The title is a question. To better understand the poem "Could you?" (Mayakovsky), the analysis must begin precisely with this question. At the same time, it is rhetorical and quite direct, suggesting an answer. Although, on the one hand, it reflects a certain judgment regarding the total mass of people, which, based on his own experience, Mayakovsky has.
Analysis “Could you?” (poems) shows that the author really asks his readers and listeners, as he, including, gave a lot of live performances. The potential response of these people would be no. Of course, in fact, no one would have voiced it, because people simply would not have entered into dialogue with him, limited by the earthlyness of their thinking. On the other hand, he does not go into the description of someone else's sinfulness and mediocrity, does not point to anyone, because he does not seek personal satisfaction in this. Being full of energy and creative power, he regrets others. His goal is not to blame, but to shake. His peculiar weeping is like a friendly hand that no one can shake, or as a challenge to an enemy standing on a hill on the other side of the plain where everyone is sleeping. Here the reader is invited to compare one and the other, and answer the question posed by Mayakovsky himself, “But could you?” An analysis of the poem makes it clear that in reality it is a question of who you are - ordinary or not. Therefore, this phrase precedes the poem, and in the end hangs with ringing silence.
Images-objects and images-actions
The means to which Mayakovsky resorts can be conditionally characterized as images-objects and images-actions. You could even say it another way - he doesn’t resort to them, but they themselves pour out of it a bitter syrup. Images-objects symbolize the components of the material world and circumstances, and images-actions - the manipulations that Mayakovsky carries out in relation to them. Analysis “Could you?” (one of the most famous creations) suggests that if an epithet is an addition to a word, saturating it, giving weight and a new meaning, then the actions that the author performs are epithets for the objects over which it is performed.
Interaction with the outside world
The first two lines reflect the solidity and uncompromising approach of the author to life. He does not accept the environment as something in itself directive, but instead manages it. Also, he does not defile the attributes of everyday existence, but rather, makes them play with deep colors. Thus, he says that our internal picture of the world depends only on our perception and interpretation, and that it can mutually influence the state of things.
More than a still life
The richness and expressiveness of the text gives rise to an association with still life. At the same time, in the poem “Could you?” (Mayakovsky) analysis of the qualitative composition of the proposals suggests that this is not just a still life. Although one must pay tribute to Mayakovsky as an artist of the word. Almost all words in the text are represented by verbs and nouns (or pronouns). And those few adjectives that are found ("oblique", "tin", "new", "gutter") have a very specific physical, non-emotional meaning. Removed from the context, they hardly change the expression of the poem. The verbs “showed”, “read”, “play”, “could” are also initially colorless. Of the most ordinary words, Mayakovsky weaves something completely new and enthralling. Every word is said to the point.
The difference between “could” and “could”
All emphasis is placed on actions. “Lubricate the card of everyday life”, “splashing paint from a glass” means not to surrender to the mercy of fate, and at the same time to color it. "Show oblique cheekbones of the ocean on a jelly dish" - can be interpreted as the disclosure of potential and prospects. So is the question posed by Vladimir Mayakovsky (“Could you?”) Be a primitive provocation? The analysis of the subsequent text indicates that it condemns not only the earthliness of thinking, but also its excessive volatility, carelessness. In everything that surrounds us, there is no need to search for poetics and engage in lengthy reasoning. You need to create, act, transform, take everything under your control - and right now, as Mayakovsky himself does. Analysis “Could you?” shows that this is not just a challenge. Compare, for example, two forms of the verb - “could” and “could”. The first option, which is used in the poem, has a more interrogative meaning, the meaning of the action, continuing always and everywhere. Whereas the second option is just an urge to prove something to someone.
Almost tangible power and assertiveness are distinguished by images, natural and at the same time original, which Mayakovsky created. Analysis “Could you?” shows that not only the meaning of words contributes to this, but also their sound. However, the overall picture does not lose its lightness, the author’s readiness for soft and fresh impressions, for their expectation, of which the lips are a symbol, is shown. You can notice the ironic and flying tint of the narrative, which in the last line is compared with the nocturne. "I have already played my nocturne and will play again, but what about you?"