When we came to class on Monday, I felt that I had a pretty good grasp of what Humanism was, based on the reading and some searching on the internet.  Basically, it is an interest in “antiquity” (aka the Greek and Latin cultures).  That seems easy enough.  So, when I read the poems, I wanted to compare them to poems from the old greek poems, or the old latin poems, or perhaps to compare them to other non-humanist poems of the time period so that I could see the differences or similarities.  There I ran into some trouble; I don’t know enough about either of those groups to make any good comparisons.  Nor am I even a fan of more recent poetry.  So, I attended class curious as to how the discussion would go. 

In the end, I think that I was looking for something more concrete.  (example “This is written in iambic pentameter, which was not used until this poem.)  But I should have been looking at the topic, word choice, and voice.  Furthermore, not all of those will reflect humanism in one work.  The part of the work that reflects the humanist ideals may change, and the way in which it reflects those ideals may change.  

So, when I left class, I knew more than when I came in, and yet, it clouded up the picture of humanism.  However, I beleive that class was probably suppose to do that.