|
WESLEY MCNAIR
Living Twice:
Thoughts about Poetry
Lived once, the events we
experience come and go, in disorder and confusion. But as poets we
have the luck of living twice, the second time when we recall
through our work what happened to us, learning in this way the
event's true meaning.
*
A poem
depends on reticence and smallness. It consists of just a few
sentences grouped around an insight. Left without fanfare in the
silence of a page, it is discovered by a solitary reader who finds
it important enough to pass on to a friend who may also benefit from
it. The new reader perhaps makes a copy of it to pin on his wall,
then hands it on to another, who learns it by heart. By this slow
process, the little poem eventually finds its way to a community of
appreciation, acquiring a scale and an authority that in the
beginning might have been unsuspected.
*
In a nation
like ours that honors the big, the noisy and the quick, the poem has
no supporting mythology. But since the poem's strength arises from
precisely what this mythology rejects, its power continues, even
here, undiminished and unabated.
*
I attend a
writers conference billed as one of the largest in America among
whole classes of area high school students attending with their
teachers, poetry enthusiasts from all over the country, and of
course poets, those who write regularly and those who want to write
more. The many panels about the craft feature poets with brand names
and meet concomitantly to discuss the writing process, methods of
revision, publishing, and the writer's development. "If you had
known who I was when I began as a poet, you would not believe a
person such as I could be here occupying this chair," says one at
her panel. There are so many poets at one afternoon reading, they
must be listed on two sides of a program. There are so many
listeners, all scanning their programs to pick out their favorites,
the faces of the poets must be presented on giant TV screens as they
read from their work. Every poem draws applause. In an old joke, a
man who prays to God asking Him for a way to gain entrance into a
church that will not let him in. "Don't worry," God says, "I've
never been in that church myself." Who could object to building this
huge church for poetry, which, unlike the church of the joke,
welcomes all who wish to enter? So why, in the middle of my own
enthusiasm and applause, do I miss poetry?
*
Places
where poetry is invoked and may not come: a presentation by a guest
poet during National Poetry Month in an auditorium full of students,
with teachers patrolling the aisles; a bookstore reading beginning
with what the poet terms "a long sequence of poems"; weekend
workshops in poetry writing called "Finding Your Voice."
*
Still,
developing a speaking voice, which happens over time rather than
through the seven-step program of the workshop, is crucial to
engaging an audience, and not only for writers. The jazz musician
Lester Young, who learned how to "speak" with his tenor sax, turned
public performance on the band stand into the cadences and tones of
an intimate conversation. Then there was Sigmund Freud, who in his
early work in psychoanalysis sought to engage the deeper
consciousness of his patients through a technique derived from his
experiments with hypnosis,
speaking from a chair behind the patient lying on a couch, "seeing
him," as Freud wrote in an intriguing passage of his autobiography,
"but not seen myself."
*
Again and
again in her poems Elizabeth Bishop finds just the right tone of
voice to take the reader into her confidence. There is nothing more
pleasurable in her work than that tone, her unique contribution to
poetry. "Somebody loves us all," she famously writes in "Filling
Station" about the humorous and rather hopeless family who own the
station. The confidential tone with which she describes them,
loving as it is, seems by itself to suggest what she means.
*
How much do
fellow writers love the new book of poetry? The inevitable blurbs on
the back cover, ever multiplying, explain. Not so long ago,
collections seemed obliged to include one or two blurbs. Now many
poetry covers feature three or more. Why so much boasting? What do
we have to hide?
*
And why do
the titles of poetry books open with an abstract noun and link it by
way of a preposition to another to contrive an atmosphere of portent
and profundity: The Authority of Water, The Imperatives of
Desire, The Importance of Light, The Uses of Rain? Why do
the titles of poetry books so often sound like the titles of poetry
books? The back-cover blurbs are similarly abstract and precious,
favoring verbs like "nourish" (as in "poems that nourish feelings
of") and "informs" (as in "the generosity that informs her vision");
adjectives like "luminous" or "numinous"; and descriptive
combinations like "quirky grace" and "harrowingly wise"? For general
readers examining the covers of or books in libraries or bookstores,
such titles and blurbs are likely to confirm the suspicion they have
had all along about poetry: that they will never "get it," and that
there might not be much point for them in getting it anyway.
*
William
Wordsworth, speaking to, and about, the reader in the introduction
to his book, Lyrical Ballads: "I have wished to keep the
reader in the company of flesh and blood, persuaded that by so
doing, I will interest him."
*
Without a
reader, the life of the poem does not exist. So poets should do
their best to be clear. Yet the most memorable insights of poems do
not come from direct speech, but from obliqueness and indirection.
So poems can also suffer, as they often do today, from being too
open to readers, and from an accompanying desire to be liked by
them.
*
But it is
no use to suggest, as do the poets asked in a recent issue of a
literary journal to write about audience, that poets are not
obligated to an audience, only to the truth of their inspiration.
There are few writers, poets or otherwise, who have not tried to
straighten out a tangled sentence by posing as a reader of their
work, rather than the writer if it. There is inspiration, and there
is the need to make sense.
*
At the
academic conference, I am struck by the difference between the
literary specialist and the writer, who distrusts the abstraction
and methodology that the specialist so prizes, and who acquires his
objective distance by the deepest subjectivity.
*
And who is
deeply attracted to the excitement of an idea in formation -- the
process of thinking, rather than the finished thought, in all its
self-satisfaction and complacency.
*
Looking
back on graduate school, I realize that many of my professors,
schooled in the approaches of New Critical scholarship, had trouble
with alcohol and suffered disappointment in their personal lives.
Could this be in part because they had learned a language that kept
at arm's length the thing they most loved? I only know that to write
poetry I had to unlearn New Criticism -- not only the language of
the scholars, but the poetry they wrote about, whose objective was,
following Eliot's model, "depersonalization." Poetry did not want me
to keep my materials at a distance so much as to embrace them.
*
Yet the
Eliot who called for depersonalization in his essay "Tradition and
the Individual Talent" also advised that poets should be guided not
only by the work of their own generation, but should write with, in
his words, "the whole of literature" in their minds. In a lazy
period such as ours when so many editors and poets value novelty
above all things, Eliot's advice reads like a long-needed call to
ambition.
*
A veteran
Maine woodcarver in a radio interview makes this observation with
implications for veteran poets: "Sometimes a rut can feel like a
groove."
*
The poet
takes a journey that opens his heart in two ways, deepening first
his intuitive awareness, from which his poetic insights come, and
secondly, his compassion for fellow humans and all the living things
with which he shares the planet. Without the development of this
second thing, his poems may turn inward and lose contact with the
very audience to which poems must be addressed.
*
The poems
that move us most are the most complex in their emotion, containing
a counterweight or counteraction of feeling: I am convinced and I
can't quite believe; how could he have done this to me and I love
him; this beauty is endless and I will die.
*
I have
never found a better place to seek the poem's muse than the side of
a quiet pond, whose protean surface, like the imagination, shifts
and changes the images of shore and sky and then goes still, like a
mind in concentration, lengthening the trees, docks and canoes along
its shore by its reflection.
*
Creative
thinking II, lawyers and poets: asked about the process by which he
arrives at approaches to legal issues he researches, the professor
and lawyer Peter Strauss tells me he always begins with a series of
questions --"just as you do, I'd guess."
*
"As they
grow older, do composers, like poets, feel the need to impart
whatever wisdom they have to their listeners?" I ask the composer
Jon Appleton at a retreat for artists. "I don't know if there is a
way to express wisdom in music," he replies. "But what about the
feeling that you're up against the ultimates and you want only to
speak the truth as you know it?" I ask. "That," he says with his
finger in the air -- "that, I have felt and done."
*
Several
years ago I had a residency at a writers retreat in Ireland,
becoming acquainted there with the Irish love of language. In an
instant, the Irish writers I met could wax articulate about any
issue, their opinions leaping fully formed into sentences.
Meanwhile, I spoke haltingly or not at all, dazzled and intimidated
by their facility. I finally discovered it was not only my
ineptitude that made me different from them, but my attitude toward
language. While they trusted it utterly to express what they meant,
I both trusted and distrusted it, as other American writers tend to
do. Our ambivalence toward language gives us a special feeling for
free verse, its line-breaks, sentences broken across stanza
divisions, and spaces just beyond the lines and stanzas -- all of
which bring the not-said into the poem and indicate meanings that
exist beyond the power of language to express them.
*
Which is to
say that the very form of free verse calls us to the deepest
communication possible in literature: to bring language to the edge
of articulation, revealing feelings words cannot express.
*
There is,
however, another way of writing free verse among American poets
which conveys its meanings more through what the ear hears than what
the eye sees. Those who have written the best free verse for the ear
-- Theodore Roethke, say, Sylvia Plath, James Wright, or Donald Hall
-- were trained as formalists, learning from their verse in rhyme
and meter that the line was a musical unit, self-contained. Is their
free verse therefore limited? No more than the free verse of so many
eye poets who have followed them, writing for the page and losing
more and more of poetry's music.
*
How long
will we poets have readers who know the difference between language
for the eye and the ear, or for that matter, care enough to know?
According to a recent study of entering high-school students, the
average fourteen-year-old in 1949 knew exactly two and a half times
as many vocabulary words as the average fourteen-year-old in 1999.
In just 50 years, the verbal culture has been stripped away layer by
layer by the culture of the screen: TV, movies, videogames, and the
Internet.
*
In a
reminiscence about studying to be a writer with other early students
at the Iowa Writers workshop in the mid-60s, Robert Lacy writes,
"Little did we know that within two decades aspiring to be a famous
literary novelist would be, to use Gore Vidal's analogy, comparable
to aspiring to be 'a famous ceramicist'" since "the coming triumph
of pop culture over the higher varieties would soon become an
American way of life." Do we poets and writers forty years later
simply hasten the death of "the higher varieties" by drawing our
source material from the popular culture, as we often do?
*
The last
words to go if language continues to die among our readers will
surely be the "heart-words," as one writer has called them: the
words of one or two syllables inherited from primitive German tribes
that form the base of English. Referring to these ancient words, the
linguist Otto Jespersen once wrote that when we are drowning, we do
not cry out "Assistance!" We cry "Help!" In his illustration
Jespersen was demonstrating how much closer to our feelings simple
Anglo-Saxon words are than the French words of three or four
syllables that came into the language after the Norman conquest.
Emily Dickinson made expert use of the two kinds of language in her
poems, often beginning with heart-words and reserving the ones with
multiple syllables for concluding turns that open the mind to larger
considerations:
I stepped
from Plank to Plank
A slow and
cautious way
The stars
about my Head I felt
About my
Feet the Sea.
I knew not
but the next
Would be my
final inch --
This gave
me that precarious Gait
Some call
Experience.
*
Emily
Dickinson on literary celebrity and making poems: "If fame belonged
to me, I could not escape her."
*
There has
been a great deal written and said about the influence of one poet's
work on another's, but the work that most influences a poet is the
poetry he writes himself. Poets grow by choosing challenging
material that forces them to do things they have not done before.
*
Except that
other writers can embolden a poet through their writing, and the
best ones can help him discover and claim what has all along been
inside him waiting to be transformed. The result is called his
original work.
*
Was it
Annie Dillard who once said that the best subject matter asks the
writer to resolve a contradiction between two contraries that cannot
possibly be brought together?
*
More
contraries poets must resolve: the disorder of external events and
the poem's interior arc of feeling; the heart's urgency and the
denials of the shaping mind; living the life of a right-brain person
in a left-brain world.
*
Afterthoughts
I. On the
best place to think and write:
I write
this far from the side of a quiet a pond, in the mess of my study at
home in front of a computer screen. The door is wide open; my wife
talks nearby on the kitchen phone, lets the whining dog in, then
turns on the tap over and over, carrying water to her plants
throughout the house. The distraction has its own rhythm, breaking
my concentration, though each time it resumes, I am reminded of
something new to say.
*
II. On
thoughts about poetry, by Theodore Roethke:
"For poetry, my dear, is not
What other people said & thought..."
*
III. T.R.,
on conveying thoughts about poetry:
"He teaches a class like an animal trainer...The cage is open:
you may go."
|