The poems of Wislawa Szymborska

[ibapiggie]

You can tell a lot about Szymborska through her poetry. It shows her life experiences and the things that have influenced her to be the person she is.
One of the things you can tell about her is that she has been highly educated. She has a lot of allusions in her poetry that signify this.
There is a lot of allusion to classical Roman, Greek, and other mythology in a lot of her poems. Some of the titles are "a moment in Troy" (31), "Atlantis" (17), "commemoration" with its reference to Icharus (23), and a recurring line of Latin, "non omnis moriar", in at least two of her poems, "the rest" (34) and "a large number" (145). All of these allusions eliminate unnecessary words and give the reader the feeling of an inside joke with the author.
There are also a lot of other allusions, most of which I’m unsure of what they mean. But some must be well known because my spell-check recognized them as I put them here. Some examples are "the rest" and it's reference to Ophelia and Polonius (34), "greeting the supersonics" and it's reference to the tortoise and the hare (7), "water" and it's Biblical allusions to the tower of Babel (58), "family album" and it's allusions to Bosch (72), and the one that I find the strangest, "Brueghel’s two monkeys" (15). There is also a very strange title of "buffo" (21) which seems like a typo to me. Did she mean to say buffalo or buffoon instead?
She writes her poems in a very unique way, with unique structure. Sometimes her poems are structured into traditional stanzas, but she often will alter their structure. A few of her poems restate or continue the title in the first line of each stanza. She does this in "some people like poetry" (227) and "classifieds"(5). The effect is that the reader gets a deeper explanation of the title and the main idea is strongly emphasized. She will even abandon normal stanzas and write the poem in one large stanza, or many short stanzas depending on how you see it. Some examples of this are “possibilities” (213), “synopsis” (60), “vocabulary” (36), “astonishment” (128), “birthday” (129), and “certainty” (136). The effect of this is either a lengthy and possibly purposefully monotonous poem to emphasize a united idea or an abrupt feeling of divided short and choppy separate ideas to emphasize chaos and randomness.
She also writes a lot of poems about writing and how writers are different and strange people. I think this echoes her own personal realizations of how she is different from the rest of the world, even her own family. Some examples are “starvation camp near jaslo” (42), “I’m working on the world” (3), “the joy of writing” (67), “In praise of my sister” (159), “writing a resume” (205), “evaluation of an unwritten poem” (162), and “a tale begun” (210). I find it ironic that she is writing about writing, but then again, there is no better way to explain how to do it, than to do it

By the way, I love smilies!!!

[mzmarymack]

Duckduck! I really like your stance on "Vietnam."
When we discussed in class, we said something like "children are so much more important than the political on-goings (is that a word??)"
I like how this person asks about her children last. Like they aren't as consequential as her age or something. (BTW that was sarcasm. I hate how the speaker asked about her children, who were probably huddling in the ditch in fear, last.)
The speaker also says "This is war. You've got to choose," when he/she asks the woman about what side of the war she's on. We've always been told to take a stance, have a position, and be willing to fight for it. "If you stand for nothing, you'll fall for anything" is a common saying.
However, Szymborska's saying that it's okay not to have a side. There are more important things than declaring your views. The most important thing is making sure you stay human when you're part of a war. It's easy to start a crusade saying God is on your side and that you are justified to do anything. However, that is a bunch of bluestand (BS hahaha). It's easy to say "everything's fair in love and war." It's not. At all. Ever. heh
This woman (from the poem), by forgoing the political pomp and making her kids' welfare her number one priority, has kept her humanity while countless people take pleasure in the news report declaring the death of hundred thousands. [this isn't supposed to be offensive. please tell me if I didn't make that clear earlier....]

You can tell a lot about Szymborska through her poetry. It shows her life experiences and the things that have influenced her to be the person she is.
....There is also a very strange title of "buffo" (21) which seems like a typo to me. Did she mean to say buffalo or buffoon instead?
She writes her poems in a very unique way, with unique structure. Sometimes her poems are structured into traditional stanzas, but she often will alter their structure.

That's so true, ibapiggie! I think she meant buffo, and we have to remember that "buffo" isn't necessarily her word choice but her translator's. In my mind, buffoon has a more derogatory, demeaning connotation, whereas "buffo" is like "class clown." So I think there's a method behind the madness.

[10yWakingUp]

oky, this is one of my favorites. szymborska is amazing as always.
this is a translation i found online of her poem "hatred", so it is not the same as in the book. but still


Look, how spry she still is,
how well she holds up:
hatred, in our century.
How lithely she takes high hurdles.
How easy for her to pounce, to seize.



She is not like the other feelings.
At once older and younger than they.
She alone gives birth to causes
which rouse her to life.
If she sleeps, it's never for eternity.
Insomnia doesn't take away but gives her strength.



Religion or no religion
-- as long as she's in the running
Motherland or no-man's land
-- as long as she's in the race.
Even justice suffices at first.
After that she speeds off on her own
Hatred. Hatred.
The grimace of love's ecstasy
twists her face.



Oh, those other feelings,

so sickly and sluggish.
Since when could brotherhood
count on milling crowds?
Was compassion ever first across the finish line?
How many followers does doubt command?
Only hatred commands, for hatred knows her stuff.


Smart, able, hard working.
Need we say how many songs she has written.
How many pages of history she has numbered.
How many human carpets she has unrolled,
over how many plazas and stadiums.



Let's be honest:
Hatred can create beauty.
Marvelous are her fire-glows, in deep night.
Clouds of smoke most beautiful, in rosy dawn.
It's hard to deny ruins their pathos
and not to see bawdy humor
in the stout column lording it over them.



She is a master of contrast

between clatter and silence,

red blood and white snow.
Above all the image of a clean-shaven torturer
standing over his defiled victim
never bores her.


She is always ready for new tasks.
If she has to wait, she waits.
They say hatred is blind. Blind?
With eyes sharp as a sniper's,
she looks bravely into the future
-- she alone.

its obviously different from the book, poems new and collected. page 230.
but i wanted to post an example for those who dont have the book

so szymborska doesnt cover why we hate. just that we do hate. and for rather stupid reasons. she mentions how religion and fatherland can be a cause of conflict that leads to hatred. she kinda says that there is no hope for our future if we keep hating each other. 'hatred' is given a monster/predator like quality-- with the pounce/tracking us down. the comment on how brotherhood cant draw as much crowds as hate, is rather depressing. if we only gather in vast numbers for negative, violent things---what does that say about our nature? hatred also finds its way into history books. for instance, ever notice how in american history books, the british look like the bad guys? her comparision of hatred being "contrast---between explosions and dead quiet, red blood and white snow." gives it a real creepy feel. we know that world war two influenced alot of her work, but she makes a point. and her use of "dead quiet" instead of "silent" adds to that feeling. then the symbolism of snow, which is supposed to be either pure or a sign of death, which is obviously a symbol of death. (a great book about symbols and other devices used in books would be How to Read Litterature Like a Professor, really, its great)

i would continue with this but im going to go to sleep. i would love some input on this poem. ^^

[10yWakingUp]

okay so since im the only one on this page anymore, im going to comment on how in this translation, hatred is a girl vs. the books translation where there is not sex of hatred. and "let's" beings the reader into the poem. just a quick comment. ill make more later, but id love some input

[mzmarymack]

Hey girl! (and before you ask, I know that you are indeed female. I'm not making assumptions )

The sex thing is the first thing I noticed! In addition to "motherland" in this version rather than "fatherland," this translation uses
"She" rather than "it"
It made me a bit put off. Why is it that people refer to boats as she? (As in total ownership) And why do natural disasters often have female names?? hmpf

But saying "she" here reminds me of the Congreve's saying "Heaven has no rage like love to hatred turned, nor hell a fury like a woman scorned." I think this quotation describes hatred perfectly, although that may be because it's talking about hatred. haha

The way I see it is that using "it" would be like categorizing death as a machine, which is what the opening line of the poem states.
The difference b/w it and she is that "it" gives me a more eternal, can't-do-anything-to-wear-it-down feel whereas "she" makes it seem like hatred is a too-hot-to-handle, let-it-cool-down, it'll-get-easier-to-handle-later emotion. (and sorry for all the annoying hyphens ) her hatred isn't disappearing, but it will one day, given that we, as humans, don't provoke her. however its hatred will be perpetual. it will fuel generation after generation, never slowing down.


Also, another thing I noticed about this translation above...
"Smart, able, hard working."

That sounds like something I might say if asked to describe myself in three words.
sure, i wouldn't use those words exactly, but wow! These are characteristics that we value. Remember in Heart of Darkness how sickness was like having AIDS?? (okay AIDS is a sickness anyways...) What I mean is that in HoD Kurtz was only valued when he was in good health, when he was able-bodied. When he started to waste away, I believe that people were plotting to kill him or at least demote him(?). Anyways, Szmborska, by personifying Hatred, shows us two things.
1) we all harbor hatred--and yes this is obvious. It's still important enough to repeat.
2) hatred resembles us. the things we might be boastful of--"Oh look at me. I create beautiful works of art" is
"Let's be honest:
Hatred can create beauty.
Marvelous are her fire-glows, in deep night.
Clouds of smoke most beautiful, in rosy dawn."
and "Oh I'm so sly and clever" Why is that a good thing in the first place? Wouldn't the world be a better place if no one was sneaky?

To summarize, we have hatred within us, and it (or she--no just kidding, hatred's not a she ) takes after us. It's to effective because we are effective (or efficient) So while we can say that we're so smart, so special, for every one of our talents, we have a flaw.

What do you think?

[10yWakingUp]

"It made me a bit put off. Why is it that people refer to boats as she? (As in total ownership) And why do natural disasters often have female names?? "

agreed. i could rant all day about all the sexism behind it.

and since you mentioned that saying, do you think the poem has anything to do with Congreve's quote?

but i agree and appreciate your input ^^
and comparing to previous books read in our class.

the line "Above all the image of a clean-shaven torturer
standing over his defiled victim"
makes it seem like szymborska is point out how men are the ones physically going out and following through with emotions forced on us by the "she"-hatred.
idk, it kinda makes sense if you look at it from a sexist point of view

women are emotional
men are physical

and her word choice is perfect. "defiled" "victim" makes you feel a lil angry towards the "torturer" right? anger=hatred but not as advanced

people do what they believe is right in their eyes. after reading this, most likely, people would say 'im not a mean face like all other people' but there are no exceptions.

i always feel like szymborska is trying to pull people into reality.

im going to cut this short, cause i have things to do, but i look forward to any other comments
thanks ^^

[mzmarymack]

and since you mentioned that saying, do you think the poem has anything to do with Congreve's quote?

I don't know... hmm. I'm always scared to say anything like "this is what szymborska is saying" (except where grades are concerned) because only she knows. plus there's the whole translator thing. if both poems used "she" then I might think so, but I'm too scared to say that WS was thinking about the quote when composing the poem. heh

the line "Above all the image of a clean-shaven torturer
standing over his defiled victim"
makes it seem like szymborska is point out how men are the ones physically going out and following through with emotions forced on us by the "she"-hatred.
idk, it kinda makes sense if you look at it from a sexist point of view

women are emotional
men are physical

wow i didn't notice the "his"! can I just say that torturer is one of the weirdest words in English?? Anyways, I love your analysis of this, 10yWakingUp.
Clean shaven.. I wonder. It reminds me of how we always say that appearances in literature reflect what the person is like--like Scarlet Letter and that horrendous novella with Tickles Fanny (forgot the name). Here, this isn't true. Even though the torturer is clean shaven, his appearance doesn't indicate his personality/goodness. So it's like Szymborska's trying to teach us another lesson (actually it's prolly the translator. It's funny because how did the translator decide that the torturer is male?? If the other torturer didn't even associate a sex at all... w/e). Don't judge a book by it's cover.

people do what they believe is right in their eyes. after reading this, most likely, people would say 'im not a mean face like all other people' but there are no exceptions.

i always feel like szymborska is trying to pull people into reality.

Dude I AGREE!!!

"You can take a horse to water but you can't make him drink" is what my grandfather often told me. Apply this to people who read poems. You can educate people, you can supply them with mind-blowing, horizon-widening literature, but you can't make them take the message/adage to heart.
You can't literally open people's eyes if they don't want to see. Which, in my humble opinion, is incredibly annoying.

I really like Szymborska. And I really don't understand what she's saying about 85% of the time. Just thought I'd put that out there.

[10yWakingUp]

the Mr. Tickles and Fanny novel is Venus in Boston. possibly worst book ever written.

another idea about the "clean shaven" guy, which i agree with your analysis of it completely ^^, usually the "clean" people are the Euros or Americans in literature. It reminded me of God of Small Things and Poisonwood Bible, how they went to Africa and realized there is no such thing as a civilized inidividual.

i think your grandfather is awesome! that horse quote is perfect for poetry, and possibly life as a whole. and i completely agree, again

i absolutely love szymborska and enjoy reading her poems ^^


what do you think about her poem
"Some People" (i had to recite it in class so I've been doing some thinking)

'Some people flee some other people
in some country under a sun
and some clouds

they've abandoned something close to all they've got
sown fields, some chickens, dogs
mirrors in which fire now preens

their shoulders bare pitchers and bundles
the emptier they get, the heavier they grow

what happens quietly: someone s dropping from exhaustion
what happens loudly: someones bread is ripped away
someone tries to shake a limp child back to life

always another wrong road ahead of them
always another wrong bridge
across some oddly reddish river
around them, some gunshots, now nearer now further away
above them, a plane seems to circle

some invisibility would come in handy
some grayish stoniness
or better yet, some nonexistance
for a shorter or longer while

something else will happen, only where and what
someone will come at them, only when and who
in how many shapes, with what intentions
if he has a choice
maybe he wont be the enemy
and let them live some sort of life'

i did this on memory, so there might be a few minor mistakes
but i believe that Szymborska was discussing people fleeing from Nazis. Since Polish was taken over at the beginning of the war, and she is polish, it makes sense to me.
i think she uses the word "some" in a sarcastic but deeper meaning, or the exact opposite meaning. because, "some" generalizes everything. and Szymborska doesnt generalize anything. it wasnt just "some people" who died from bombings, concentration camps, etc. it was ALOT of people. innocent people were murdered ruthlessly. it wasnt just "some country" it was almost all of Europe. everyone was trying to save themselves and their family.
the reddish river led me to believe she was discussing how there was possibly so much hatered and blood shed that it was dying the water red.
"someone tries to shake a limp child back to life" and "what happens quietly: someone s dropping from exhaustion" are possibly the saddest lines in any poem i've ever read.

but there was hope.
at the end she says:
"someone will come at them, only when and who,
in how many shapes, with what intentions,
if he has a choice
maybe he wont be the enemy
and let them live some sort of life"

by that, i think szymborska is saying that not all the bad guys are bad. maybe one of them will have sympathy and let them try to live a sort of normal life after all theyve been through. its hope ^^

and i love her for that

[mzmarymack]

i think she uses the word "some" in a sarcastic but deeper meaning, or the exact opposite meaning. because, "some" generalizes everything. and Szymborska doesnt generalize anything. it wasnt just "some people" who died from bombings, concentration camps, etc. it was ALOT of people. innocent people were murdered ruthlessly. it wasnt just "some country" it was almost all of Europe. everyone was trying to save themselves and their family.
the reddish river led me to believe she was discussing how there was possibly so much hatered and blood shed that it was dying the water red.
"someone tries to shake a limp child back to life" and "what happens quietly: someone s dropping from exhaustion" are possibly the saddest lines in any poem i've ever read.

but there was hope.
at the end she says:
"someone will come at them, only when and who,
in how many shapes, with what intentions,
if he has a choice
maybe he wont be the enemy
and let them live some sort of life"

I agree with you about "some":
The fact that it is "another wrong bridge", "some country under a sun", and "for a shorter or longer while" point out all the ambiguity. This poem doesn't use the definitive word "the." So Szymborska and the translators aren't pointing fingers and labeling oppressors. They are leaving it up to the readers to decide who the bad guys are and who the good guys are.

I think the last few lines say that we can't separate the bad from the good. We can't even have bad people and good people. (I urge you to read the poem "A Contribution to Statistics"--I'll add it to the bottom of this post. It's really good... I did my poster on it ) because "worthy of compassion / --ninety-nine [out of a hundred]" (from "A Contribution to Statistics"). Szymborska says that no one is purely one thing. That's why she incorporates the extremes in her poems, and we see this in this poem"
"What happens quietly:
what happens loudly:"
the parallel structure here supports the point I just made.
Also, "what happens quietly: someone s dropping from exhaustion
what happens loudly: someones bread is ripped away"

Ripping bread away... usually a quiet motion, but if you put it in perspective, in pindrop silence or whatever, then you can imagine it. also, if you're a beggar and someone's given you a scrap of food, imagine what you might go through as someone else steals it away from you, taunts you with the bread. So she's putting things in perspective--things that most of use skim over because we can't truly empathize with a beggar as we've never been there.

About the last lines... The same person can be good or bad is what I wanted to say. When people are forced by circumstances (once again, read Contrib to Stats) then they may act evilly. But when they are "given the chance", they may live up to their potential:

"if he has a choice
maybe he wont be the enemy
and let them live some sort of life"

The main thing is "he" often has no choice. The "bad guys"... you mentioned Nazis.. perhaps they aren't motivated by racism. Perhaps the vast majority are motivated by fear instilled by a higher authority.



A Contribution to Statistics

Out of a hundred people

those who always know better
-fifty-two

doubting every step
-nearly all the rest,

glad to lend a hand
if it doesn't take too long
-as high as forty-nine,

always good
because they can't be otherwise
-four, well maybe five,

able to admire without envy
-eighteen,

suffering illusions
induced by fleeting youth
-sixty, give or take a few,

not to be taken lightly
-forty and four,

living in constant fear
of someone or something
-seventy-seven,

capable of happiness
-twenty-something tops,

harmless singly, savage in crowds
-half at least,

cruel
when forced by circumstances
-better not to know
even ballpark figures,

wise after the fact
-just a couple more
than wise before it,

taking only things from life
-thirty
(I wish I were wrong),

hunched in pain,
no flashlight in the dark
-eighty-three
sooner or later,

righteous
-thirty-five, which is a lot,

righteous
and understanding
-three,

worthy of compassion
-ninety-nine,

mortal
-a hundred out of a hundred.
thus far this figure still remains unchanged.

-- Wislawa Szymborska


PS Please check out the So Long a Letter thread at this link:
http://www.online-literature.com/for...ad.php?t=43253

[lalalalala]

thanks!! i appreciate it!!!

-gab

[mzmarymack]

Hey gab.
I don't think the point of this site is for us to analyze for you, but we can definitely help you start.

In class, we often look at literary devices and their significance. For example,

Of all your loves, mention only the marriage;
Of all your children, only those who were born.

What does this excerpt make you feel?
I feel like Szymborska's showing readers that we often don't understand things--we see something and take it at face value, but we don't stop to understand the significance.
You could have loved three different men, and they could have had tremendous impacts on your life, but if I ask you about your husband, I'm only skimming the surface of who you are. I would never know about the other 2/3 of you.

What do you think is the speaker's tone in the poem? Playful? Sarcastic? Neutral? And how does the tone help convey the theme?

[lalalalala]

thanks!!! that really helped. i was thinking of the symbolism of the resume. what do you have in mind?

[poet_discussion]

FAMILY ALBUM
No one in this family has ever died of love.
No food for myth and nothing magisterial.
Consumptive Romeos? Juliets diphtherial?
A doddering second childhood was enough.
No death-defying vigils, love-struck poses
over unrequited letters strewn with tears!
Here, in conclusion, as scheduled, appears
a portly, prince-nez'd neighbor bearing roses.
No suffocation-in-the-closet gaffes
because the cuckold returned home too early!
Those frills or furbelows, however flounced and whirly,
barred no one from the family photographs.
No Bosch-like hell within their souls, no wretches
found bleeding in the garden, shirts in stains!
(True, some did die with bullets in their brains,
for other reasons, though, and on field stretchers.)
Even this belle with rapturous coiffure
who may have danced till dawn--but nothing smarter--
hemorrhaged to a better world, bien sûr,
but not to taunt or hurt you, slick-haired partner.
For others, Death was mad and monumental--
not for these citizens of a sepia past.
Their griefs turned into smiles, their days flew fast,
their vanishing was due to influenza.
__________________________________________________ ___________________________________

literary "sight" elements:
Symbolism: When Szymborska used the phrase "No death-defying vigils, love struck poses over unrequited letters strewn with tears!" I was able to visualize the actual course of action occurring before me. You could see the passionate emotion within this sentence. And it really brought out the imagery. Also when Szymborska mentioned the "Bosch-like hell within their souls" although the imagery wasn't a physical one the mental image and the suffering or rather the hell within their souls, perhaps meaning more so an evil essence or spirit, was what I would call a great play on words. It honestly helped further strengthen the imagery of this poem. Largely this entire poem is set on imagery. I would even go far enough to say that imagery is its strong hold and foundation. The family album itself tells tales of the past, yet it does not show the truth behind it all, each picture hides that which is the ultimate truth. So what is seen is merely a façade.
Personification: At the mention of a “sepia past” I felt as though the past had come alive and was being further emphasized by the personification of “griefs turned into smiles, […] days flew fast, […] vanishing was due to influenza”. Yes I do agree that this is also great symbolism but I thought as though the past had its own character and that that was something much more than just its imagery.

“sound” elements:
Rhythm: The poem is fluid, and flows from event to the other efficiently and smoothly. Even with the format and punctuation it is not just placed there line after line, meaning it is not just said and done. There is flow within it. The rhyme scheme helps to further emphasize this flow.
Rhyme: The ending words of lines 2, 3; 6, 7; 10, 11; 14, 15; 18, 19; 22, 23 each rhyme in pairs. I’m curious as to the significance of this particular rhyme scheme.
Repetition: The only word repetition visible is “No . . .”; however, as for visual repetition, Szymborska consistently brings up the mention of death and the past life of the family as well as some form of love, but the love included here is the love which did not kill these people but rather the love with which the album pictures hid.
Tone: I view the tone of this poem as sarcastic, yet it gives a message in a passionate voice. So I would say it is both sarcastic in the sense that it portrays that with which a family album hides behind it’s pictures and also passionate because there is depth in every detail in every picture and the exclamation marks truly help enhance that passionate tone.

[poet_discussion]

TP-FASTT Poetry Analysis

Poems New and Collected 1957-1997 by Wislawa Szymborska

THANK-YOU NOTE

Title: I predict that the title of the poem, Thank-You Note, is a representation of an actual thank-you note or rather what is written within a thank-you note. I also think that there is significance to the audience Szymborska addresses in her poem.

Paraphrase: I saw the entirety of the poem as though it focused on the gratitude with which should give to those who don’t have love or aren’t loved, those whom you don’t truly love just respect I guess. Although love would find them unworthy of thanking, one should thank them because if not for them everyone would be blinded by love. It seems as though basically Szymborska is saying thank you those whom I don’t love for being just who you are. At least that’s how I saw it, I honestly didn’t see it as being sarcastic, but then again from the poems we’ve read I could be wrong.

Figurative Language: Personification of love (specifically “‘I don’t owe them a thing,’ would be love’s answer to this open question). Love was given an essence of humanity. It was directly being thanked, almost as though a real human being was being thanked.

Attitude: The tone of this poem is very simplistic and rather bland. There isn’t much excitement if any within the poem. But its simplicity makes it flow very smoothly and each stanza has a particular beauty about it.

Shift: There are two shifts within this poem. The first one is at the beginning of the stanza on the next page when the three dimensions are mentioned. The shift here indicates I presume a sense of “if so, then maybe”. That gives a shift from appraisal of the not loved to them deserving credit if one were to live in three dimensions. The second shift is at the end when love’s answer is “I don’t owe them a thing”. Here the shift is direct, and for the first time, we see love “talking” instead of the narrator inferring that he/she knows what love knows not. Love has an opinion here. I believe this indicates a form of hypocrisy in a sense. The narrator owes so much to those whom he/she does not love, but love on the other hand, owes the unloved nothing. Through this shift, the narrator answers his/her open-ended question in one form from the perspective of love itself personified as a human.

Theme: One can owe so much to those whom he/she does not love without knowing it, yet when it comes to those whom we love, we know we owe them so much more.

Title: Now I see that the title has one meaning rather than two. The meaning is that we ought to be thankful for those whom we cherish and also those whom we do not cherish. Life has its ups and downs yet we must cherish those around us, even if we take little notice of them. What surprised me most is that Szymborska didn’t directly state what should be included within a thank-you note, but in an indirect way, she did say what we should be thankful for from those whom we do not love.

[poet_discussion]

THE END AND THE BEGINNING

After every war
someone has to tidy up.
Things won’t pick
themselves up, after all.

Someone has to shove
the rubble to the roadsides
so the carts loaded with corpses
can get by.

Someone has to trudge
through sludge and ashes,
through the sofa springs,
the shards of glass,
the bloody rags.

Someone has to lug the post
to prop the wall,
someone has to glaze the window,
set the door in its frame.

No sound bites, no photo opportunities,
and it takes years.
All the cameras have gone
to other wars.

The bridges need to be rebuilt,
the railroad stations, too.
Shirtsleeves will be rolled
to shreds.

Someone, broom is hand,
still remembers how it was.
Someone else listens, nodding
his unshattered head.

But others are bound to be bustling nearby
who’ll find all that
a little boring.

From time to time someone still must
dig up a rusted argument
from underneath a bush
and haul it off to the dump.

Those who knew
what this was all about
must make way for those
who know little.
And less than that.
And at last nothing less than nothing.

Someone has to lie there
in the grass that covers up
the causes and effects
with a cornstalk in his teeth,
gawking at clouds.
__________________________________________________ ________________________________________

literary "sight" elements:
Symbolism: The imagery of war-torn veterans and a reconstructing society emerges in my mind when I read this poem. The vivid details within each stanza remark on the difficulties one experiences through a difficult time in life, specifically that of a war-torn society. I specifically like how Szymborska begins her poem “[a]fter every war someone has to tidy up. Things won’t pick themselves up, after all”. With that I think she makes her intentions clear, she is indicating to her readers that society has to clean up its own affairs and through the flow of her poem, by the end she also indicates that society tends to find bliss in the ignorance of “the causes and effects” of its affairs. What's also really interesting is also the imagery of the "unshattered head". To me it's a portrayal of the humane vs the inhumane aspects of war.
Personification: At the mention of “[n]o sound bites, no photo opportunities, and it takes years. All the cameras have gone to other wars” Szymborska is personifying sound, photography, and cameras in correlation to war-time. She indicates that sound is deafening, photography disappears because of I imagine the lack of people to take it due to the great loss of people during wars, and she also indicates that cameras move although what she means is that nearly every war has a picture as a remembrance of the past.

“sound” elements:
Rhythm: Szymborska constructed this poem’s format to which each stanza states a duty that must be done in order to cleanse society of its war-torn land. Through this format, the rhythm of this poem flows brilliantly because of the separate breaks that allow the reader to think more closely about each obligation.
Rhyme: There is no rhyme within this poem.
Repetition: The only word repetition visible in five of the eleven stanzas of this poem begin with “Someone . . .”; however, as for visual repetition, Szymborska consistently brings up the mention the duties on must do in order to supposedly “tidy up” a war-torn country, although one can also see that Szymborska intends to show that that history of the battles isn’t easily forgotten even though society tends to do its best to either hide or ignore the past all through her use of sarcasm.
Tone: I view the tone of this poem as sarcastic yet subtle. So I would say it is sarcastic in the sense that it portrays the supposed effort of others when it comes to tidying up a war-torn society, but also subtle in the sense that it doesn’t frighten the reader nor demand something of the reader and neither does it obstruct the flow of the poem in general. Basically the poem is subtle because it is what I would call airy, given the sense that it fills the atmosphere with its quite tone.