Poem of the Week '10

[Scheherazade]

Edit: I think there's a deliberate oral quality to the poem, which I think is intentionally done to try and give it an "Indian" quality.

I agree with this. I am not familiar with the Indian literature but I could not help but feel as if I was reading a tale of some sort especially in the second half.

I am not sure why this is considered contraversial but I have enjoyed reading it and, whether we like to admit it it or not, all over the world, the treatment the elderly receives leaves a lot to be desired.

[OrphanPip]

I agree with this. I am not familiar with the Indian literature but I could not help but feel as if I was reading a tale of some sort especially in the second half.

I am not sure why this is considered contraversial but I have enjoyed reading it and, whether we like to admit it it or not, all over the world, the treatment the elderly receives leaves a lot to be desired.

It's mostly only controversial because of what Scott's historical legacy has been for the native community in Canada.

Scott essentially tried to lead a systematic cultural genocide against Canada's native communities. Despite the amount of poetry he seems to have written Romanticizing native cultures and people, and his extensive knowledge, for the period, of native culture.

"I want to get rid of the Indian problem. I do not think as a matter of fact, that the country ought to continuously protect a class of people who are able to stand alone… Our objective is to continue until there is not a single Indian in Canada that has not been absorbed into the body politic and there is no Indian question, and no Indian Department, that is the whole object of this Bill."

His policies caused years of suffering for generations of native Canadians.

Edit: But on the subject of the poetry itself. You bring up a good point about how this reflects a certain universal truth of the way older generations are tossed aside and supplanted by their children. I'm not sure Scott would have seen it as such though.

Edit2: On the topic of native literature, that which got published tended to be written in the same form as the popular Victorian poetry of the period. Probably the most famous native poet of the late 19th century was Pauline Johnson, she was half Mohawk and half English-Canadian. She used to perform her poetry on stage, doing half dressed in native clothing, then switch into a Victorian dress to perform the second half of her show. She was famous enough to have her poetry published in the UK and the US, and to manage to tour England and the United States to perform her poetry. Though she tended to draw on native themes, her poetry was clearly Victorian in style. Apparently, Margaret Atwood has recently written an opera libretto about her life. I quite like this dramatic monologue written by her:

Cry of an Indian Wife

My forest brave, my Red-skin love, farewell;
We may not meet tomorrow; who can tell
What mighty ills befall our little band,
Or what you'll suffer from the white man's hand?
Here is your knife! I thought 'twas sheathed for aye.
No roaming bison calls for it today;
No hide of prairie cattle will it maim;
The plains are bare, it seeks a nobler game:
'Twill drink the life-blood of a soldier host.
Go; rise and strike, no matter what the cost.
Yet stay. Revolt not at the Union Jack,
Nor raise Thy hand against this stipling pack
Of white-faced warriors, marching West to quell
Our fallen tribe that rises to rebel.
They all are young and beautiful and good;
Curse to the war that drinks their harmless blood.
Curse to the fate that brought them from the East
To be our chiefs--to make our nation least
That breathes the air of this vast continent.
Still their new rule and council is well meant.
They but forget we Indians owned the land
From ocean unto ocean; that they stand
Upon a soil that centuries agone
Was our sole kingdom and our right alone.
They never think how they would feel today,
If some great nation came from far away,
Wresting their country from their hapless braves,
Giving what they gave us--but wars and graves.
Then go and strike for liberty and life,
And bring back honour to your Indian wife.
Your wife? Ah, what of that, who cares for me?
Who pities my poor love and agony?
What white-robed priest prays for your safety here,
As prayer is said for every volunteer
That swells the ranks that Canada sends out?
Who prays for vict'ry for the Indian scout?
Who prays for our poor nation lying low?
None--therefore take your tomahawk and go.
My heart may break and burn into its core,
But I am strong to bid you go to war.
Yet stay, my heart is not the only one
That grieves the loss of husband and of son;
Think of the mothers o'er the inland seas;
Think of the pale-faced maiden on her knees;
One pleads her God to guard some sweet-faced child
That marches on toward the North-West wild.
The other prays to shield her love from harm,
To strengthen his young, proud uplifted arm.
Ah, how her white face quivers thus to think,
Your tomahawk his life's best blood will drink.
She never thinks of my wild aching breast,
Nor prays for your dark face and eagle crest
Endangered by a thousand rifle balls,
My heart the target if my warrior falls.
O! coward self I hesitate no more;
Go forth, and win the glories of the war.
Go forth, nor bend to greed of white men's hands,
By right, by birth we Indians own these lands,
Though starved, crushed, plundered, lies our nation low . . .
Perhaps the white man's God has willed it so.

[Jassy Melson]

I view this as just another example of a didactic poem

[Scheherazade]

It's mostly only controversial because of what Scott's historical legacy has been for the native community in Canada.

Scott essentially tried to lead a systematic cultural genocide against Canada's native communities. Despite the amount of poetry he seems to have written Romanticizing native cultures and people, and his extensive knowledge, for the period, of native culture.

Interesting. It is hard to guess this by reading only the poem you posted.

As for the second one... Despite the poet's interesting origin, it does not feel like a poem.

[OrphanPip]

Interesting. It is hard to guess this by reading only the poem you posted.

As for the second one... Despite the poet's interesting origin, it does not feel like a poem.

Doesn't feel like a poem? It's a dramatic monologue in standard iambic pentameter and heroic couplets. It fits into the form of a dramatic monologue perfectly. This was a very popular form of poetry during the Victorian era, "Ulysses" by Tennyson and "My Last Duchess" by Browning are famous examples.

I view this as just another example of a didactic poem

Duh?

It was written for and performed at a political rally. The point was to differentiate, thematically, the poetry of an actual Indian poet from the period, from Scott's poetry that is rather just about Indians.

The poem is specifically about the North-West rebellion of the Metis against the Canadian government, which was violently crushed, but split the country politically as the Metis are Catholic and French speaking and were strongly supported by the French Canadians in Quebec. And the poem is actually highlighting the similarities between white and native people, and it several times advocates reconciliation rather than violence. However, it is a dramatic monologue, and the character of the Indian Wife ultimately has no choice in the matter and can only wish her warrior husband well and support the war (just like the white wives).

I would contrast the emotional Indian Wife, with the stoic dedicated old woman from the Scott poem. The woman from Scott's poem is rough, defiant, perhaps heroic, and acting very different from how white people would maybe be expected to behave under those harsh conditions. Johnson's Indian Wife on the other hand deliberately draws attention to her similarity to the white wives, and at least she has a voice. I wouldn't merely dispense with the poem because it is definitely didactic and political, it wasn't nothing to take this kind of political stance in the period. I think, in general, a wife sending a husband or son off to war is an interesting topic for a dramatic monologue, even if it leads to the inevitable anti or pro war message. It is, though, Johnson's most political writing by far, usually she was a pretty standard imperialist who often played up her loyalty to Canada and the British Empire whenever she could, she was also half English after all.

[Scheherazade]

I am familiar with "Dramatic Monologues"; however, the latter poem you posted seems to try a little too dramatic for my liking... Probably because, as you mentioned, it was written for a political rally. It reminds me of speeches delivered on national days to stir the blood with the additional bonus of rhyming couplets.

Please don't forget to post a new poem tomorrow!

[OrphanPip]

I am familiar with "Dramatic Monologues"; however, the latter poem you posted seems to try a little too dramatic for my liking... Probably because, as you mentioned, it was written for a political rally. It reminds me of speeches delivered on national days to stir the blood with the additional bonus of rhyming couplets.

I'm going to have to disagree with it not having a poetic feel, it is definitely heavily dramatic since it was written for performance, like a Shakespearean soliloquy, rather than to be read, but the diction and meter is clearly poetic. To say it's not a poem strikes me as a bit extreme when this is a pretty standard example of performance poetry from the period.

Anyway, I don't think it's all that great a poem, but it's thematically interesting and gives a different Victorian Canadian perspective on Indians than what is found in Scott's poem.

[Virgil]

Ok, if it's not too early in the week, and since i'll be at work unable to post in the morning, I hope it's ok if I post the next poem of the week. Here's one from a poet that has caught my eye in recent years. She's relatively well known, though not overwhelmingly. Here's one I've not analyzed deeply, so i'm hoping to be surprised by its depth. Let's see.

Seeing For A Moment
by Denise Levertov

I thought I was growing wings—
it was a cocoon.

I thought, now is the time to step
into the fire—
it was deep water.

Eschatology is a word I learned
as a child: the study of Last Things;

facing my mirror—no longer young,
the news—always of death,
the dogs—rising from sleep and clamoring
and howling, howling,

nevertheless
I see for a moment
that's not it: it is
the First Things.

Word after word
floats through the glass.
Towards me.

[Scheherazade]

Thank you very much for posting the poem for this week, Virgil. I am not familiar at all with Denise Levertov so am not sure what to expect.

After the first reading, I had to search for Eschatology as I am not familiar with this concept in Christianity either (which, I assume, what Levertov is refering to in this poem). After a quick glance at Wiki, if the last things are "death, judgement, heaven, and hell", I am wondering what the "First Things" (S5) might be... Birth as opposed to death?

Will read the poem again and ponder about it some more when I have more time later on

[OrphanPip]

Thank you very much for posting the poem for this week, Virgil. I am not familiar at all with Denise Levertov so am not sure what to expect.

After the first reading, I had to search for Eschatology as I am not familiar with this concept in Christianity either (which, I assume, what Levertov is refering to in this poem). After a quick glance at Wiki, if the last things are "death, judgement, heaven, and hell", I am wondering what the "First Things" (S5) might be... Birth as opposed to death?

Will read the poem again and ponder about it some more when I have more time later on

Maybe not birth, but a new start?

I take the first line, "I thought I was growing wings," to feed into an image of a winged spirit or the like. But she's playing off of the image of a caterpillar growing wings in a cocoon. Instead of an end, it becomes a beginning. That seems to be the general trend throughout the poem.

I'm not sure about the depth of the poem, but I think it is very well written, and quite clever. We can't really get what she's at with the first two stanzas until we get to stanzas 3-5.

[Scheherazade]

Maybe not birth, but a new start?

Yes, I agree that "First Things" do imply new beginnings but I was wondering if it was possible to find equivalents of "Last Things" (ie "death, judgement, heaven, and hell").

I take the first line, "I thought I was growing wings," to feed into an image of a winged spirit or the like. But she's playing off of the image of a caterpillar growing wings in a cocoon.

My interpretation of "growing wings" and "cocoon" is that even though there was an expectation to turn into a butterfly (something beautiful and independent -because it can fly?), there was only a cocoon (a hollow shell, a burden), that limits movement and freedom maybe? Also, a cocoon that does not lead to wings must be such a disappointment.

I am not comfortable with the "stepping into the fire" and "deep water" imagery... Does that mean the persona expected to face up to some challenges but they proved too much (drowned?)?

Is it the poem urging us not to concentrate on the end results at the end of our lives but celebrate the achievements or, more explicitly, the beginnings we bring about?

[Silas Thorne]

I read the wings and fire as either flying up or falling down to Heaven or Hell. The cocoon seems to stifle and trap the freedom of wings to fly, in the same way as the deep water stifles the image of the flames. This seems to clash with the idea of death, for in the poem I see the idea of dying as a process of seeing thing anew ie dying to the past. And perhaps the cocoon and deep water could picture returning to the womb and living the life anew? Or reincarnation perhaps?


I think there is a significance to the fact that just after 'First Things' there is 'Word after Word', as in the beginning was the word, and that things are not ending but life is coming anew, or there is the freedom to reconceptualize everything in the present. The writer's past is seen again in the new light of the present, and so it is no longer something negative and dead. It also rejects the negative conception of the world presented by the news media perhaps, that things are moving to death and that all news is bad news, and that she is no longer young, for she says 'that's not it' later on in the poem.

[OrphanPip]

Yes, I agree that "First Things" do imply new beginnings but I was wondering if it was possible to find equivalents of "Last Things" (ie "death, judgement, heaven, and hell").

My theological knowledge is fairly limited, so I have no idea, maybe Virgil could enlighten us. Although, Silas does bring up the obvious, though I missed it, allusion to Genesis in "Word after word," the "First Things" could also be a reference to those opening lines of Genesis.

My interpretation of "growing wings" and "cocoon" is that even though there was an expectation to turn into a butterfly (something beautiful and independent -because it can fly?), there was only a cocoon (a hollow shell, a burden), that limits movement and freedom maybe? Also, a cocoon that does not lead to wings must be such a disappointment.

I am not comfortable with the "stepping into the fire" and "deep water" imagery... Does that mean the persona expected to face up to some challenges but they proved too much (drowned?)?

Is it the poem urging us not to concentrate on the end results at the end of our lives but celebrate the achievements or, more explicitly, the beginnings we bring about?

I think it's entirely possible, but I'm leaning a bit more towards them being an invocation of heaven or hell (as Silas said). There's a disappointment of expectations occurring, though I'm not sure if the cocoon and water convery something negative or positive.

I think there may something in your conclusion. Though, I think what's occurring here is more of a retrospective inspection of past events, the mirror is reflecting the speaker after all. The speaker expected certain things, and they didn't occur. And then the speaker seems to paint a miserable picture of how the world is, but then contradicts that misery. I don't think it's just about celebrating our achievements, but re-examining and reinventing our perceptions of the past and the world around us. The last stanza gives me the most trouble, as I'm not exactly sure how to take those words, other than as a Biblical allusion.

[Virgil]

I'm not going to reply individually, but here are my thoughts.

First Levertov is a poet who in mid to late life did have a spiritual conversion and wrote a good deal of religious poetry afterward, though I wouldn't say exclusively so. This poem I found was written in 1984, right around that spiritual conversion.

The poem is about a transition, either into a coming death (she would have been entering her sixties when this was written), or into her new spiritual mindset, or both. Growing wings from a cocoon is almost a cliche for a transition.

Fire is a purgation (purification, or the burning off of the old) while water is a baptism, an acceptance into the new, which are similar in some respect, but the water is so much more gentle.

Eschatology is what she says it is, the study of the end of things, but it will be seen as ironic in the sense that this is a new beginning, whether she's talking about her death or her new life.

Facing the mirror she sees what the title refers to, "the moment," presumably first of death and then the life she now believes beyond. "Word after word" is an interesting pun. She is a poet and now she has new themes to write about, but the Word is a reference to Christ, who is referred to as the Word.

A nice poem. I have no idea what the dog reference is about.

[Scheherazade]

Especially after reading Virgil's brief background information on the poet, I agree that there is a religious significance to the poem. I wonder, after experiencing some kind of spritual awakening, if the persona feels that all is not in vain and what seems to be the end (death) is actually a beginning (afterlife and all)?

So, any comments on "the dogs"?