The Companionship of a Poem

Great thoughts from Billy Collins

The Companionship of a Poem

I came to realize that to study poetry was to replicate the way we learn and think. When we read a poem, we enter the consciousness of another. It requires that we loosen some of our fixed notions in order to accommodate another point of view — which is a model of the kind of intellectual openness and conceptual sympathy that a liberal education seeks to encourage. To follow the connections in a metaphor is to make a mental leap, to exercise an imaginative agility, even to open a new synapse as two disparate things are linked. Flying a kite, say, can suddenly be seen as a kind of upside-down fishing; a flock of blackbirds may rise up like a handful of thrown, black confetti. I began to see connections between surprise and learning.

Further, to see how poetry fits language into the confines of form is to experience the packaging of knowledge, the need for information to be shaped and contoured to be intelligible. It is to understand that form is a way of thinking, an angle of approach.

. . .

Our supersonic, digital age demands rapidity. And, understandably, students want colleges to speed them toward their future goals. But the true tempo of education, and the best thing about any college, is a slowing down of things to an earlier, more human, pulse — the leisurely pace of deliberation. Education may be the way to slow back down from the computer to the television, to the newspaper, to the essay, to the novel and, finally, to poetry.

. . .

Let us remember that poetry began as a memory system. Mnemosyne was, by Zeus, the mother of all the Muses. In poetry’s most ancient form, the now-familiar features of rhyme, meter, repetition, alliteration, and the like were simply mnemonic devices — tricks to facilitate the storage and retrieval of information, and vital information at that. In an oral culture, before it was possible to write anything down or look it up, knowledge had only one reliquary: the human memory, the library of the mind. The history of one’s people, one’s family genealogy, survival facts about hunting, fishing, and farming — all were saved from oblivion by what we now call poetic devices.

Today, some may view poetry as a sport of dilettantes, despite its ability to say what cannot be said otherwise. But originally poetry was necessary for survival, for human identity, and it issued forth from the wellsprings of human memory.

While I don’t agree with the idea that the important part of poetry is memory, most of the article is sound. I suppose I’m just too much of a Blakean for that. Blake sought to replace “the daughters of memory” with “the daughters of inspiration.” Inspiration is of course uniquely human, and poetry is indeed it’s highest manifestation. At least to me.

I think that my study of Blake has complicated lots of stuff for me. Photography once seemed to me to be a tool of memory, but now I begin to wonder if it also might better serve as slave to inspiration, rather than memory. Blake thought that the slavery to memory, to tales of past glory and conquest, was at the heart of humanity’s problems. He thought that we had to replace this with a higher innocence, a sense of wonder, a fresh and new approach that did not sanction corporeal war, but rather celebrated a continual state of mental involvement, mental war to overthrow the stain of the past.

Maybe one day I’ll learn to write poetry. Right now, prose gives me fits enough. But I must confess a growing fascination with the precise control over the construction of meaning that formal poetry provides. Free verse just doesn’t do it for me; it’s just prose with silly line breaks.

Things Pass

the poster inside my 3-LP box was still intact to scan

Sunrise doesn’t last all morning
A cloudburst doesn’t last all day
Seems my love is up and has left you with
  no warning
But it’s not always going to be this grey
All things must pass, all things must pass
  away
Sunset doesn’t last all evening
A mind can blow those clouds away
After all this my love is up and must be
  leaving
But it’s not always going to be this grey

All things must pass
All things must pass away.
All things must pass
None of life’s strings can last
So— I must be on my way . . . and face
  another day

Now the darkness only stays at night time
In the morning it will fade away
Daylight is good at arriving at the right
  time
No, it’s not always going to be this grey
All things must pass, all things must pass
  away
All things must pass, all things must pass
  away

George Harrison, All Things Must Pass, 1943-2001

Intonation

Intonation.

I lead a seminar last night on the subject of intonation. As usual, I had to relate it to poetry and metrics. But the theories from Haliday and Brazil advanced in the textbook, An Introduction to Discourse Analysis by Mathew Coulthard, put an all new spin on how, and why, poetry works.

Brazil proposes that there are four options which we control when we speak: prominence, tone, key, and termination. Sounds like music, doesn’t it? Well, it is. These things are dependent on a notion of common ground where speakers of a language agree to interpret the meaning, for example, of a rising tone to be a question, rather than a statement. The words are the same, but the meaning is held in the music.

The woman who presented before me was a native Russian, and she spoke about the dialect of one province that used an exaggerated intonation to such an extent that she couldn’t understand what the people were saying— it sounded more like singing than speech. As I scanned the lines of some poetry, I noticed how the metrics determine these factors, and in really good poetry they act to narrow the range of interpretation for the line, making the meaning clearer. Sometimes, bending to the conventions of speech dictates the sort of metrical variations that keep poetry from being meaningless adherence to strict form, which makes it more natural and lifelike. It’s really cool stuff.

But here’s the strangeness of my mind at work. I’ve got to write a flippin’ essay about nature. I’m not a nature guy. So, I was thinking about how it took me forever to “get” Wordsworth, and how I only got it by reading it outdoors. Set and setting, as the old LSD maxim goes. Since Wordsworth’s poetry is kind of hallucinogenic anyhow, I figured I’d lead with the acid thing, and run at the essay from there. But I started thinking: what is set and setting ? Maybe it’s another way of describing a common ground, a group of assumptions that allow us to extract the message from a communication. Language. It’s a wonderful thing.

Of course, that isn’t what the person who coined the phrase had in mind. Or was it? Since I need to attribute the phrase in order to use it appropriately, I tracked down what was originally meant. Big surprise, I found it in the book Drug, Set, and Setting by Norman E. Zinberg:

The two related hypotheses underlying this project were far more controversial in 1973 than they would be today, although they are still not generally accepted. I contended, first, that in order to understand what impels someone to use an illicit drug and how that drug affects the user, three determinants must be considered: drug (the pharmacologic action of the substance itself), set (the attitude of the person at the time of use, including his personality structure), and setting (the influence of the physical and social setting within which the use occurs) (Weil 1972; Zinberg & Robertson 1972; Zinberg, Harding & Winkeller 1981). Of these three determinants, setting had received the least attention and recognition; therefore, it was made the focus of the investigation (Zinberg & DeLong 1974; Zinberg & Jacobson 1975). Thus the second hypothesis, a derivative of the first, was that it is the social setting, through the development of sanctions and rituals, that brings the use of illicit drugs under control.

So, maybe I’m not that far off. It’s the common ground that determines the result, in speaking, reading, or doing drugs. Now that’s weird.

John Lennon Video Collection

Power to the peep-hole

I’ve been watching The John Lennon Video Collection for the last few days. I’ve also been thinking about the sheer oddity of living with dead people on your TV screen. And I’ve been thinking about Blake’s notions of a sort of higher innocence. We live in a fallen world, and can never experience the sort of innocence that exists in the mythic sense. Every moment after being born, we are gathering experiences that cannot be removed from our consciousness; even with metaphoric blinders on, the experience lurks. Religion operates on notions of letting go of the world, a sort of free fall into a world without attachments; but it doesn’t seem to work for me. Just what’s up with the red patent leather suit, John? But I must admit that the two-faced band members was a stroke of genius. In the live concert version of Imagine from 1975, Lennon imagines a world without immigration. A rather grounded reference, for an ethereal song, sung from inside what must have been an expensive suit, for an elite audience. The irony is rather thick.

But I’ve got to admire what some would call a naive search for innocence. I’ve got to believe that war can be over, if we want it. I’ve got to believe that humanity has more commonality than difference. These are prerequisites for a sort of innocence within our experienced world. I think it’s an ideal worth striving for, even with all the flaws. For all my skepticism, I can embrace Lennon as a sort of child, though as an adult he, like all of us, is suspect. Some ideas, like the idea of peace, require a sort of suspension of disbelief. Looking through the peep-hole, without worrying about what’s just outside the field of view.

Eye-beams

Today, I couldn’t stop thinking about eye-beams.

No, not high-beams, though I must confess to a bit of a “deer in the headlights” sort of feeling as I contemplate the idea. It all started with Milton.

Throughout Paradise Lost and Paradise Regained Milton sets up some pretty fundamental tropes: God=Light and Satan=Darkness. Okay, so what makes Satan dark is the absence of light(God). He’s still visible, you see, darkness visible and all that. Don’t get confused with the inversion; hey my name isn’t Satan, I’m Jeff, and this is visible darkness.

For those (including high school English teachers, at least the ones who end up on game shows) who aren’t that familiar with Milton, he was blind when he dictated these works. Blind prophets are also a big trope in literature, besides being a factual description of Milton’s self image. In Samson Agonistes, Milton weaves his own personality tightly around Samson, who like Oedipus was blinded before the crashing conclusion of the biblical story. How do you get around the reality of that darkness in contrast with the more abstract symbolism? Eye-beams.

But Milton was too well versed in science to go for that. Milton admits that eye-beams cannot be evidence that Samson was inspired: “For inward light alas / Puts forth no visual beam.” John Donne wasn’t so scientific about it, particularly when using it as a trope for seduction:

Where, like a pillow on a bed,
A pregnant bank swelled up, to rest
The violet’s reclining head,
Sat we two, one another’s best;

Our hands were firmly cemented
With a fast balm, which thence did spring,
Our eye-beams twisted, and did thread
Our eyes, upon one double string;

So to’ intergraft our hands, as yet
Was all our means to make us one,
And pictures in our eyes to get
Was all our propagation

The Ecstasy 1-12

So, being in love is collecting the same pictures with your eyes? I really like that idea. This whole concept of eyes reaching out to get the world has been a big thing with me. I first found it in Blake.

But Blake’s conception is different (big news, eh?). In Blake not only do the eyes reach out (not take in, that’s the key difference) to the world, they create it. The key is to see the world with “poetic genius” (one of his primary ways of referring to God too, BTW) rather than the mundane organ of the flesh. So, though eye-beams aren’t visible, they also do exist as a manifestation of the “poetic genius”. For Blake, that was as good or better than real. Vision is eternal. There is a similar sense of this in the conclusion to Donne’s poem.

And if some lover, such as we,
Have heard this dialogue of one,
Let him still mark us, he shall see
Small change, when we’are to bodies gone. (73-6)

I want my eye-beams back, but I’m tragically uninspired. My eyes keep connecting with the world in their own way, but like most times I end up talking, it’s strictly a monologue. I don’t like that as much. But I keep collecting my pictures, and spitting them back out again. It’s not as much fun without an audience.

Barbie Revisited

Bill Jay has some interesting observations in the end notes to the latest Lenswork. I don’t usually buy the magazine, because I don’t like large format snobs. The majority of large format photographers come off as die-hard modernists who don’t have a clue about what photography can really do, instead clinging to notions like “essence” and “emotional tonality”. I never have been into the still-life thing. I like my life to move, and I really only bought the magazine because of Bill Jay’s writing. I like it. Here’s his jab at the po-mo crowd:

The continuing saga of Barbie pix. A federal judge recently (August 2001) decided that photographer Tom Forsythe can, indeed, take naked Barbie pictures in spite of Mattel’s objections.

It was not only the nakedness that Mattel found “disturbing” but also the fact that Forsythe photographed Barbie in a blender and frying in a wok.

I have some suggestions for his creations: dunk Barbie in a bath of urine (Serrano); slice her head in two and arrange the two halves to kiss each other (Witkin); ram her breast into a meat grinder (Krims); cut off the limbs for rearrangement (Belmer).

Now we’re getting somewhere . . . Or maybe not. Forsythe has more noble ambitions than disturbance. He is attempting to make people think about how Barbie’s image has distorted children’s concepts of beauty. I can go along with that, although it makes me think that Mattel is delighted to have found a new market for flagging sales: art photographers

Of course, this issue of Lenswork has pointless photographs of flowers in vases, all nicely muted soft focus, and a bunch of stuff with toy cars and trash photographed in still life tableau. Yawn. I know I’ve gotten bad when I start buying photo magazines for the articles, instead of the pictures. Not much interests me in what I see on the shelves these days. I know there is a lot of good work going on out there, it just doesn’t seem to fit the critically hyped trends.

Syndicated Dreams

Number 9 in an ongoing series

I don’t know why I didn’t mention it before, but the folks over at the Steve Wynn Syndicated Dreams list have put up the latest volume of live stuff as MP3s. I didn’t bother with them, because I knew that the CDs would be in my hands soon enough.

What a great show this time around. Steve Wynn and the Miracle Three perform the entire Days of Wine and Roses album live, in order. While I miss Karl Precoda, it’s a pretty admirable effort. And one of the encores is a song mentioned here a few days ago, Some Kind of Itch. So, if you’d like to check it out, here’s your chance. I’m not sure how long these things will remain online, and if you feel the desire it’s an easy matter to sign up for the tree and get goodies like this in your mailbox.

Great stuff, I think, but then I’m biased. I’ve been a Steve Wynn fan since Days of Wine and Roses was new.