Okay,
Eagleton, so you think Porphyria’s Lover isn’t about a giraffe, do you?
I take that as a challenge, sir! Here’s how it happened. Porphyria
invented a transfiguration beam to turn giraffes into chimpanzees. She
tested it on a giraffe and he turned into a chimpanzee, whom she named
“Lover”. She tried to teach Lover about religion, but giraffes and
chimpanzees are both naturally curious, and Lover, who already secretly
detested the woman who took his giraffe-ness from him, decided to test
whether God was real by seeing if it was impossible to strangle
Porphyria without divine intervention preventing it. So Lover tried it
and voila, dead Porphyria. Then the murderous giraffe-ape bastard hung
out for a while before running away to eat some leaves. QED.
I
can do that because Death of the Author. We’re not beholden to the
poet’s original vision. Once it’s out there, it’s out there, and any
interpretation is valid as long as it can be backed up by textual
evidence. I realize that Robert Browning didn’t write it with giraffes
and chimpanzees in mind, but that doesn’t matter. A poem can be
interpreted to fit into whatever context you like. It just takes a
little creativity.
Okay,
yes, I do also realize that Eagleton’s point is more that the text has
inherent meaning to it, as opposed to it being completely subjective.
It’s fair to argue that some interpretations make more sense than
others. And his concession that a secretive group of English professors
could use “syrup” as a code word to conceal their feelings on
historicism from their colleagues does, admittedly, prove he does not
lack the necessary imagination. So I can’t say I strongly disagree with him here. Only a little bit, I guess.
I
smiled at the Cloud-Cuckoo-Land reference in Jarrell’s poem. I hang out
on the TV Tropes Wiki a lot, and over there we have a trope we call
“Cloudcuckoolander” to refer to characters like Luna Lovegood or Pinkie
Pie who seem like they have their brains in a different universe all the
time. That being said, “North” is definitely not a poem I’d expect to
see from Pinkie Pie. Gloom gloom gloom. Just throw a party or something
and it’ll all be fine, no need to go worrying about everything all the
time.
On the Roethke, I see “The Pit” as one of the riddles you’d find in a Redwall
novel. Like the heroes are looking for the lost staff of Martin the
Warrior or something, and they find this clue that tells them to look
under the tree roots, and talk to the mole who lives there, but watch
out for the evil, uh, snails, and their leader, Mother Mildew, a giant,
uh, giant snail, yeah, that actually totally works. I’d read that book.
See, Eagleton, I can interpret it however I like. They had talking
riddle-solving animals back whenever this poem was written, right?
Also,
Sylvia Plath’s daddy is a Nazi vampire? That’s pretty messed up. If my
dad were a Nazi vampire, I mean, I can’t even imagine. Oh, wait, this is
one of those figurative things, isn’t it? So who is she talking about,
then? Her literal father? Or is “daddy” supposed to be a metaphor
for...uh...something? Actually, I could probably see it going either
way. You could have your Nazis being written about as “daddy” or your
father being written about as “Nazis” and end up with reasonably similar
poems. I’m leaning towards Nazis. But I’m sure there’s a good name for a
rock band in there somewhere. Oh, and the tulip poem is okay too, but I
don’t have much to say about it.
Regarding the Berryman: Inner Resources, ha, that’s a good line. I can just imagine how that
goes. “Mom, I’m bored.” “Johnny, haven’t I told you that saying you’re
bored is only confessing you have no Inner Resources?” “...Mom, I have
no Inner Resources.” That droll acceptance of the implications —
brilliant. I like it. Also, what is chicken paprika? Never heard of that
before. I know what chicken is, and I know what paprika is, and I’m
guessing chicken paprika is either chicken-flavored paprika (?!) or
chicken spiced with paprika (that’s probably more likely). And who
exactly is this Henry person? Henry Ford? John Henry, the steel-driving
man? Henry Kissinger? King Henry V? Just some random guy named Henry?
Just some random girl
named Henry (or I guess Henrietta)? The poetry takes on different
meanings for all of these. I kind of like the Henry Kissinger version.
Then
we’ve got some “Deep Image” styles of poems, which are supposed to
focus on powerful imagery and narrative. I can indeed see some of that
in Kinwell’s “On the Oregon Coast”. We can see the first few lines of
the poem dedicated just to describing the waves breaking against the
shore and sweeping a log across the beach. He uses both visual and audio
details — “pewtery sheen on the water” alongside “bass rumble of sea
stones”. And the narrative element appears both in the pseudo-narrative
of the floating log and the meta-narrative of a conversation about
evolution. Would I see these things if I weren’t being prompted to look
for them? Well, in this case, probably, yeah. Seems like sort of the
point of the poem. But even with the background info, interrupting with
that anecdote seems oddly out of place. Essentially the only segue is
“Since I’m talking about a beach, let me tell you this story of this one
time I talked to this one guy and, oh, there was also a beach nearby.
(Is that a coincidence or what!)”
“Lying
in a Hammock at William Duffy’s Farm” is the first poem today to make
me put it down, sit back, and wonder what the hell I just read. “I have
wasted my life.” Woah. What. Huh. What happened to the bronze
butterflies, the chicken hawks, the fields of sunlight? Why is life
wasted? That’s a curveball if I ever saw one. On reflection, I think the
speaker means that he wasted his life not
doing this. Like, “I can’t believe I ever worked all day in the city
when I could have been lying in a hammock at William Duffy’s farm!”
That’s my best interpretation. Either way, it’s a jarring last line that
feels like it comes out of nowhere. I was surprised. Oh, and again,
deep imagery — this poem does do a lot of image-painting for the reader,
with, again, bronze butterflies, fields of sunlight, et al.
And
“A Blessing” clearly has the narrative going. Breaking into a horse
pasture, basically. Uh...that’s fine, I guess, if you’re into that kind
of thing. I’m not really into horses. Pinkie Pie notwithstanding.
No comments:
Post a Comment