How might a modern, twenty-first century neo-classical formalist critic judge these three poems?

1)  Remember that mimesis (imitation) is central to Aristotle's and Horace's practical analysis of "what works" in the literature of their era.  How well does the work imitate its subject?  Do its parts persuade us that we are seeing the real thing?

2)  Aristotle says less about lyrics than about drama, but he is interested in the emotional and intellectual impact of literature on its audience.  Do these poems move you?  Does their "movement" of the passions correspond to formal elements that the poet controls will skill?

3)  Horace goes further than Aristotle in saying that poems that "win" the audience's approval must "delight and instruct."  Do they?  If so, what is the source of their delight, and what is the nature of their instruction?