Petrarch vs. Tennyson

Can I just take this time to stress how different Tennyson and Petrarch were from each other? This is essentially comparing a tomato to an an orange. Both are fruits with a high vitamin C content, and both are writers who made a huge impact on the literary world, but no one in their right mind is going to confuse an orange with a tomato. Wasn't that a super deep metaphor? I worked hard on it. Right, so we all remember who Petrarch was? The good guy with a slightly creepy obsession with Laura? (I mean 366 poems is bordering on mild psychopathy...) And Tennyson was the romantic poet who embodied all things Victorian England, and also quite possibly the poshest name ever (Alfred, Lord Tennyson). Now Tennyson was known during his own time to a brilliant poet, master of language. But this poses an interesting question: would Tennyson be as well known today if Queen Victoria hadn't loved his poems? It's a bit like modern-day celebrity endorsement, and difficult it accurately compare his poems when there could have just as easily been a more brilliant poet who just  never got "discovered".Then again, Tennyson was quoted in Skyfall, so maybe that point is moot. If M. can appreciate it, then so can I. And if you don't get the reference, haul yourself to a theatre. Like now. Where was I? Right, as for Petrarch, he was known to be a pretty smart guy, but his influences were much more long term. I mean, Petrarch wrote his sonnets, died (the day before his 70th birthday), was buried, and decomposed before one Thomas Wyatt "borrowed" his sonnet format and used it to write cryptic messages to Anne Boleyn. But I think we've already gone over that... Also Petrarch is considered to have coined  the term "dark ages". Bit pessimistic to call the time you're living in the bane of arts and culture, don't you think? 

And the winner is...

Petrarch
While I can appreciate the beauty of Tennyson's works, and they are amazing, he just didn't have the influence that Petrarch did. Keep in mind Petrarch defeated Shakespeare to get to this point. The heavyweights of the 13th-16th centuries will always destroy the Romantics. Besides, I don't think the posh Tennyson would last very long in an actual fight...

Thomas Gray vs. John Milton

  In one corner we have Thomas Gray, the brain behind the masterpiece Elegy in a Country Churchyard, the man who made us think about the people beneath those tombstones. In the other corner we have John Milton, son of composer John Milton (that's confusing...) and author of the epic Paradise Lost, which is as it's genre describes-epic. But which of these poets will emerge as victor and move on to the semi-finals? Well, Thomas Gray, while a very intelligent man, scholar extrordinaire, was not a very prolific poet. In fact, he only ever wrote less than 1000 lines of poetic verse (and no I don't know the actual number), where as Milton wrote thousands in Paradise Lost alone. Milton was also a very important member of Cromwell's government and had a lot of influence on a shaky, newly-formed republic. Both Gray and Milton attended Cambridge, which actually isn't that surprising given that England seems to only have 2 universities: Cambridge and Oxford. (or at least if you expect to be anyone in the English Lit world, that's where you must go!) And we know Gray is the resident expert on graves, where as there is no mention of a graveyard anywhere in Paradise Lost, which seems a bit of an oversight, considering the whole death of Jesus thing in it.

So.. Who would win?

John Milton.

Alright, so these two facing off is a bit like comparing a factory worker who only installs the windshield of a space shuttle to the astrophysicist who designed the whole thing. I'm certain that the factory worker is reallyyyyy good at assembling windshields, but the everyone knows that it's the astrophysicist who gets the credit. (In case you're unsure, Gray is the factory worker, Milton the astrophysicist.) And that's a science-y as it gets here, folks!