Question

read rita dove’s poem \sonnet in primary colors,\ then study frida kahlo’s painting self-portrait with monkey and parrot.

this is for the woman with one black wing
perched over her eyes: lovely frida, erect
among parrots, in the stern petticoats of the peasant,
who painted herself a present—
wildflowers entwining the plaster corset
her spine resides in, that flaming pillar—
this priestess in the romance of mirrors.

each night she lay down in pain and rose
to the celluloid butterflies of her beloved dead,
lenin and marx and stalin arrayed at the footstead.
and rose to her easel, the hundred dogs panting
like children along the graveled walks of the garden,
diego’s
love a skull in the circular window
of the thumbprint searing her immutable brow.

which statements best describe differences in the style of the two works?

○ the painting pays attention to details of kahlo’s physical appearance, while the poem does not.
○ the poem portrays the painter as serious, while the painting does not.
○ the poem reveals details that explain kahlo’s facial expressions, while the painting does not.
○ the painting uses imagery that tells of kahlo’s connection to nature, while the poem does not.

Explanation:

• Option 1: The poem does describe Frida's physical details (e.g., "one black wing perched over her eyes", "plaster corset"), so this is wrong.
• Option 2: The poem's "erect among parrots", "stern petticoats" and the painting's self - portrait with a serious - looking Frida? No, the poem portrays her as serious (priestess, pain - enduring, rising to easel), while the painting (self - portrait with monkey and parrot) may not have that serious tone. Wait, re - evaluate.
• Option 3: The poem has details like "wildflowers entwining...", "each night she lay down in pain..." which explain her facial expressions (the pain, the priestess - like seriousness), while the painting (a self - portrait with monkey and parrot) doesn't give such explanatory details. This makes sense.
• Option 4: The poem has "wildflowers", "garden" imagery, so it does show connection to nature. So this is wrong.

Answer:

The poem reveals details that explain Kahlo's facial expressions, while the painting does not.