In the small hours. . . we make up a different language for
poetry, and for the heart.
I was not a natural poet like the Russian I translated,
Yevgeni Vinokurov, or Tom Clark, whose Stones
is here, with its wicked parody of Wallace Stevens, ‘Eleven ways of looking
at a shit bird.’ Rather, as Donald Davie would write in a note to his collected
poems, poetry went or came out against the grain of a natural inclination for
abstraction and ratiocination though poetry can and sometimes does happen in those circumstances –provided
one keeps the antennae open – just as, on occasion, conceptual art transcends
the literature and anthropology with which it has such affinities and generates
and authentic visual construction.
I was trying to pass myself off as a modernist with his own
slant when I was nothing of the sort. I was attention-seeking, inventing a gap
whose filling would henceforth be associated with me. Many notebook statements
I annotated seem now to be wind in the straw, but I remain struck by a
handful. Painful for me is Roethke’s thought that ‘One form of the death
wish is the embracing of mediocrity: a deliberate reading and rereading of
newspapers.’
Donald Davie’s endnote to his Collected Poems spoke volumes
to me:
It is true that I am
not a poet by nature , only by inclination; for my mind moves most easily
among abstractions, it relates ideas far more readily than it relates
experiences. I have little appetite, only profound admiration, for sensuous
fullness and immediacy; I have not the poet’s need of concreteness.
But, he continues,
. . .a true poem can
be written by a mind not naturally poetic –though by an inhuman labor of
thwarting the natural grain and bent. This working against the grain does not
damage the mind, nor is it foolish; on the contrary, only by doing this each
true poem as it is written becomes an authentic widening of experience – a truth
won from life against all odds, because a truth in and about a mode of
experience to which a mind is normally closed.
Every real poem starts from a given ground and carries the
reader to an unforeseen vantage point, whence he views differently the landscape
over which he has passed. As a translator my job has been to recognize these
two terminal points, and to connect them by a coherent flight. This cannot be
exactly the flight of the original, but no essential reach of the journey
should be left out. Features are thus transposed, or suppressed only to come
out elsewhere in disguised form. These are the liberties of a translator, but
liberties assumed for the sake of a new order. Sometimes the original thought
would be compromised by appearing in a poem for the twentieth century. It must
therefore be diffused in the atmosphere of a new poem .For a new poem the
version must be: otherwise it cannot live. Translation is resurrection, but not
of the body.
There is also a distinction to be made between poetry and
verse, roughly put, the thought and the feeling; “The perception of the
intellect is given in the word, that of the emotions in the cadence’ (Pound).
The fact is that we are always fundamentally more interested in what a writer
has to say. When we are sure of that, we pay attention to the way in which he
says it. Time and time again reams of verse surround a nugget of poetry, though
Peter Russell could invent a live world
in words radiating energy that projected far from the poesy and flights rampant
in the main body of his work. On the other hand, as DeQuincy wrote, “the restless
activity of Coleridge’s mind in chasing abstract truths- attempts to escape out
of his own personal wretchedness -often buried itself in the dark places of
human speculation”, a sentence I heavily underlined thirty years ago and which
still speaks volumes to all who in their own small way have experienced the treachery
of their own will.
Robert Lowell is an iconic figure, the very figure, the very
type of poet, an artist who spoke truth to power, as Norman Mailer well
understood in Armies of the Night although, in his third-person narrator
persona, he has problems if not issues with the Boston Brahmin and judges the
poet ‘to possess an undue Christian talent for literary log-rolling.’ In a
postcard, Lowell tells Mailer he is the finest journalist in America; in a
second card, he praises Mailer’s book of poems Death for the Ladies, but Mailer notes that he never praises it in
public. Lowell repeated the remark about journalism on the steps of the
Pentagon, occasioning the reply: ‘Well, Cal, there are days when I think of
myself as being the best writer in America.’
Lowell is one of the poets in Walter Lowenthal’s anthology
Where is Vietnam?, but he never resorted to agitprop, nor did he embrace
silence* the way Oppen did, precisely because at the time and in the radically
different and differently radical circumstances of the 1930s, Oppen could not conceive of a political poetry
that was not agitprop. ‘Mailer’ then addresses
himself and Lowell: ‘The only subject we share, you and I, is that species of
perception which shows that if we are not very loyal to our unendurable and
most exigent inner light, then some day we may burn.’ More experienced in
protest than Lowell, he explains to the poet, who hopes to get away in time for
an important dinner, that he must be prepared to stay on longer to ensure that
if there are any arrests the two senior and well-known figures will be among
them, to prevent authorities from claiming that the demonstration (in the persons
of those arrested) exclusively involved bohemians, radicals and nutters.
Starting out under the aegis of John Crowe Ransom and Allen
Tate, Lowell lightened up under the influence of poets unlike himself –the younger
Ginsberg, the older Williams –and generated a freer poetry, so-called raw poetry.
Life Studies was the turning point; deservedly, it is one of the most
influential poetry books since the war. Some of his best poems, however, are
contained in Lord Weary Castle, and
all written before he was thirty. If you think I am exaggerating, take another
look at “The Quaker Graveyard in Nantucket” and “Mr Edwards and the Spider”.
I have two books by Gary Snyder, Regarding Wave and Earth
House Hold, the latter a precursor of what we would call today green attitudes
and green writing, and an argument for a synthesis of the wisdom of both East
and West in order to arrive at a ‘totally integrated world culture’. Nearly
forty years on, globalization has arrived, integrating us all in a terrifying
vicious circle at the heart of which climate change is worsening and all the
models of capitalism on offer increasing the gap between the haves and the have
nots, a bermuda triangle into which the finite resources of a battered and
plundered planet are pouring –uncontrolled, wasted, contaminated. He saw it
coming.
The Viennese-born Londoner Erich Fried was a harsh, powerful
and astute poetic commentator on the daily insults and injustices to common
decency and historical truth that regularly turn up in the press and from the
mouths of government spokesmen. His poems are laser-tipped (or taser lipped)
attacks on the enemy. Fried, translated by George Rapp, is often formulaic,
reminding me of Guillevic and other prolific and fluent poets with acute powers
of condensed observation:
“Answer”
Someone
Came to stones
and said
Be human
The stones replied:
We are not
Hard enough
yet
When working on my anthology
Voices in the Ark it became
obvious that it was easier to define a Jewish poet than a Jewish poem: for our
purposes a Jewish poet was not defined in strict religious terms but someone
who said they were Jewish or, if one could still asked them, would say they
were. Pasternak, we decided, would not have wanted to be in the anthology, whereas
Mandelstam would. Joseph Brodsky agree to be in, so did Bob Dylan, except his
agent asked for too much money.
“The Jewish Time Bomb”
On my desk is a piece of stone engraved amen,
one survivor of the thousands and thousands of fragments
from
graves
in Jewish cemeteries. And I know that all the shards
are filling up the biggest Jewish time bomb
together with other splinters, fragments from the Tables of
the Law,
filling it with broken alters and crosses, rusty crucifix
nails,
and broken bone, broken holy vessels, broken houseware,
and shoes, glasses, artificial limbs, dentures,
and empty canisters or lethal poison: all these
are filling up the Jewish time bomb until the end of days.
And even though I know about these things and about the end
of
days,
this stone on my desk gives me tranquility.
It is a stone of truth left to its own devices,
wiser than any philosopher’s stone, a stone from a fractured
grave
and this stone is absolutely perfect,
this stone testifies to all the things that ever existed
and all the things that will exist forever, an Amen and
love.
Amen, amen and may this be His will.
Yehuda Amichai (his
final poem, translated by Miriam Neiger-Fleischmann and Anthony Rudolf)
* Sadly, you cannot insure against silence but it is certain that it should not be described as writer's block, that vulgar psychologism pulling down an iron curtain between art and life." Nothing ever halts the essential exercise of the composer in me . . .I live in a permanent dream which never ceases day or night'- Georg Enescu.
ReplyDelete