It is most appropriate that Jim Hoggard begins by correcting Plato – and that he does it with an oblique reference to myths that begin both “testaments” of the religious tradition that, with Plato, has come to be inextricably identified with “the West.” For a poet, as for a philosopher, it goes without saying that the word is in the beginning. But for a poet who sings the music of pumpjacks and rivers we wear in layers on clothes and skin, it is essential to begin with a “God from the first / being partial to things” (3). Thunder is the first word, “a celebrative / explosion of noise / echoing off / newly made matter” (3).
There is a philosophical sweep to this collection that makes the whole a response to Plato in four movements – a direction Ion might have taken had he been a poet as well as a performer of poetry (and had he not come to us as a character formed entirely by Plato with an end in mind). The movements are named “Graven Imagery,” “Different Kinds of Wilderness,” “Distant Homes,” and “Wind Bursts.” Hoggard’s take on graven imagery is an ongoing play with form – especially the sonnet, which flows through the entire collection, but also the pantoum, which gets the last word. The play with form is in the aniconic tradition of Hebrew prophecy – shaping things to see through them, finding words to speak silence: “the drama / of the voice / is the meaning / of the voice” (3). And the drama of the voice, like the thunder of the first poem, is notable for being partial to things – or, perhaps more to the point, being face to face with them.
In “Caught in the Drought,” one line stands on its own as a stanza in the familiar form of a fourteen line poem: “There’s nothing to do this year but wait” (10). Not to wait for, but simply to wait. And that carries us through a variety of wildernesses – the Louisiana bayou Jack Kerouac described as a manuscript of night we could not read, rattlesnakes, lovers, sycamore leaves that don’t decompose. Still correcting Plato: the world is a world of words, and in it there is a world of ideas; but there is no world of ideas above or beyond the world of things. This is it.
This “thatness” of things, the celebration of being immersed in them, makes Hoggard a nomad in the Deleuzian sense, at home on the road in the variety of places he sings in the book’s third movement – Vienna, Florence, London, Seville, Mycenae, Chihuahua, Cuba, Mosul. And in the end, the wind, like a spirit moving on the face of water: “We should stop getting lost in ourselves / We should know how to read the world / yet we look at it blindly or indifferently / Listen: the wind here blows insistently” (76).
Read the world, Hoggard says. Divide at the joints, Socrates might add. A world of words to the end of it, yes – an explosion of noise still echoing off matter still newly made – a music in the wind’s insistence that gives us something to sing, for which we as poets, as readers of poetry, as listeners are grateful.
reviewed by Steven Schroeder, Chicago
James Hoggard. Wearing the River. San Antonio: Wings Press, 2005. ISBN 978-0-916-72717-8.
Labels: reviews
[ 0 comments ]
This new edition of Willis Barnstone’s translation of the poems of Mao Zedong (originally published by Harper & Row in 1972) includes thirty-five poems written between 1925 and 1963 (with Chinese and English on facing pages) along with an introduction and brief notes on translation and Chinese versification by Barnstone, a sample of Mao’s calligraphy, and (as an afterword) a snippet on Mao’s poetry from a 1983 interview with Richard Nixon conducted by Frank Gannon. The book is valuable for Barnstone’s comments on Chinese poetry – but it is also a fascinating historical document, with significant insights into two of the most powerful political figures of the twentieth century, Nixon and Mao, both of whom left decidedly mixed legacies.
Perhaps the most striking feature of Mao’s poetry is just how traditional it is, in both form and content. Barnstone’s introductory essay highlights this, also noting that Mao “modestly” dismissed his poems “as being of little value” (22) and did not recommend them to the young, “who must find their own way” (23). Barnstone’s observation that Mao, who wrote influential essays on art and literature, followed “little or none of his own counsel” (23) is telling. Separating the practice of those with political power from their art and from their philosophy is a tricky matter made trickier by proximity. Barnstone notes in his introductory essay that “the main published essays on Mao’s poems in Beijing and elsewhere are not much help in evaluating and understanding them; except in offering useful annotation on allusions, studies of the poems tend to be so full of admiration that there is much paean singing, little criticism” (22, 23). Almost forty years later, the uncritical admiration has faded enough to quiet the paean singing – and it has not been entirely replaced by uncritical condemnation, so there may be an opening now for a fresh reading.
Standing alone as poems, these are competent but not remarkable. They would likely not be read at all (and Richard Nixon certainly would not have discussed them with Zhou Enlai) if not for the continuing political significance of their author. What is remarkable, though, at least to an American audience, is the fact of a political leader in the midst of an intense struggle like the Long March turning to poetry that is competent if not brilliant – finding solace in the writing of it and turning to it naturally as a means of focused observation. And equally remarkable is the fact of two political leaders (Nixon and Zhou) turning in their last meeting to the poetry of a third. As a traditional poet, Mao reads the natural world through which he passes with eyes formed by centuries of mythology. And he turns those eyes and that reading to the politics in which he is engaged. A Marxist appreciation of the power of myth might at least remind us not to be surprised if it plays a role in tying revolution into time and history. That a revolutionary leader could be so unremittingly traditional is partly explained by the power of myth and tradition in shaping perception and action. Writing in 1972, Barnstone understands this as “Old and new China” coming together in Mao’s “fresh poems in the traditional style” (24). Old and new China are still coming together, of course, and “traditional style” remains an issue in every new China – as in every place where “newness” encounters tradition (and what place could there be where it does not?). Barnstone’s commentary is particularly helpful in making English readers aware that the interplay of poetry and politics is as conventional in Chinese society as the interplay of politics and religion is in the United States – so conventional that it mostly flies beneath the radar of public consciousness.
For the most part, the traditional style will not be at issue. Even a cursory reading of the poems confirms it, both in terms of form and content. The poems look like traditional Chinese poems, and the allusions that shape observation of contemporary affairs are classical. What will be at issue is the freshness. Take the second stanza of “In Praise of the Winter Plum Blossom” (105), written in December 1962, as an example: “The plum is not a delicious girl showing off / yet she heralds spring. / When mountain flowers are in wild bloom / she giggles in all the color.” This is written in the lyric style called ci, and it is a response to a Song dynasty poem by Lu You. But, as Barnstone notes, it reverses the ending of Lu’s poem “which speaks of peach blossoms that will signify fallen petals and dust, with only the fragrance left” (147). Does Mao’s vision of Spring in Winter constitute freshness, and does the plum blossom as giggling girl bear comparison to Sappho’s girl as an apple? There is a small window for freshness in poetry so clearly tied to traditional form and traditional images. Mao did not recommend it for the young, but the question is whether more experienced eyes can see something new in wild flowers heralding spring though they are not showing off. As a poet, Mao apparently thought he did. It is difficult for an audience to read that now without reading through the almost fifty years that have passed since; but, at the beginning of that half century, it is intriguing that the possibility of something new could be spoken by a revolutionary in the form of a traditional poem that responded to an older poem and to the world by only slightly turning it.
Politically, more Burke than Mao, perhaps. But interesting reading nonetheless. Read it, and let a hundred flowers bloom, let a hundred schools of thought contend.
reviewed by Steven Schroeder, Chicago
The Poems of Mao Zedong. Translations, Introduction, and Notes by Willis Barnstone. University of California Press, 2008. ISBN 978-0-520-25665-1.
Labels: reviews
[ 0 comments ]
In his introduction, Neil Corcoran draws the lines within which this Cambridge Companion explores English poetry with admirable clarity: “The poetry treated here is ‘English’ in the sense that it’s written in the English language, or versions of it, by poets who are, or were, of English, Scottish or Welsh origin, or have an origin or family attachment overseas but have been resident in Britain or taken British nationality” (1). That is at once a wide and an explicit net that raises issues of nation, language, politics, and identity – by what it includes and by what it excludes – from the outset. These issues were contested terrain in the twentieth century, and the terrain continues to be contested in the twenty-first. The work of poets in the period, whether explicitly engaged in contesting terrain or not, was (and is) affected by the way those issues were (and are) handled. And, as Corcoran suggests, leaving the Irish story untold in this volume (on mainly “practical” grounds, as he puts it) means that an Irish presence – particularly in the person of William Butler Yeats, haunts the collection from beginning to end. That alone makes for an interesting commentary on English poetry, particularly as the questions of language and national identity are complicated by nationalist struggles, devolution, and immigration in the course of the twentieth century. Add the fact that T. S. Eliot is not treated individually in this collection, and you have a century of English poetry haunted by two presences (and a multiplicity of “versions”) that have transformed the music of English as we hear it now.
The collection consists of seventeen essays in four sections: “contexts,” “moderns,” “modernists,” and “later modernities.”
The three essays in the “contexts” section address the transition from Victorian to modern (with particular attention to Gerard Manley Hopkins), the relationship between “modern” poetry (a matter of periodization) and “modernist” poetry (a matter of style and ideological orientation), and “postmodernism” as an “elastic” term (stylistic, ideological, and periodizing at the same time) particularly problematic for poets who – as Redell Olsen puts it – are “often relatively uninvested in the capital of a culture industry” (42) and critics (perhaps more invested) who investigate their work. The essays in this section do an excellent job of problematizing categories that might otherwise be so rigid as to obscure connections across boundaries historians have constructed for the sake of order or convenience. Hopkins is perhaps the most important instance of boundary crossing in this collection, which clearly outlines stylistic and historical reasons for making the line drawn at Victoria’s death in 1901 permeable while also noting quirks of publication that put the poems in this case in a different century than the poet.
The other three sections are generally chronological – moving from A.E. Housman, Charlotte Mew, Thomas Hardy, and Edward Thomas through D. H. Lawrence, Wilfred Owen, W.H. Auden, William Empson, and Dylan Thomas to Philip Larkin, R.S. Thomas, Stevie Smith, Sylvia Plath, and Ted Hughes. The last four essays continue the generally chronological plan under titles that also group poets along lines partly determined by historical developments and partly by the identity politics of the period: “Black British poetry and the translocal” (which focuses on Grace Nichols, Louise Bennett, Linton Kwesi Johnson, and Bernardine Evaristo – but also reaches back through Afro-Caribbean music to Claude McKay), “Poetry and class,” “A Scottish Renaissance” (associated with Edwin Morgan, Douglas Dunn, Liz Lochhead, Robert Crawford, Don Paterson, and Kathleen Jamie), and “Lyric adaptations” (ending with Carol Ann Duffy, Martianism, and Simon Armitage).
There are problems, of course, of the sort that confront any survey: what is left out is as important in determining the shape of the object or period surveyed as what is included, and grouping poets – one chapter for the Scottish Renaissance, one chapter for women, one chapter for “Black British poetry” – may effectively marginalize them. But Stevie Smith’s comment (cited by Linda Anderson) turns this marginalization into an invitation to rethink the whole poetry of English. “But I’m alive today,” she said, “therefore I’m as much a part of our time as everybody else. The times will just have to enlarge themselves to make room for me, won’t they, and for everybody else” (174). Everybody is not included in this survey, but (in the words of the publisher) “these specially commissioned essays by highly regarded poetry critics offer an up-to-date, stimulating and reliable overview of English poetry of the twentieth century” – an overview that gives students a taste of the variety of English poetry rather than an illusion of its singularity. There are ghosts that dominate the story told here – but there is also Stevie Smith and the calypsonian Young Tiger singing “I was there” as he sings about the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II (206).
When Corcoran writes “English language, or versions of it,” he invites a correction, not an alternative – joining John Agard in “inciting rhyme to riot,” opening up possibilities not only for “reverse colonization” but also for the new songs that accompany cities made new between Victoria and the turn of another millennium.
reviewed by Steven Schroeder, Chicago
The Cambridge Companion to Twentieth-Century English Poetry. Edited by Neil Corcoran. Cambridge University Press, 2007. ISBN 978-0-521-69132-1.
Labels: reviews
[ 0 comments ]
|
