“Sonnet: Composed Upon Westminster Bridge” – The theme of cities

In a Romanist’s view, the city or anything manmade is considered unnatural and therefore bad. However, is this the case? If everyone thinks that nature is better than cities, then why build cities in the first place?

Think of it this way. Does a wood-built hut out in the woods with spiders crawling everywhere or an apartment with luxurious facilities such as a swimming pool provide better living quality? Most people would obviously choose the latter. In this world in which time is more precious than anything else, our definition of ‘living quality’ mostly considers how convenient something is. Everything in the city is designed to save time — the water taps save you from having to go to the lake to get water, the phone saves you from having to find the actual person in order to chat with them…

However, over-use of artificial substances can also cause great damage to the natural world. Although things become more convenient, the clean air becomes polluted, the clear water becomes dirty, and eventually, we will have to artificially clean them with man-made products. Natural ecosystems will get destroyed, but some people — the same people who probably took part in causing the destruction — spend time on doing research and protecting the ecosystems. It seems as if we want to take control of all natural things and believe we can fix any problem that goes wrong in nature with our knowledge and technology — but is that really true?

Is the city better or the nature better? Well, it really depends on everyone’s views — whether you believe the cost of our activities are acceptable compared to the development and convenience which it causes.

Be the first to like.

7 comments to “Sonnet: Composed Upon Westminster Bridge” – The theme of cities

  • Dan Lian Zhao

    I like the bit about how both opinions would think, not only the one you agree with. But if in the conclusion, instead of thinking about how others might think, write about your own opinion.

  • Mihnea Lupu

    Your review was one of the best. It had a beginning which make the reader want to continue as well it was very captivating. I also liked the fact that you asked the question. Furthermore, you debated both sides of the argument and explained your reasoning for each. The conclusion was sound but did not answer the question fully. It was opened ended. Overall a very well structured review.

  • Tom Prior

    Very detailed response, one of the only reviews to be so methodical 😉 and display both sides of the argument (romantics not romanists)

  • Jasmine Yeh

    As others said, this is a very well written post. Though you should add more of your own opinions to conclude the post

  • Lewis Harding

    i think that in your section of writing it made me understand your point of view and it made me want to read more. Another good key thing of which you had included has been you have debated both sides so a person who reads this will gain full acknowledgment of the argument and its basis.

  • Sophie Krafft

    Very nicely written also that you started out in a romanticists point of view and what the romanticist would think. Really good choice of examples. Only your own opinion is mission now

  • Edward Higham

    Great post, you made good examples but you could have added your own opinion.

Recent Comments