field to matters more directly concerned with literary criticism, de-emphasising the detective work and detailed historical research that the French School had demanded. The American School was more closely aligned with the original internationalist visions of Goethe and Posnett (arguably reflecting the postwar desire for international co-operation), looking for examples of universal human "truths" based on the literary archetypes that appeared throughout literatures from all times and places.

Prior to the advent of the American School, the scope of Comparative Literature in the West was typically limited to the literatures of Western Europe and Anglo-America, predominantly literature in English, German and French literature, with occasional forays into Italian literature (primarily for Dante) and Spanish literature (primarily for Cervantes). One monument to the approach of this period is Erich Auerbach's book Mimesis, a survey of techniques of realism in texts whose origins span several continents and three thousand years.

The approach of the American School would be familiar to current practitioners of Cultural Studies and is even claimed by some to be the forerunner of the Cultural Studies boom in universities during the 1970s and 1980s. The field today is highly diverse: for example, comparatists routinely study Chinese literature, Arabic literature and the literatures of most other major world languages and regions as well as English and continental European literatures.

Current developments

There is a movement among comparatists in the US and elsewhere to re-focus the discipline away from the nation-based approach with which it has previously been associated towards a cross-cultural approach that pays no heed to national borders. Works of this nature include Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak's Death of a Discipline, David Damrosch's What is World Literature?, Steven Tötösy de Zepetnek's concept of "comparative cultural studies", and Pascale Casanova's The World Republic of Letters. It remains to be seen whether this approach will prove successful given that Comparative Literature had its roots in nation-based thinking and much of the literature under study still concerns issues of the nation-state. Given developments in the studies of globalization and interculturalism, Comparative Literature, already representing a wider study than the single-language nation-state approach, may be well suited to move away from the paradigm of the nation-state. While in the West Comparative Literature is experiencing institutional constriction, there are signs that in many parts of the world the discipline is thriving, especially in Asia, Latin America, and the Mediterranean. Current trends in Comparative literature also reflect the growing importance of cultural studies in the fields of literature.

TRANSITION WORDS

To improve your writing, you need to make sure that your ideas, both in sentences and paragraphs, stick together or have coherence and that the gap between ideas is bridged smoothly. One way to do this is by using transitions - words or phrases or techniques that help bring two ideas together. Transitional words and phrases represent one way of gaining coherence. Certain words help continue an idea, indicate a shift of though or contrast, or sum up a conclusion. Check the following list of words to find those that will pull your sentences and paragraphs together.

For continuing a common line of reasoning:

consequently
clearly, then
furthermore
additionally
and
in addition
moreover
because
besides that
in the same way
following this further
also
pursuing this further
in the light of the... it is easy to see that

To change the line of reasoning (contrast):

however
on the other hand
but
yet
nevertheless
on the contrary

For opening a paragraph initially or for general use:

admittedly
assuredly
certainly
granted
no doubt
nobody denies
obviously
of course
to be sure
true
undoubtedly
unquestionably
generally speaking
in general
at this level
in this situation

For the final points of a paragraph or essay:

finally
lastly

Transitional chains, to use in separating sections of a paragraph which is arranged chronologically:

first... second... third...
generally... furthermore... finally
in the first place... also... lastly
in the first place... pursuing this further... finally
to be sure... additionally... lastly
in the first place... just in the same way... finally
basically... similarly... as well

To signal conclusion:

therefore
this
hence
in final analysis
in conclusion
in final consideration
indeed

To restate a point within a paragraph in another way or in a more exacting way:

in other words
point in fact
specifically

Sequence or time:

after
afterwards
as soon as
at first
at last
before
before long
finally
first... second... third...
in the first place
in the meantime
later
meanwhile
next
soon
then

 

اشعار سهراب ا ز بعد عرفانی بودن

سپهری از جهت اندیشگی شیفته یك نوع عرفان خاص خود است كه بدان می توان عرفان طبیعی نامید.عرفای گذشته ما در تكاپوی عرفانیات خویش سعی دارند خدا را بیواسطه بنگرند چشم به چشمه اصلی نور . به خانه خورشید دوخته اند.
سپهری اما در عرفان ویژه خویش بلند پروازی عرفای  تاریخ اسلامی ما را ندارد و خدا را از طریق طبیعت جستجو می كند.

 
من نمازم را وقتی می خوانم كه اذانش را باد گفته باشد سر گلدسته سرو
من نمازم را پی تكبیره الاحرام علف می خوانم پی قامت موج

 
شكی نیست كه او در دید عرفان ویژه خود مصمم است به همین جهت می بینیم كه تصوف قشری و عرفای ظاهر نما را با طنز تصویر می كند .
به هر صورت این عرفان ویژه سپهری هر چه هست و هر چه آن را بنامیم از عوامل عمده تصویر گرائی اوست .   
اگر عرفان عرفای قدیم آنان را در الله مستغرق می ساخت ... در سپهری باعث شده كه با دید عرفانی در طبیعت غرق شود و وقتی تا این اندازه در طبیعت مستغرق می گردد . دستمایه ایماژهای شعر خود را فراهم می آورد. به همین جهت خیال انگیزی شعر سپهری در اوج است . 
می دانیم كه هر تصویر ساخته یك صنعت ذهنی است اما هر چه عناصر این صنعت ذهنی تر و وابسته تر به قوانین و قواعد شاعرانه و به تعبیر من كوششی باشد ، شعر مصنوعی تر از كار در می آید . به عكس هر چه جوششی تر باشد یعنی بازیافت آن مستقیما از خارج ذهن و در طبیعت گرفته شده باشد ، شعر طبیعی تر می نماید و شعر سپهری چنین است . اگر بخواهیم مقایسه ای كرده باشیم ، نادرپور هم یك شاعر تصویر گر است و حتی در این زمینه قوی تر از سپهری است اما صنعت و كوشش در نادرپور غلبه دارد و در واقع به تعبیری دیگر تخیل نادرپور بسته تر ولی تخیل سپهری آزادتر و گسترده تر است در او جوشش غلبه دارد .
همه چیز در شعر سپهری زنده است،احساس دارد، عاطفه دارد، می بالد و نفس می كشد در واقع چنانچه خودش می گوید او همان شاعری است كه به هنگام خطاب به گل سوسن می گفت:

شما به كجا می گوئید شب می تپد جنگل نفس می كشد جای دیگری می گوید:
علف ها ریزش رویا را در چشمانم شنیدند

 
كلمه در زبان شعری او با خود شعر یكپارچه فرا می جوشد , نه آنكه مانند شاعران نخست سوژه ای دست و پا كند آنگاه برای بیان آن به فكر قالب و فرم گفتار و كلمه بگردد.
شعر او عین گیاه و سبزه و گل كه او آنقدر دوست می داشت در زمینه ذهنش ناگهانمی روید . نجابت و زلالی و معصومیت روستائی وار او گوئی خود شعر را نیز تحت تاثیر قرار می دهد.

در شعر معاصر فارسی، شاید سهراب سپهری تنها شاعری باشد كه اندیشه‌های قرآن و دین را در كمال شعری خود بیان می‌كند و شعر وی از آن رو ارزش والایی می‌یابد كه هم شعر است و هم در تمامی ابعاد آن، از گزینش واژه‌ها گرفته تا تصویرسازی، در شكل ذهنی و در تركیب‌بندی درونی  ، بیانگر اندیشه‌های قرآنی و دینی اوست و آن چنان بیدار و همه‌جانبه، تعالی‌جوست كه نیازی به اغراق ندارد و بی‌آن كه از صافی تعقل جزیی‌نگر بگذرد، پیام خود را منتقل می‌كند و می‌گوید:

 
 و خدایی كه در این نزدیكی ا‌ست

 یا

تو اگر در تپش باغ خدا را دیدی، همت كن و بگو، ماهی‌ها حوضشان بی‌آب است

شعر سپهری در كمال خود شعر عرفانی است؛ عرفان سپهری، عرفان تأمل و آرامش است. در شعر عرفانی ما، عشق چنان شوری در جهان و جان آدمی می‌افكند كه هر دو قرار از كف می‌نهند.
عرفان و نگرش عرفانی، در تمامی اجزا و عناصر شعر او نفوذ دارد اما عرفان او با عرفان و عناصرعرفانی فرهنگ ما بیگانه است چرا كه عرفان سپهری، عرفان ایرانی نیست؛ عرفان سپهری بیش‌تر، عرفانی است كه بر مبنای سركوب اراده و خواست و نفی‌طلبی بنا می‌شد و بر همگامی با جهان، بدان‌گونه هست و نه بدان‌گونه كه در پرتو عشق دگرگون‌كننده می‌توانند باشد، شكل می‌گیرد و وقتی از دیدگاه او به جهان بنگریم، می‌بینیم همه‌چیز رنگی دیگر به خود می‌گیرد و از بدی و شر نشانی باقی نمی‌ماند.
جهانی كه در آن نه شب باشد و نه كركس.
 اگر زیبایی‌شناسی سهراب را بپذیریم، جهان پذیرفتنی می‌شود و سیاهی فقر و جهل آدمیان و آن همه بندها كه باید از آن رهانند ؛ چونان تصویری بازگونه كه نه در واقعیت كه درذهنیت ما وجود دارد ناگهان از بین می‌روند و آنگاه برای انسان پاك‌بین كاری نمی‌ماند جز آن‌كه در آرامش مطلق، كنار گلی نیلوفر بنشیند و به جهانی كه پاك، نیكو و زیباست بنگرد.
 جهان سپهری آن‌چنان زیبا و شفاف است كه هیچ پرسشی را برنمی‌تابد. خیال سپهری جهانی است كه بر نیلوفر و با پر پروانه ساخته شده و زیباتر از آن است كه به نقد خردگرایانه سنجیده شود اما شاید در جهانی كه به قول «نیما» در آن مجال دمی ایستادن نیست و در زمانه‌ای كه صدای وحشت از هر سوی این كره‌ی خاكی بلند است، بیش از هر زمانه‌ی دیگری به شعر سهراب نیاز باشد تا به یاد آوریم كه جهان می‌تواند زیباتر و پذیرفتنی‌تر باشد و اگر اكنون در زمانه‌ی ما چنین نیست چیزی از ارزش شعر سهراب سپهری و از نیاز ما بدان نمی‌كاهد.
 سهراب در جهان فكری‌اش، بین قرآن، انجیل و متون عرفانی شرقی ‌پل زد.
 هرچند كه در ظاهر عرفان بودیستی و نگاه‌های شرقی تمام ذهن سهراب را پر كرده بود اما در اصل سهراب سپهری در جهان فكری‌اش فاصله‌ی میان قرآن، انجیل و متون عرفانی شرقی را پر كرد. به هرحال سهراب شاعری بود كه زبان خودش را در ارتباط با محتوای شعر گزینش كرد و بر اساس تفكرات تازه‌ای كه به ادیان داشت، به یك زبان مشترك در بین ادیان رسید.
 زبان سهراب، تابعی از روحیات عرفانی و اشراقی اوست كه در طول هشت كتاب، با تأثیرپذیری از نیما آغاز شده و با عبور از نیما به سجع و قافیه‌های میانی رسیده است و با یكی شدن دنیای ذهنی و بیانی او و تسلط زبانی سهراب بر ذهنیات خود، با اشعاری چون ((صدای پای آب)) نرمش و انعطافی در اوزان نیمایی ایجاد كرده و به سمت سروده‌های نیمایی باز‌می‌گردد.
 سهراب انسانی منزوی، اهل سكوت و سكون بود. او می‌خواست از طریق سكون و آرامش به حقیقت برسد. او می‌خواست با كنار گذاردن تمامی مسائل فكری، به حقیقت دست یابد. از نظر او حقیقت نه در علم و نه در استدلال است، بلكه در نوعی صفا و عشق به ماوراء است. سهراب به دنبال خانه ی دوستی است كه نشانی ندارد؛ یعنی همان خدا.
 سهراب نقاشی است كه جهان را از دریچه‌ی عرفان اشراقی خود نگاه می‌كند و در بیرون از ایران تنها نقاشی بود كه جهان را با تصویر به مخاطبان خود نشان می‌داد و این را با بیش از ده‌ها نمایشگاه نقاشی در بیش از ده‌ها كشور جهان اثبات كرده است.
 سپهری احساس می‌كرد كه این نگاه را باید به تمام مردم ایران نیز نشان داد و از آن‌جا كه تفكر سنتی ایران نقاشی را پس می‌زد، سهراب به ناچار آن‌ها را در قالب زبان و شعر كه هنر اصیل و كهن ایران است ریخت و به بهترین شكلی نگاه خود را برای جامعه‌ی ادبی ایران ومردم كشورمان به یادگار گذاشت.
 سهراب سپهری دایره‌ی صور عاطفی را در آثار خود كاملاً باز كرده است و این صور عاطفی بیشتر از صور خیال نمود بیرونی دارد و اگر درست به آن توجه شود، می‌توان استفاده‌های خوبی از آن كرد.
سهراب شاعر آب و آیینه بود و همان زلالی شخصیت و واقعیت خود را در آثارش منعكس كرده و بر خلاف بعضی از پیروانش، به تزویر و تلبیس دست نزده است و برداشت‌های شخصی خود از دین‌های اسلام و انجیل و فلسفه‌ی بودیستی را همان‌گونه كه می‌بیند در آثار خود منعكس كرده است.
 كار سهراب در واقع پررنگ كننده‌ی جریان ادبی نیمایی بود كه در آن زمان تمام ایران را فرا گرفته بود و سهراب با آمیختن این زبان ادبی نهفته در طبیعت و نقاشی، یك تازگی خاص و لطافت زبانی در آثارش منعكس كرده است.
سفر به ژاپن که به قصد آموختن حکاکی روی چوب, آهنگ آن کرده بود, به او چیزهایی دیگر نیز آموخت؛ اینکه شعرهای سهراب سپهری را گاهی در حال و هوای "هایکو" یافته ‏اند. سپهری به داشته ‏های خود خرسند و به شهر و دیار و طبیعت رهای اطراف شهر خود کاشان پای بند است. هر چند اندک می‏تواند نتیجه تاثیر این گونه سفرها باشد؛ چنان که توجه او به طبیعت هم در نقاشی و هم در شعر نیز از این تاثیر بلکی دور نمانده است.
او چشم به طبیعت داشت و از پیرامونیان خود, که شاید تنها اندکی از آنان از صداقت و صمیمیت انسانی بالایی برخوردار بودند, پرهیز می‏کرد:

به سراغ من اگرمی‏آیید            
نرم و آهسته بیایید, مبادا که ترک بردارد                             
چینی نازک تنهایی من        

تجلّی‌ طبیعت‌، هنر و معماری‌ کاشان‌ در شعر سهراب‌ سپهری‌