Pages

Tuesday, August 16, 2016

Some stream of conscious on value of poetry and labor + a poem

Although I've been writing nearly every day, whenever possible, I haven't had a long enough chunk of time to pull something together for a thorough blog post. I've got about two hours free to write outside of work each day, and I try to plan and sketch out ideas mentally during each shift. Hopefully over this weekend (my "weekend" = wed/thur) I can finish some of the things I have started.

I've been taking William Carlos Williams's lead lately in trying to understand how to balance work/necessity with poetry. WCW was a full time pediatrician and supposedly wrote poems on the backs of prescriptions slips in between delivering babies. He also famously held to the motto "No ideas but in things." I think "ideas" parallels "poetry" and "things" parallels labor. To really flesh out a poem involves retreating to some solitude and focus, regrouping your thoughts. But all the material for the poem has to come from the outside world. Interpreting WCW as an object-oriented poet (opposed to a platonic poet), the world of things begets the world of ideas. As a novice poet, I have spent a lot of time misguidedly thinking that writing should occur in an anchoritic vacuum-- that "the dream" for a writer is a "room of one's own," some perfect private office and infinite time to write there, not spending the majority of my time working some close to minimum wage job. Instead, I found that while I DO need solitude and a large chunk of uninterrupted time to really hone and finish projects, once I reached a point of really being serious about writing and wanting to do it for itself, to work on words, not simply "express myself" and emotions through bad poetry, I have found that I don't have to be in the immaculate workspace I thought I needed. There's enough rugged determination to try and put some words or sentences or ideas together in between ringing up customers or while mopping the floor, and to hastily jot notes down on my phone notepad or a napkin whenever possible. No more compartmentalizing [work, not fun, not proud, no creativity] and [coffee shop, study, joy, writing, me].

What's more, I don't feel that poetry and work are competing with each other (although I would ideally not work quite as many hours), but that work is a time to practice the unexamined life-- the lived life instead of the reflective life. It is a time to reach out to the public sphere, to serve others, to engage with the body as well as the mind. I can't say I'd ever choose to stock a cooler or scrub a toilet over retiring to a cottage to write all the days of my life, but that may be because I'm weak. Because there's a certain value, rugged and genuine, never to be romanticized but to enjoy very plainly, in toil. As Ecclesiastes says "What profit has a man for all his labor in which he toils under the sun?" and answers "For my heart rejoiced in all my labor / and this was the reward for all my labor." There is no point to our toil, except that we are illuminated in rejoicing at what is, at doing with all our hearts whatever our hand finds to do-- at not shirking or shying but embracing. And for all of the beauty of poetry and how much it adds to life, because life can thrive without poetry, the best life puts effort into thriving and loving the whole first, and then rejoicing that poetry, too, exists.

Here's a sketch of a poem, not polished, somewhat along these lines that I jotted down at work yesterday, channeling Marianne Moore :)

---


Nor should one discriminate against
     sticky gas station storerooms
in all their dinginess

drab rows of tall boys and 40s
     racks of dusty candy bars
hot dogs rolling in grease

Without romanticizing, one should 
     learn to wonder at hyper-
commonness. What is not 

ancient enough to reflect on,
     nor novel enough to desire 
to reflect. But what is 

banally immanent. The poet
     should engineer the event.
It is through knowing death

is soon (“is always and is near”) we
     do this. Every image becomes
important against the 
     threat of the abyss.

Wednesday, August 10, 2016

"Ceramic"

Kay Ryan is one of my favorite poets and THE master of rhyme, so I like to imitate her style from time to time. Couldn't think of a catchy maxim-like title a la Ryan though.

Ceramic

Poetry
is one t away
from pottery.
On a vola-
tile day—
a slipped t
suddenly—
and all
words are clay. 
The poet must 
be careful—
she cannot panic—
she cannot trust
a misplaced sylla-
ble 
won’t turn
ceramic.

Thomas Wyatt -- "He is not ded that sometym hath a fall" -- Third Stage of Reading

Thomas Wyatt

He is not ded that somtyme hath a fall
The sonne retorneth that was under the cloud
And when fortune hath spit oute all her gall,
I trust good luck to me shalbe allowd.
For I have sene a shipp into haven fall
After the storme hath broke boeth mast and shrowd
And eke the willowe that stoppeth with the wynde
Doeth ryse again and greater wode doeth bynd

(It's good to always keep the poem in front of you for reference, so I'm prefacing each section of analysis with it)

Third Stage of Reading

Having gotten good vibes from this poem on the first reading, and fleshed out references to Christian images of hope and redemption on second reading/analysis, let’s trouble the waters a bit.

Context can help us get new perspectives on poems, so long as we think of context as one of many lenses, one of many ways to enjoy a poem and so enrich our lives, never as doctrine for the “one meaning” of the poem. Some context for Wyatt is that he valued reason, had some tough luck and writes a lot about luck and fortune, and doesn’t write a lot about God. The Tudor court at the time was lapping up new and competing philosophies—on the one hand, protestant theories of predestination and individual faith in God; on the other hand, a revival of the ideas of Lucretius, who denied the influence of gods and, through poetry, promoted the theory that everything is made of atoms, whose random swerves give us some free will, and the introduction of English translations of Machiavelli, who also eschews God to talk about dealing with Fortune instead. My impression of Wyatt’s other poems has always been that he has the sensibilities of a courtier-criticizing, proverb-loving protestant with an interest in analyzing reason and fortune with skepticism about divinity.

I want to stress that I hold by the Christian interpretation as a worthwhile reading of this poem—this poem gives several gifts of meaning, and I wholeheartedly support the use of this poem as a prayer and mantra to keep one going when times are tough. AND I support the following interpretation, a parallel version of the poem that involves what I would call the opposite interpretation if I believed in either/or instead of both/and. In a flat ontology, the writer and his life are valuable. The poem alone without a reader or context is valuable. The reader and their history are valuable. Everyone and everything is worthy of respect. So no matter which interpretation seems “more likely”—that the poem is hopeful, that it is Christian, that it is sarcastic, that it is confused as to whether it should be hopeful or not—let us explore all routes.

Here is the sarcastic route. The grim protestant bitterly realizing his hope and faith are for nothing, that we live in a world of absurdity as dictated by fortune. “I’m not dead yet!” cries Monty Python’s knight, as each limb is hacked away. Four hundred years pre-Python, Thomas Wyatt, with the same sardonic wit, cries “he is not ded that somtyme hath a fall” and goes on to list all these “hopeful” ways that things can be totally trashed and still keep going—pointlessly. Even without the above context about why Wyatt might not be trumpeting Christian hope here, we have internal context—the poem itself (1) does not mention God, and (2) specifically mentions Fortune:
              And when Fortune hath spit oute all her gall
              I trust good luck to me shall be allowd
These two lines seem to give us the traditional idea of Fortune’s Wheel: good fortune and bad fortune alternate, and if we cannot have faith in God, we can have faith in Fortune’s cycle—look at all these examples: the sun returns from under a cloud, a ship is broken in a storm but makes it safely home, a man falls but gets back up again, a stagnant willow continues her dance when the winds come round again—and poor Wyatt, well, once Fortune has done her worst, good luck will come his way, he just has to hold out. Right?

Re-examining the examples he gives—his reasons to have faith—we see they are bitter examples of why the wheel metaphor for fortune is flawed. If the wheel takes you through the worst that can happen, you can’t possibly pop out on the other side and be all better. A more apt metaphor would be Fortune’s Steamroller: you might come out alive, which is technically good fortune, but you’re also a pancake, every bone in your body broken. Consider these paraphrases (taking some license) of each image Wyatt uses:

Wyatt
He is not ded that somtyme hath a fall

Paraphrase
He is not dead that lies in the hospital in a vegetative state

Wyatt
The sonne retorneth that was under the clowd

Paraphrase
[to be fair, this doesn’t have an obvious downside]
[And it's good to note when part of a poem doesn't perfectly line up with what you want to be your rock-solid interpretation. This one line here could be the starting point for a fourth line of inquiry and analysis-- instead of brushing over lines like this, we should ask "Why doesn't this work?"]

Wyatt
For I have scene a ship into haven fall
After the storme hath broke boeth mast and shrowd

Paraphrase
Imagine you’re a merchant. You invest everything in this ship—maybe you don’t even own it outright yet-- you've taken out a bunch of loans to pay for it. Only several voyages transporting merchandise will pay off the ship, and hopefully make you a rich merchant! But on the first voyage, the ship is totally wrecked and barely makes it back to port. Probably, it doesn’t even make it back to your port. The lucky sailors land at some distant port and ditch the ship to get celebratory drunk at the nearest pub, just happy to be alive. Now your ship is in the middle of nowhere, and totally useless even if it had gotten back to home port-- you don’t have the funds to repair it or buy a new ship because all your wealth was tied up in the livelihood of the ship. And you're going to go bankrupt because the ship was what you needed to pay off the loans you took out to pay for the ship. It may be bopping peacefully in haven, but you are sunk.

Wyatt
And eke the willowe that stoppeth with the wynde
Doeth ryse again and greater wode doeth bynd

Paraphrase
Going out on a limb here… but it seems like this straight out says “The wind bends the willow over. The willow resists and grows taller, it rises up!.... only to bend its branches itself.” That is, the willow resists outside tyrannical forces only to imitate, to internalize, to self-impose that degradation. Even if we scrape past fortune, we our often our own downfall, unable to break the mold.

Thomas Wyatt -- "He is not ded that somtym hath a fall" -- Second Stage of Reading

Thomas Wyatt

He is not ded that somtyme hath a fall
The sonne retorneth that was under the cloud
And when fortune hath spit oute all her gall,
I trust good luck to me shalbe allowd.
For I have sene a shipp into haven fall
After the storme hath broke boeth mast and shrowd
And eke the willowe that stoppeth with the wynde
Doeth ryse again and greater wode doeth bynd

Second Stage of Reading

Following from my first impression of this poem as hopeful and redemptive, I looked into the Christian over(under?)tones in this poem.
           Although God is not explicitly mentioned in this poem, several other images and words reference Christian themes. The description of the ship, of which a “storme hath broke boeth mast and shrowd,” is a loaded image. I had to google what a shrowd is regarding ships—it’s the sort of net-looking rigging you might have seen pirates scaling as they sing shanties, which pulls back on the mast the opposite way the wind in the sails pulls it, so the mast doesn’t just snap over. The teamwork of mast and shrowd could parallel the duality of human soul and body—the mast, like one’s body, ideally stands upright and carries the ship forward, gives it momentum and action in the world. But it can only remain upright and strong through the shroud, the soul, which tethers the body to virtue and higher things in the force of strong winds. Also, the mast blatantly resembles the cross, and the shroud, Christ’s shroud, often depicted hanging off the cross.
                 Similarly, the willow battles wind which threatens to... somehow affect the tree. The word “stoppeth” seems to mean “stop,” as in, when the wind stops blowing, the tree stops moving—without the motivating forces usually at play, whether God’s grace or good fortune or one’s will to keep going, the tree is paralyzed. But another edition of this poem employs the spelling “stoupeth” instead. The OED had no record of “stoup” being used to mean either “stop” or “stoop,” so it could be a variation on spelling “stop” or a different word entirely. The latter makes sense in the opposite way—the willow “stoops with the wind,” or, its branches are bowed lower by strong winds, similar to how the ship is broken by them, yet when they abate, the willow “doeth ryse again.” Rising again is obviously very Christian, as is the “wode” which the tree “doeth bynd” – the wind, like God, may force the branches to stop or bend to its will, but the tree itself has some agency still, yet with that agency it also chooses to bend—as humans have free will, but ideally choose to bend that will to God’s—the branches are bent either way, by outside forces or inside, but the inside force matters most. The parable of the willow calls to mind the story of Job—bent by God/wind to a low point against its will, when it does rise again it does not spring free, but faithfully continues to bend to God’s will, of its own will. “Bynd” could also be read a “bind,” as in, “binds its own wood it its will.”

But knowing what I know of Thomas Wyatt and his usual style, I have doubts about him writing a hopeful little Christian poem prettily tied up with a ribbon like this. Leading me to my third reading...

Thomas Wyatt -- "He is not ded that sometym hath a fall" -- First Impressions

Thomas Wyatt
He is not ded that somtyme hath a fall
The sonne retorneth that was under the cloud
And when fortune hath spit oute all her gall,
I trust good luck to me shalbe allowd.
For I have sene a shipp into haven fall
After the storme hath broke boeth mast and shrowd
And eke the willowe that stoppeth with the wynde
Doeth ryse again and greater wode doeth bynd


My initial reflex response to this poem was to feel struck by the beauty and hopefulness of it. The words “he is not ded” open the poem with a resilient and stubborn refusal to surrender. The idea that a ship could “into haven fall” plays with a startlingly fresh, topsy-turvy depiction of Christian redemption: humans are fallen, yet perhaps through God’s grace we fall upward, or through God’s mercy, we find in our final hour that despite our unfailing downward trajectory we have miraculously landed somewhere far above where we first jumped off, and fall into heaven.

Here are two poems that evoke a similar idea-- both through the use of snow. In the first, both falling and rising are positive, and interrelated. In the second, falling also has a positive outcome regardless of rising.

Howard Nemerov "Because You Asked About the Line Between Poetry and Prose"
Sparrows were feeding in a freezing drizzle
That while you watched turned to pieces of snow 
Riding a gradient invisible
From silver aslant to random, white, and slow.

There came a moment that you couldn’t tell.
And then they clearly flew instead of fell.

Hannah Stephenson  "Good Job You Now Know the World’s Secrets"

If snow were a message
and it is

it would mean
falling

is the source

of all repair

Stages of reading and analyzing a poem

A lot of things to consider: why read poetry? why write poetry? how to read a poem? how to write a poem? To help figure these things out, I'll probably be going over these questions again and again in blog posts, starting with this one.

I'm working through an analysis of Thomas Wyatt's "He is not ded that sometym hath a fall" and using this method, so I thought I would write out my method and then post the actual poem and analys(es).

Three+ stages
First readings are peculiar things—almost entirely worthless in comprehension, yet entirely necessary for a second reading, where comprehension begins. Like anything in life, reading a poem involves three stages: where it is new, thrilling, and misunderstood; where it is good work but work nonetheless; and where it pays off as something deep, rich, and hard-earned, that makes life more meaningful.

In the first contact, where the very newness of the thing provokes a lively interest, along with striking some emotional chord, we love something that does not exist—yet our ignorance and misplaced adoration is a tool to guide us to the more difficult truth. We must love what the thing is like and is not (ie the selfish drive—love what we see of our own self and opinions in it) in order to get to what it really is, and move to the beyond-ourself which feels like that “eureka” moment of epiphany—and why that moment feels so awesome. For example, if you first get a crush on someone because they give you special attention, and only later love them in all their faults. And in poetry, I first enjoy a poem because it has pleasing sounds or an image I like, or reminds me of an emotion I’ve been feeling and wanting a way to express, but on analysis, I find something rich and complicated—a reason the poem in itself is wonderful even if it doesn’t relate to me at all.

In the second stage, analysis, I focus on different words and lines of the poem trying to see what forms, themes, and images the poet uses. Guides on reading poetry always say “start with form” and they mean “Is it a sonnet? A villanelle? Free verse?” When you are first beginning to read poetry, this is important, but only so much as keeping your balance on a bike is important when you’re first learning to ride—after a few goes, you will hardly think about it, unless something tricky happens—a bump in the road, or a noteworthy variation in form (for example, Gerard Manley Hopkins is known for his novel variation on the sonnet). What is more important than being able to recognize “this is a sonnet” or “this is free verse,” is to think about how form strengthens or works with (or against!) content. For example, you might say “The poet writes about waves coming in and going out, and I notice that the word “waves” occurs at the beginning of the first line, the end of the second line, and back near the beginning of the third line—the way the poet builds the word into the lines (form) imitates the way waves come in and out (content).” Or you might notice “this poem is about grieving, yet the poet used triple meter, common in nursery rhymes, which gives the poem an uncomfortable and inappropriate sing-song quality.”

Along with how structure works in the poem, you should look at what kind of vocabulary is being used. Shakespeare, for example, will draw from different areas of trade or seasons for his metaphors, which provide a set of words for each stanza. A stanza might revolve around words related to a season, like “Winter / dark days/ freezing / December’s bareness” or accounting “lack / waste / canceled [debt] / expense / tell over (i.e. count) / account.” Are the words everyday words, or highly flourished? Does the poet start fancy “Loving in truth and fain in verse my love to show” and end simple “Fool, said my muse to me, look in thy heart and write!”?

In this stage, we break down (without breaking) the poem into all its pieces, its mechanics, its lego blocks. We start to form an idea of what the poem “looks” like—for example “It sort of has three sections, because in lines 1-4 it uses a season metaphor, in lines 5-8 it uses a setting sun metaphor, and in lines 9-12 it uses the metaphor of fire” or “the same word keeps cropping up, at different times, and sometimes with different meanings, so the poem kind of has a question about this word, or revolves around it.” Now you may start to see that what you felt on your first reading “this poem is beautiful” or “this poem makes me feel hopeful” starts to morph into “I actually misread what that line meant—it’s subtle, but what it actually means is even cooler!/not as cool!” or “this poem sounds hopeful but it’s a particular kind of Christian hope—the hope of someone completely broken, who won’t survive this round, but hopes in a future resurrection.” In this stage, the poem starts to feel more solid to you, something tangible, certain lines and words are starting to stick in your head, and you think maybe you’ve got it figured out.

Except you have still only gone from admiring your reflection in the surface to scratching the surface—the real excavation of meaning occurs in stage three (and four and five and six, etc., unearthing new tidbits with every reading, perpetually, at least if it’s a good poem). In stage three, you question what you just dug up, and you dig more. You keep digging. You keep doing the thing—picking out words, picking out sounds and emphases, picking out themes and images. You might realize that while your second stage reading understood more than your first stage reading, you got a lot of it wrong in your excitement. You may have misread lines—or you may realize that the whole time, the poem was actually pretty sarcastic, and if you look at the images the poem uses to convey hope, they’re not actually very hopeful, they just seem that way to an undiscerning eye. 


Always write when you are analyzing, if only in the margin. I do some or all of the following: circle or highlight similar sound clusters and rhymes, scan the meter, circle the same word where it pops up multiple times, write a theme word next to each stanza as summary where applicable, etc. Even better, write out your thoughts in a notebook as you are working through the poem, or going over it in your second stage anyway. In the Thomas Wyatt analysis I'll be posting, my first analysis and my second were almost opposites, and my notebook stream-of-conscious provided a valuable record of how differently the poem could be read, yielding double interpretation gainz.