Poetry For Dummies:
A Reference for the Rest of Us
by John Timpane and Maureen
Watts
Wiley Publishing Inc.,
2001
by Shane Neilson
I approached this book
with smug self-satisfaction. The elitist in me, the poet, was
credulous about the prospect of making poetry palatable to ‘dummies.’
I believed that poetry possessed an ineffable, superior quality that
kept it accessible only to its chosen initiates; people, in other words,
like me.
So though I came to this
book to be dismissive, I have remained between its covers to learn.
Foremost among Poetry For Dummies’ lessons is that poetry is
inherently egalitarian. Else why would a book on poetry even be produced
for the ‘For Dummies’ series? One of the signs of validation in the
twenty-first century is enshrinement in the Dummies pantheon.
That a book on poetry is now in this series – along with Huskies For
Dummies, Guitars for Dummies, and Woodworking For Dummies -
attests to the practical application of poetry in everyday life
for the average person.
Heretofore, the public was
dependent on world-class poets – elitists all - for their how-to manuals
on the venerable art. Robert Pinsky’s The Sounds of Poetry is
the most recent and prominent example where a professional poet lapses
into professorial prose, beginning his book with a lot of hand-wringing
about how he meant to write an entry-level text but fatally compromising
the book with terminologies and jargons. That Timpane and Watts, the Dummies
authorial duo, are obscure recommends the book as an unsanctioned,
unofficial text. Not holy writ from on high, Poetry For Dummies
is the basics as written by poetry plebes- for other plebes.
Looking in hindsight at
recent events, it seems inevitable that such a book would appear. There
has been in this country a poetry renaissance: poetry appears in the
public transit systems of many major cities; for several years, The
Globe
and Mail devoted a page of its Books section to the discussion of a
different poem each week; a few years ago, Christian Bök’s book of
lipograms, Eunoia, got common people –poetry ‘Dummies’-
talking about poetry. They spoke with their wallets: Eunoia
became the best-selling book of Canadian poetry in history. With all
that poetry flying around, an unpretentious reference work was needed.
In its quiet way, Poetry
For Dummies fills that need by setting out – and to my mind,
accomplishing - the resuscitation of poetry from most everyone’s dead,
dull, indoctrinating exposure to it in grade school. Constructed in
three parts, the first (and best) is devoted to the reading and
understanding of poems, advising us to read poems closely, then reread
them, and then read them aloud. The mechanics of poetry – simile,
metaphor, tone, subject, meter, narrative, assonance, dissonance,
alliteration, allusion, symbol - get discussed but never without
the reference point of real poems. Most importantly, we are told to
identify how the poem makes us feel. All this might seem obvious
to anyone with the most passing familiarity with poetry, but the first
part of the book puts each of these tenets into practice over the course
of ninety pages, and it’s how the data is displayed – as could
be said with poetry - that’s important, not the information itself.
The second part of Poetry
for Dummies is a survey of the history of poetry, from its
Mesopotamian beginnings to the avant-gardists of today. This section
reads like a treatise on Earth’s topography as seen from an orbital
space station. Over here is India; there is Italy; now France and
England are coming into view; quick, there’s Japan… but the Dummies
authors are honest about this, stating in chapter six that:
In this chapter and the next,
we tell the story of 5000 years of poetry in about 7000 words. In
this chapter, we take on the first 4700 years- a tough job, so we
have to move fast.
To their credit, these
gaps are filled somewhat by reading lists that mention seminal texts and
translations from the respective eras.
Part Three ministers to
the aspiring poet, providing him or her with the information necessary
to write traditional and free verse. The instruction is stock creative
writing course fare: read a lot, write a lot, trust instinct… the
advice can be as hackneyed as, "Be awake to your own processes.
Just as an athlete gets to know her body and its ways, get to know when
your mind is most open to the music." We are told to keep a journal
and develop regular habits. Also to "…find a reason to care and
something - many things- to care about." There’s nothing wrong
about the prescriptions of Poetry for Dummies - they offer many
different ways to write a poem. I just wish that, as they advise their
charges to do, they’d be more specific.
As a poet, I admit that
much of the book’s contents were no surprise, but that attests to the
book’s sureness of aim. Timpane and Watts’ discussion of poetry isn’t
marketed for the practicing poet, it’s marketed for the pre-poet ripe
for gushing, unPinskyesque sentences like, "Your local library is a
great source for poetry- and best of all, it’s free!" The
discussion also occurs amidst icons –yes, icons- meant to serve as
quick text references. (My favourite is the Bomb, used to warn the
reader against particularly horrible habits.) On occasion, pictures are
used to add atmosphere.
But more than the visual
doodads the publisher put in to Dummify things, the most endearing
quality of this book is that it’s enthusiastic about the riches of
poetry without being didactic. A reader could be alienated if the tone
were earnest; why dress up poetry, a subject that needs no dressing up?
Instead, the book is matter-of-fact about the power and value of poetry,
presenting poetry as a transformative art as a matter of course.
This is the attitude of a good teacher. In fact, it’s downright
heartening to read what the teachers, Timpane and Watts, believe poetry
can do:
Oh, and one promise: if you
let poetry into your life –if you read aloud and read
attentively, discover how to interpret poetry for yourself- you’ll
start seeing benefits, including a broader life, a more sensitive
awareness, and a more flexible spirit.
Though this book has
refreshed, reminded, and even inspired me, I must be ungrateful for a
moment and point out flaws. One missing element is a mention of the
preconscious, animalian response to good poems that poetry-reading
people have, or as T.S.Eliot put it, "the feeling for syllable and
rhythm, penetrating far below the conscious levels of thought and
feeling, invigorating every word; sinking to the most primitive and
forgotten, returning to the origin." Such a concept may, I admit,
be too mystical for a basic text that’s supposed to demystify
the art.
The book places too much
emphasis on biography in its conception of poetry. Readers are told to
familiarize themselves with the poet and his times in order to unlock
the secrets of poems, yet no mention is made that poems must stand on
their own sans biography as a true test of the work as poems.
Biography can enrich a poem, but it can never prop up a poem.
Because this book is a
sampler of sorts, care must be taken when it is time to list - the lists
are often all that is said about particular trends and schools of
poetry. The authority of the Dummies authors is called into question
when they include names like Dylan, Lennon, and McCartney in their
roster of ‘Postmodern Greats.’ LL Cool J is purportedly a ‘Global
Great!’ Yet if the lists cannot be taken completely at face value,
they do provide one useful bit of data: Erin Mouré is mentioned – along
with Margaret Atwood and Nicole Brossard - as one of Canada’s all-time
important poets. Mouré? We must scrub her off that list, lest an
international public think Canadians have cornered the market on
unintelligibility.
Though almost anyone – including
Mouré - can be brought to poetry, not everyone can write it. Sure, anyone
can string a few words together, but for a piece of writing to be called
a poem, it must earn that designation. And this stern evaluative
attitude is not one espoused in Poetry For Dummies. Rather
Timpane and Watts are antic co-ed cheerleaders. They write, "So who
gets to be a poet? Anyone who wants to be." I have my doubts. For
example, in the first writing exercise of the book, the authors create
their own example of a ‘poem’ written about a sunset. They estimate
their own efforts as follows: "Did we come up with Shakespeare? We
didn’t have to - our aim was to find fresh ways of making our readers
experience a sunset." Actually, that sounds like the aim of a
dabbler, of someone unserious. A poet would attempt more; and though it’s
grandiose to try to vault over Shakespeare, from diminished expectations
come diminutive poems. Their poem, moreover, is bad - especially when,
as they say, they are going "for maximum meaning and emotion":
Sunset spilled on the rug,
stained
XXXXXXXXthe fabric, can’t get it
out of my brain. It’s lava, hardening
to darkness.
First of all, why the
unconventional typography? The rhyme of ‘stained’ with ‘brain’
is rather plain. And the cliché in "can’t get it out of my
brain" should be banished. Finally, the conclusion of ‘to
darkness’ sounds rather portentous. In summary, so many transgressions
against style in such a short poem suggests that the authors might be
better at sticking to the reading end of the poetry spectrum.
This writing exercise
comes in an ominous place - in the first chapter of the book,
where poetry is introduced and allowed to stain reader’s brains so
that it can’t get out. ‘Forget everything that comes after,’ this
exercise seems to say; ‘all the chapters on metaphor, metre, and
rhyme, you don’t need them!’ I feel it was a serious mistake on the
part of the authors to encourage readers to write poetry before they
were really told what poetry is, especially since the book does such a
good job of that; it’s like going off half-cocked. This is an error
that is also reflected in Canadian Poetry ad nauseum, as I will
attempt to show.
~
Five Years of Tips: The
Governor General’s Award 1999-2003
The following is an
examination of the past five years of GG laureates and where these books
transgressed against taste as formulated in the ‘tips’ area of the Poetry
For Dummies manual.
~
2003
The year of "Be
Tough With Yourself. Cut out anything that you’ve seen in print
before (the George Orwell Rule.)" p. 152, Poetry
for Dummies
Tim Lilburn, Kill-site,
McClelland and Stewart, 2003.
Tim Lilburn’s sixth
book, Kill-site, owes so much to the late Ted Hughes’
shamanistic vision, or as Lilburn puts it in a poem, "First
theology is mystical theology," that I ask if the poetry of this
book needed to find utterance at all: Big Ted is a more precise, more
encompassing, and more vivid poet than tiny Tim. Because Lilburn
worships at Hughes’ animalian altar, it’s no wonder that that
theology line is followed by "The fox moves quickly on the
snow" - a homage to Hughes’ celebrated "The
Thought-Fox." And this borrowed fox reappears throughout the
collection, but never so memorably as in Hughes’ poem.
If Lilburn could be
thought to major in Hughes, he minors in another poet intimate with
nature, namely D.H. Lawrence. Consider the following excerpt from Kill-site:
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX…stubbed
thunder mourning under the
chokecherry thicket, nubbly
insistently not-there wind, whose
great belly is the chokecherry thicket, the
black fountaining of its fed and
pleased haecceity- descended ear-sleep,
it is quickly for that one slow
thing whose girthy-
it is multi-stomached-
hairy-armed waiting,
its stay-in-place waiting, makes
for the right arm
of the as-I-am thicket…
Note the similarities of
rhythm and repetition with Lawrence’s "Bavarian Gentians:"
Bavarian gentians, big and
dark, only dark
darkening the day-time,
torch-like with the smoking blueness of Pluto’s gloom,
ribbed and torch-like, with
their blaze of darkness spread blue
down flattening into points,
flattened under the sweep of white day
Lilburn’s ‘thicket’
is Lawrence’s ‘dark,’ though Lawrence’s poem doesn’t need
the added effect of tangled syntax to make a metaphor. There are other
similarities: both pieces ceaselessly circle back to their initial
images while simultaneously adding detail to them. They share y-vowel
use as well as a fancy for hyphenated words. Although in Lilburn the
hyphenation habit becomes a mania: in some places the number of hyphens
rivals the word count. Consider "This":
XXX…the jacklit,
god-on-a-pin the colour of a snow-moth-eyed collie.
And also the two truck tire
track-through-excited-but-self-clasped-grass
apophaticism…
I’m reminded of Martin
Amis’ objection to Truman Capote’s overheated, over-hyphenated prose
in Answered Prayers. Amis quotes:
‘A rollicking
soldier-sailor-marine-marijuana-saturated Denny-Jean cross-country
high-jinks’, for instance, ‘or a pasta-bellied whale-whanged
wop picked up in Palermo and hog-fucked a hot Sicilian infinity
ago’… The style is as promiscuous as the narrator.
Derivativeness aside, this
book’s chief deism - nature mysticism - is supplied in embarrassing,
soft focus patches that do injury to Hughes’ and Lawrence’s memory.
What Lilburn intends is epiphany; what results is bathos. In the title
poem, a deceased fellow named ‘Henry Kelsey’ has the following
happen to him:
And because he was under
the ground, everything came to him- he
saw a face of wheat, a face
of mineral beam, nipples of
stones, a face
of winter in things, a face
of what is
at the back, the watery,
the alto part of the mind,
showing through skin.
It’s the magical
mystical moment one dreads when reading poetry: dead people seeing faces
of wheat and mineral beam at the watery backs of their alto minds. And
note the lack of music in this snippet: the line breaks are as random as
the sense. There is indeed a good deal of repetition, but in such a
brief passage three mentions of ‘face’ is overkill. There is
much, much more of this wooly mysticism to be found in Kill-site
– one further example: "…enter the before-room name of the
unnamed/ name…" - but in order to avoid becoming repetitious
myself, I shall move on to 2002.
2002
Not the year
of "Poetry constantly presents its readers with bursts of
concentrated emotion…" p. 12, Poetry
For Dummies
Roy Miki, Surrender,
The Mercury Press, 2002.
In this book, it is
difficult to pick just one offense against style and taste; Surrender
is instead a repeat offender. If one thing stands out before all the
others, though, it is the utter tonelessness of Miki’s poetry.
In what is essentially a book of nonsense verse, Miki manages to avoid
evoking a single feeling (except perhaps frustration at his sheer
obscurity).
I’m not advocating that all
poems should have a meaning, but every poem should at least attempt
an emotion. In the poem "Lisbon," Miki states with a straight
face: "the abstraction summons all." I don’t agree; poetry
should be visceral and felt as much as contemplative and intellectual.
By habiting in the realm of emotion – a place of immediate experience
-
much more can be summoned in a poem than with baffling abstractions.
What can be made of a poem like "attractive?":
The distaste for turmoil
embroiled oceanic slips
like wandering on tarmac
looking for insularity
finding dry grass
the promise of unbridled
recompense- risen dough
in the non-chalence forms
bleached by similitude
the probate will runs on
neutral- gravity’s weal
it’s the sonic boom
of a lingual disequilibrium…
I’m at a loss to divine
a meaning from this poem, which continues on in the usual obscure
fashion. Indeed, confusion’s a constitutive experience when reading
through the whole book. But I must ask: who wanders on a tarmac desiring
insularity? Where did the "probate’s will" come from? Why do
the stanzas appear to be to be randomly composed? And isn’t there a
tell-tale tepidness to the technique, a reliance upon stating –I
hesitate to call them emotions- vaguenesses like "insularity,"
"recompense," and "similitude?" Would that there be
a verbal "sonic boom" the poem describes! Instead, the reader
is immersed in a ‘lingual disequilibrium’ that, because there is no
reference point or orientation in tradition, cannot be accessed by
readers other than the most fervent members of the L=A=N-G=U=A=G=E sect.
Miki anticipated these
objections himself, writing later in the same poem as if he were
speaking through a critic’s mouth:
…let’s get serious a
poetic
text has to resonate
has
to transport emotion to an
island called identity.
Well, absolutely. That he’s
aware of the criticism is good; that he chooses not to heed it is
understandable. After all, Miki thrived long before he was feted by the
GG jury. In Canada, he had no reason to be intelligible, he was rewarded
precisely for being unintelligible. Consider "material recovery
two":
resin does not resonate
ricochet does not return
rebellion does not make
an easy truce with frenzy
arrested weights
where did that come from?…
Where indeed. How resin
relates to ricochet is beyond me, other than both start with the letter
‘r.’ A ricocheted object can, in fact, return to the point of where
the body in motion started – a bullet, say - if the bullet hits other
objects properly, though I’ll admit this is very rare. (Shane’s Guns
for Dummies rule #1: don’t shoot in an elevator.)
"Ricochet" and "rebellion" interact in interesting
ways – rebellions are often armed, and there is always a chance of
rebellions ending up in the deaths of the ringleaders - but
"arrested weights" is plain bizarre. How can a weight get
arrested? And why is this unfocused image in the poem?
"material recovery
two" hurtles towards more prosaic strangeness, like with all Miki
poems. In order to complete the book, the reader must abandon the
fruitless process of asking questions – a faculty necessary to enjoy
poetry fully- and simply accept that this bland book isn’t meant to
make you feel or know anything. You must, in other words, surrender.
Surrender to instances like
XXXXXXXXXX…aaaaaaaahhhhh
XXXXXXXXXXhhhhhaaaaaaaa
one more
XXXXXXXXXXchapbook
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXfor the
road[kiyooka]
Aha indeed. This passage
belies Miki’s greatest offense - he doodles on his keyboard and
inflicts the results on us, his unfortunate readership. With the
"one more/chapbook/for the road" bit he’s saying that he put
little effort into what he was doing, that it was impromptu and
unserious. Surrender is anti-poetry; it deserved no award, and that it
won the GG suggests the irrelevance of the institution.
2001
The Year of
"Keep a Journal," p.147-149, Poetry
for Dummies
George Elliot Clarke, Execution
Poems, Gaspereau Press, 2001.
As a method of generating
poetry, the Dummies authors advise neophyte poets to start a journal.
There advice is as follows:
A journal is a single,
locatable repository for your writing, a stockpile of raw material
for future poetry… [make] lists of subjects to write about…
A cautionary note is
sounded, however, when the Dummies authors go on to say:
Most journal entries aren’t
poems just yet- they’re the raw material for poetry…
distinguishing between a journal entry (in which you just say
something) and a poem (in which you use language and thought to
make something new happen) is important.
To write poetry, then, the
Dummies authors suggest poets should make a list, but check it twice;
they mean for their charges to keep a journal, but refine its contents
into poetry, where, as they say later, "an event takes place.
Something happens to the reader."
Too often in Execution
Poems, a book about two black killers in 1940s New Brunswick named
George and Rufus Hamilton, there is unmitigated and unmediated journal
entry. Consider the blunt transcription of facts in the deliberately
provocatively-titled "George & Rue: Pure, Virtuous
Killers":
They were hanged
back-to-back in York County Gaol…
They sprouted in Newport
Station, Hants County, Nova Scotia, in 1925 and 1926.
They smacked a white taxi
driver, Silver, with a hammer, to sack his silver.
They bopped Silver and hit
backwoods New Brunswick in his black cab.
They slew him in the first
hour of January 8, 1949, A.D…
Not much poetry to be
found here, only the cribbed data from a crime report. As Robert Lowell
put it, poetry should be an event, not the record of an event. Yet
"George & Rue: Pure, Virtuous Killers" is all record. Even
its contents have been taken from the official record. But this isn’t Execution
Poems’ only instance of list: in "Child Hood I",
Clarke writes in an aside:
(I miss peanut butter
cookies, her sewing machine, the grey gloves
she let me present to a
schoolgirl, her preacher-lover-dad’s second-
hand Shakespeare and tattered
Scripture she taught me to read…
Here Clarke seems to be
following the dictum of "keep a journal" on behalf of his
characters, who record their sensations and memories in list fashion.
Yet poetry doesn’t exist in list; as Timpane and Watts admonish, lists
and other journal entries are only the "raw material" for
poetry. There is much, much more of this "raw material" to be
found in Execution Poems, like the following list of random
violence from "Child Hood II":
A boy’s right arm stuck to
a desk with scissors; a father knifed in the gut
while shaking hands with a
buddy; two Christians splashed with gasoline
and set ablaze in a church; a
harlot garroted in her bath; a bootlegger
shot through the eye in a
liquor store; a banker brained in a vault: two
artists thrown into the
Gaspereau River with their hands tied behind
their backs; a pimp
machine-gunned to bits outside a school; a divine
getting his throat slit; a
poet axed in the back of the neck; a Tory buried
alive in cement; two
diabetics fed cyanide secreted in chocolates; a lawyer
decapitated in his office.
Again, nothing much can
happen to the reader because of the sheer randomness of these disjointed
impressions. All that can be gleaned is that it’s a harsh world George
and Rue grew up in. Consider "Identity II" as a final example:
Hatchets of sunlight; a horse’s
black ass; a decayed dreamer in a cell
of dung; Ma in an attitude of
licking my bum; grotesque, gaudy insects; disgusting infants with
snake’s heads; me inside a drum hammered
shut, cringing; vomiting;
statues with eyeholes bandaged over; reptiles’ puncturing fangs;
plush cockroaches crawling and crawling into and
out of my mouth…
And on it goes, more raw
material that gets rawer and rawer. Notice the lack of music in the
piece; the sounds of poetry are absent in this mere accumulation of
imagery. It reads like automatic prose.
From these passages, one
suspects Clarke keeps a journal, writing down his thoughts, choice words
and phrases. The obvious next step is the refinement of these lists of
phrases into something workable as poetry.
2000
The Year of
"Slave over your line endings!" Poetry For Dummies, p. 163
Don McKay, Another Gravity,
McClelland and
Stewart, 2000.
In Poetry For Dummies,
the authors make special mention of the art of the line break. They
state:
Poets realize that line
endings carry a certain emphasis or pressure. Your lines should
end where they end for some reason. The way a line ends- where,
and after what word or punctuation mark- should be the best way to
end… take special care with line endings! Line endings generate
much of the tension, much of the specialness that makes [free]
verse verse.
Don McKay is more than an
able poet in other regards; I reviewed this book favourably on its
initial publication, but one thing has troubled me in the years since:
McKay’s is inept with the line break. Consider the first stanza of the
first poem in Another Gravity, "Sometimes a Voice (1)":
Sometimes a voice- have you
heard this?-
wants not to be a voice any
longer, wants something
whispering between the words,
some
rumour of its former life.
Sometimes, even
in the midst of making sense
or conversation, it will
hearken back to breath, or
even farther,
to the wind, and recognize
itself
as troubled air, a flight
path still
looking for its bird.
The line breaks here seem
random and disconcertingly weak. The "this,"
"something," "some", "itself," and
"it will" are symptomatic of a poet with "something"
to say and perhaps eventually "it will" come out but, at
present, who has an incapacity to say "it."
All these line breaks end
flatly, without a noun. And note the tendency here –carried forward
throughout Another Gravity- to make line breaks on monosyllabics.
The only two decent breaks come in six and nine with "farther"
and "bird", though nine is the end of a stanza and demands a
strong finale. The poem continues:
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXI’m thinking of us up there
shingling the boathouse roof.
That job is all
off balance- squat, hammer,
body skewed
against the incline, heft the
bundle,
daub the tar, squat. Talking,
as we always talked, about
not living
past the age of thirty with
its
labyrinthine perils: getting
hooked,
steady job, kids, business
suit. Fuck that. The roof
sloped upward like a take-off
ramp…
Here things pick up
somewhat. We begin ominously with an unprepossessing "there"
and an outright deflationary "all" but then move on to
vigorous verbs like "talking" and "living" and
strong nouns like "bundle," "roof," and
"ramp." Yet McKay persists with his "it" fetish in
line 16. The rest of the poem is itself a downhill ramp:
…waiting for Evel Knievel,
pointing into open sky. Beyond it
twenty feet or so of concrete
wharf before
the blue-black water of the
lake. Danny said
that he could make it, easy.
We said
never. He said, case of beer,
put up
or shut up. We said
asshole. Frank said first he
should go and get our beer
because he wasn’t going to
get it paralysed or dead.
Line 20 propagates McKay’s
"it" fetish. Line 21 should have ended on the word
"wharf," not "before." Three "said"
endings with lines 22, 23, and 26, because they are crowded so close
together, sound repetitive and flat. (The end-rhyme with
"dead" is nice, however.) Note again the lack of variation in
syllable count (one) with McKay’s end words. The poem continues:
Everybody got up, taking this
excuse
to stretch and smoke and pace
the roof
from eaves to peak,
discussing gravity
and Steve McQueen, who never
used a stunt man, Danny’s
life expectancy, and whether
that should be a case
of Export of O’Keefe’s.
We knew what this was-
ongoing argument to fray
the tedium of work akin to
filter vs. plain,
stick shift vs. automatic,
condom vs.
pulling out in time. We
flicked our butts toward the lake…
There are fewer missteps
in this passage, although they are there. Line 31 should conclude with
"man," not "Danny’s." Ending a line with
"was," as with line 33, lessens the rhetorical pressure of any
poem. And to end a line with "vs." is just lazy, indicating
the poet haphazardly slapped the poem down on the page. The poem
continues in this vein, as does the book, wherein "it,"
"as," "and," "to," "this,"
"that," and the atrocious "the" chronically appear
at the end of McKay’s lines.
If McKay were to pay more
attention to his line breaks, if he were more conscious of the discipline
of the line break, then his poems would have more concision, rigor, and
ultimately more "emphasis" a la the Dummies authors. If I have
not made many suggestions as to alternate line breaks, it is because the
poems of Another Gravity do not suggest alternatives. The poems
have been written without consideration of the break and would be
radically different if the line break were kept in mind during
composition. The most obvious of the benefits of revision would be an
elimination of the inarticulate "it-ness" of the book.
1999
The year of
"Cut everything you don’t absolutely need." p.167, Poetry
For Dummies
Jan Zwicky, Songs For
Relinquishing The Earth, Brick Books, 2000.
Jan Zwicky is not a
catastrophic poet a la Miki; in fact, in this GG bestiary she’s
arguably the best with metaphor, the very lifeblood of poetry. A few
remarkable instances of metaphors include reinvigorating that granddaddy
of tired metaphors, the heart, by comparing it to a "rainbarrel."
Another fine metaphor comes when Zwicky compares dawn to a
"paddle" slicing through the "horizon." Yet she is
the most bathetic poet of the bunch assembled here, and that’s because
the endings of her poems are egregious. Zwicky is a good starter but a
terrible finisher. Consider the first stanza of "Open
Strings":
E, laser of the ear, ear’s
vinegar, bagpipes
in a tux, the sky’s blue,
pointed;
Signature Zwicky tricks
include the deft metaphors in which the musical note E is "laser of
the ear," "ear’s vinegar" and "bagpipes in a
tux," all arresting and, more importantly, new. Yet the poem cannot
continue the pace:
A, youngest of the four,
cocksure and vulnerable, the white kid
on the basketball team-
immature,
ambitious, charming,
indispensable; apprenticed
to desire…
The death of any metaphor
is overelaboration; it should be left to stand on its own, and Zwicky
feels the need to qualify A beyond "the white kid/ on the
basketball team" as "ambitious, charming,/ indispensable"
and "cocksure and vulnerable"- wholly unnecessary. The
"apprenticed to desire" bit is unapt in the way the white
basketballer metaphor is not –one could say that all the other musical
notes are "apprenticed to desire." But this betrays a lesser
Zwicky tic, cribbed from Tim Lilburn: a constant recourse to vague
mysticism. Yet the real travesty comes at the poem’s conclusion:
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXOpen strings
are ambassadors from the
republic of silence.
They are the name of that
moment when you realize
clearly, for the first time,
you will die. After illness,
the first startled breath.
Just what is the poet
going on about here? Zwicky stakes too great a claim for the power of
this music. People realize they may die "clearly" when they
become ill or come in close contact with an accident; that’s when
"the moment" Zwicky’s talking about really comes. This
business about listening to music and being so wounded as to be utterly
transformed is, admittedly, a possibility for some- but this poem is
unconvincing, largely because the conclusion oversteps its bounds. This
poem does not revolutionize my spirit so that I have realized, "for
the first time," that I will die. (Actually, I’ve long been aware
of the fact.) And because it declaims that open string music will do
this, I demand the poem making this claim to do the same.
There’s much more of
this silly vagueness to ruin the conclusions to otherwise good poems.
"Bartok’s Roumanian Dances" is almost identical to
"Open Strings":
XXXXXXXXXXXXAnd lungs drawing breath,
feet kicking rhythm, the body
headlong in its worship of
the air,
or the air,
which is boundless and
momentary.
Cut cut cut such nonsense out.
Enough of this so-called breath- and body-knowledge, repeated ad
infinitum in this collection. Enough also with concluding banalities
like that at the end of "Bill Evans: ‘Here’s That Rainy Day’":
"There is sadness in the world, it says,/ past telling. Learn
stillness/ if you would run clear." Poetry for Dummies
should add to their rules : no weak-kneed ‘–ness’ words at the end
of poems. Yet when Zwicky’s not vague or banal, the conclusions are
clichéd, like in "Bill Evans: Alone": "…Says/
we hadn’t the ghost of a chance, says never/ let me go."
These are not isolated
instances. Whole swaths of Zwicky poems could be jettisoned, with much
better poems as a result. In the non-transparent
"Transparence," there’s this extended bit of ponderous
prosody:
XXXXXXXXXXXX…the
experience,
unless you are freakishly
lucky- like
that woman, thrown from her
car, her car
rolling and bouncing up one
side of the embankment and then
back down, to land on top of
her, except
the roof had been dented by
the guardrail
and it came down with the
hollow
over her and she escaped
unscathed…
Whew. Not only is this a
mouthful, it’s also compromised by cliché. The woman is
"freakishly lucky" and she "escaped unscathed." The
words "her car" appear twice in succession; indeed, the
pronoun "her" is overused, a strange circumstance for poetry
that is, qua the book’s title, aspiring to be music.
Perhaps Zwicky is aware of
her tendency to drone on and on; mid-poem in the eight-page
"Cashion Bridge", she writes "But this isn’t/ what I
meant to try to say" and a page later writes "But this isn’t/
what I meant to tell you either." One wonders: when will the poem
ever commence? Such noodling should be banished from a poem; a poem
should not perseverate, it should disclose. But then again, perhaps the
fault lies not with Zwicky, who does write well in patches, but with her
editor, who should have excised much in this book.
|