Compare and contrast "The Fish" by Mary Oliver, and "The Fish" by Elizabeth Bishop.Consider the tone, voice, form, use of figurative language,...

Your question has many parts to it, but I can,
unfortunately, answer only one. I have selected the last
part:

Are both women reaching the same conclusions or
different ones based on their experiences with the
fish?

The response that I have for each poem is based
primarily on the different experiences of each woman in catching her
fish.

Oliver's poem lists the physical attributes of the
fish, and discusses how the oxygen is so deadly for it. It describes rainbows, which I
assume refer to the light refracting off of its shiny skin. However, the speaker
conquers the fish, kills, cleans, and eats it so that they become one. Oliver seems to
describe how the death of the fish nourishes the speaker. But she also addresses the
shared experience the fish and the person both have in the pain of this "mysterious"
thing called life. The poem left me feeling that the fish was a victim, somehow a
sacrifice for man's betterment.

Bishop's poem also has
wonderful imagery. She describes the danger of the oxygen to the fish also, but her
rainbows are those of oil from the boat creating colors on the water. However, her
observations are more engaging and personal. She describes its appearance in detail: its
skin like old wallpaper; age indicated by its barnacled sides; its eyes that glitter and
shine, though not with a human
intelligence.

Everything changes when
she describes evidence of others who have attempted to catch the fish. The broken fish
lines protruding from its "lip" are described:

readability="9">

...Like medals with their
ribbons

frayed and wavering,

a
five-haired beard of wisdom

trailing from his aching
jaw

Bishop makes us care
about that fish by personifying it. It is old, has medals from previous encounters where
it "beat" mankind, to live on, and yet its jaw is aching from those "war
wounds."

Then there is a moment of fear on the part of the
reader who knows something of human
nature:

I stared and
stared

and victory filled
up

the little rented
boat

As the reader, I am
afraid that the speaker's sense of winning, of conquering that which others could not
conquer, will cost the fish its life.

However, Bishop
renews our faith in mankind. She does not set us up to care about the fish only to dash
us against the rocks—as a bear might kill a
fish.

And I let it
go.

This line
makes the reader feel victorious not only for the fish, but for the speaker as well. A
private victory in catching the uncatchable fish is all right; allowing the fish to
escape again is better.

Both women definitely do NOT reach
the same conclusions about the fish. Oliver's speaker kills the fish and eats it. This
is a victory for the speaker, but it brings no satisfaction to him/her. There is a note
of shared pain and a sense of finality, like death.

On the
other hand, Bishop's story revolves around catching, admiring, respecting, and releasing
the fish. The end is affirming and hopeful. The "race" is still on; perhaps the speaker
will fish another time and catch the old fish again, but death is not necessary in the
speaker's "battle" with the fish. Mercy leaves the reader with a sense of fulfillment
and grace.