Pieces of Air in the Epic by BRENDA HILLMAN

Wesleyan University Press

2005

Reviewed by JEN TYNES

 

Note: Read Jen Tynes’ Interview with Brenda Hillman here.

 

 

Brenda Hillman has me thinking about the long poem. I appreciate speedy discoveries, but I am invested in the big project. The story is extended indefinitely, until through extension we become aware of its finity. It repeats itself and returns to new things. It eventually reveals its body in a meaningful way, strategy and realization of strategy for being part of the world. Brenda Hillman’s Pieces of Air in the Epic says that it “is the second book of a tetrology that takes the elements – earth, air, water, fire – as its subject.”  Both books contain discrete poems and poem-series, but they read into each other, function as continuations.

In both books, Hillman seems to track the human necessity to define and name by process of elimination: we recognize a valley because of the mountain beside it, a gust of wind because of the papers it invisibly moves. We figure out what a story is by tinkering with its parts. Wendell Berry writes, “It is the thought of not writing poetry down that returns us to its mnemonic (its musical) form.” In Pieces of Air in the Epic, Hillman reviews and questions and tinkers with a history of poetry: poetry as song, poetry before it was written down, poetry as mode for telling the epic, the hero story. The narrative is lyricism and vice versa. The first poem in the collection, “Street Corner,” ends:

 

We could have said

song outlasts poetry, words

are breath bricks to

support the guardless singing

project. We could have

meant song outlasts poetry.

 

These poems exist in the good tension of Poem; they resist being removed from the page and they resist being stuck to it. Often they make sounds: onomatopoeia and puns. When poems say -eee or ch-chch, they are usually mimicking the natural world, the animals. Sometimes, however, they reside in more ominous spaces: they tilllllt (“Enron Executives Take the 5th”) or float “over e-e-e-each/ Exploded body into third forever/ News briefs with short particulars” (“Nine Untitled Epyllions”), and the repetition is mock, scary, a hole. Sometimes the fullness of sounds can only be understood through the page. “Near Stations” ends:

 

blossoms fall diagonally between

history and an endish

time. Crumble, horror; a

thought star, having thrown

throne thrown itself down

swallows the minus sign—

 

The physical shape of poems also leads us back to sound. In “Air in the Epic,” columns sometimes bleed into one another, suggesting a chorus, an uneven mind. Form reflects content: the poem deals with focus, attention, main lines of questioning. In “Green Pants & A Bamboo Flute,” four columns or blocks of text contain fragments of narrative and suggest alternate readings, “like a three-part song.” The reader feels like the reader of a play (for which there are many parts and only one author); thinking about the voices is more realistic than “doing” them. “If the flute cannot be found/ Its breath is still in you.”

[On the “backs” of poems, between titled pieces, there are some short, fragile pieces that seem to go “off-book,” break out of form, although there is no overwhelming convention for them to break. Some of these poems appear in brackets; others might as well, as they are asides, incompleted, prayers. They seem small; in my mind the font is smaller and there is no capitalization, though when I look back at the book I see I’ve misremembered that. Urgent, a whole blank space of page before them: they get your attention.]

Near the end of the book is a series of poems in and about libraries, specifically about the smells and sounds of libraries, the ways that people exist alongside paper. From “Dust Acolytes”:

 

Who     has   come?         What ironfoot  iliad

     girl approaches     the PS’s,     her weathers

            locked          in gray flame?             A steep

scent     sends    energy back            through the

fate myth.          Readers walk   mazedly    carrying

      your book~~          Did you            love paper

more than people?          Perhaps    its healing

 

These poems are double-spaced and spread out, not spread thin but intimating, each word highlighted against a base of quiet. The titles are cushioned in sets of colons; they are both sturdy and fluttered. In “Dust Dialectical”:

                         

Dust comes from    galaxies,

            each mote         bent  at the waist

                        like a poetry translator,  slight  train-

                 trace   of sleeper breath, horizon   hair

            a flame   of doubt.     In evening

           

The shapes of these poems become and disappear into their meaning, but they are also self-conscious: as written works, as poems. They are aware of the limits of language, but more importantly they are aware of the limits acquired by language: “(loosatic/ is the word/ needed here but Microsoft/ has rejected it)” and “Saw the exhalation of an ‘enemy’” and “How does one write when the laws that limit power have failed.” The book begins with two quotes (one is from The Odyssey) about spinning and weaving: weaving stories, spinning tales. In a 2003 interview, Brenda Hillman says that making a poem is like "knitting a sweater and someone is unraveling it on the other end." Alongside the singers, there are seamstresses and textiles in these poems. From “Nine Untitled Epyllions”:

    

Haunted by the

need to work, blinded

by cloth, I take

my needle through gates

of ivory and gates

of horn, I sew,

I push the little

bright thing on through—

 

Hillman’s artists and artisans draw the connection between breath and making, practice and being. “String Theory Sutra” begins:

 

There are so many types of

personal” in poetry. The “I” is   a needle some find useful, though

the thread, of course, is shadow.

In writing of experience or beauty,           a cloth emerges as if made

from a twin existence. It’s July

4: air is full of mistaken               stars & the wiggly half-zeroes stripes

make when folded into fabric meant

never to touch the ground again—

 

and goes on to say “By its I/ mean our, for we would become/ what we made.” As Pieces of Air in the Epic sends me back to Cascadia with more sophisticated ideas about how the forms of those poems render earthshapes, so do the threads at the end of this book send me back to the beginning of it, revisiting what it means to separate a craftmaker from their craft, a shape from its place, a narrative from its convention. The stories and the songs are not divisible, but by testing and tinkering with them, Hillman begins to expose the greater map of their system. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sundays on the Phone by MARK RUDMAN

Wesleyan University Press

2005

Reviewed by CYNTHIA ARRIEU-KING

 

 

Following the tradition of dialogue poetry, Mark Rudman’s ninth book of poetry, Sundays on the Phone delves into a store of actual and personal memories he has of his mother Marjorie. The longing to somehow re-visit, re-enact, rearrange order in what seems a tumultuous and passionate mother son relationship powers the book. Rudman reminds the reader of the novelistic possibilities for poetry, that its scope can reach out to situation, prose that is not the symbol laden prose poetry we’ve grown so used to but that recounts parts of a life. The dramatized anecdote and its attendant, subtly transforming texture move past the reader under the guise of reality. That unpretentious, direct delivery allows the awful emotions that can radiate only from parents to encroach and punish the reader rather than to fall maudlin. Not easy to pull off at this late date. (Albert Goldbarth and David Kirby in the generous candor and off-handedness of these poems.)

A lyric memoir, the jacket offers, Sundays on the Phone moves through four sections of spare and cut dialogue poetry interspersed with prose poems and long sectioned poems of varied lineation. Voices talking to one another in the blank silence of the page, that is what Rudman’s apparent habit of having talked to his mother every Sunday morning at 10:47 AM for years becomes for him in poetry. Starting in “Nowhere Water” Rudman sketches out for us the pattern of his vantage or eye – it travels from the familiar “immense dining room” out into the “desert …vast and empty” so that wide flat, un-peopled landscapes far from Las Vegas (in that particular poem) seem to sketch out open and frighteningly limitless psychological spaces.

The first poem of the first section—titled “Kid’s Stuff”—explores childhood from the vantage of the parent. Rudman goes on to draw airy problematic spaces so they can be later contrasted with the personal as in “Back Stairwell”:

 

Like a rustle of eternity

Shattered in the vista of receding

 

Clouds, antennae, water towers…

And I think we are not far from ecstasy

 

Even in the interior. (3)

 

This more abstract texture serves as a good backdrop in which Rudman can establish his more mystical and lyrical authority, and which helps him move to his own childhood, to the strange establishment of generic figures of adulthood – Marjorie’s husbands, quickly drawn, grouped, named. Soon the plainest detail from life in its own generic quality equates itself with tenderness, heightening the presence of that ominous mother, Medea in “Cutting Edge Production: Medea” and Marjorie’s potential for rage.  Having established that sense of unpredictability in the figure of a mother, Rudman gets back to his large open terrains again, yet these aren’t delineated by the physical world but by the dialogue between himself and his mother, their squabbles in the movie theater (“How Bad Can it Get”), the tedious quibbling about her gourmet cooking and Rudman’s own son’s limited palate “Sole Responsibility”. The nagged and nagging rigmarole of trying to explain something to a stubborn parent is perfectly captured, held on its angry terrain with few moments of peace or transcendence for most of the middle of the book.

Interspersed with these narratives that search for explanations of why this second husband for the mother, why that move back to Salt Lake City is the mother’s voice. Often her uncannily familiar and personal observations, including syncopated Jewish exclamations, are made into a kind of burning lead by being spoken from the beyond:

 

“You couldn’t control me when I was alive and now that I’m alive

in another way you have even less power over me.

 

You are sitting in that damned dentist’s chair 37 stories high over

Manhattan and you had to move your tongue while he was drilling –

Don’t interrupt—” (12)

 

(“Approach of the High Holy Days”)

 

Anyone who has lost someone close might have a strange and instant mix of relief, lightheartedness – oh yeah, I know that voice, the voice that continues – and feel a deep pang about the life in it. Rudman takes us deeper and deeper into varieties of this kind of conversation; she complains how her bones hurt now that they’re ashes and teases him with her knowledge of the term from his area of expertise, simulacra: “You smile Mark. /The dead read their Baudrillard.” (“The Birthday Call”). These moments all underline the way the poet struggles to process the mother’s dominating presence, ignited by flinty insecurity and fueled with huge indignation, even long after she’s gone. How can one deal with the unresolved conversation, and un-resolvable fallout? The dialogue poem allows us to move from the strange outlying regions of supposition and its atmosphere of rarified bravado into the real, and shocking anger of, say, “Late Lunch”. In it the speaker and son show up almost an hour late for a lunch the mother has cooked and as soon as they’re in the door:

 

“Oh why don’t you just go fuck yourself.

 

Why don’t you just get the fuck out of here and go back to New York City you shit, you little shit.”

 

Oh my god. (86).

 

This poem’s wanderings into bald narrative permit Rudman the kind explicit summation and revelation that earlier landscapes of the book wouldn’t have supported. The result seems purgative. Most of the rest of the book ramps these dialogues into the lyrical and the transcendent without truly detaching from the live report of a human voice. The rarified and the real dissolve and resolve their boundaries, as in “The Albuquerque Interventions” that allow Rudman to hear his mother say:

 

“I told you.

 

I knew if I could go

Further than I could go I would know

What lies on

Solitudes’ other side.”

 

And Rudman replies:

 

“You may have told me.

           

(Pause.)

 

I didn’t know, I don’t know.

But somehow you’ve erased

All the good times.” (119)

 

A great counterpoint to this almost excruciatingly vivid mother is the usually mute grandson, Rudman’s child Sam. Almost by the strength of his adolescent inscrutability, the child foils or attracts his grandmother’s ire, revealing its selfishness, and his own imperviousness, something the reader almost wishes the raw speaker could embody as well. He’s like a blank rock in a hoodie at times, eating only his steak and noodles to his grandmother’s chagrin, a boy who would like vegetables if only she’d raised him (?). And so he models his own brand of resistance to change, like the mother, and cleverly, one she can’t always get her hooks into, though she does embarrass and anger him at times. Sam becomes the traveling, valued pawn that always turns up in dysfunctional triangulated relationships, the one which provides examples for good or for bad, depending on who’s doing the talking:

 

She’s back.

 

“So, no bar mitzvah for you Sam, huh?”

 

(He smiles.)

 

“I don’t think so.”

 

“Well, it’s too bad that your parents didn’t (as if I’m not in the room) give you some religion.”

 

(Red-faced).

 

The ambiguity of Rudman’s quasi-stage directions give the dialogues a kind of weaving, ungrounded quality. Is the mother red-faced? Is the boy? The boy, the reader decides. And as one moves through more and more expanses of dialogue, one finds one’s self picking out what part is the mother’s, what part Rudman’s, almost being moved to sketch the names in the margin. This blurring of the identities lets Rudman say why it is so hard to deal with one’s parent: it is hard to deal with someone whose faults are so familiar and, one hates to think, possibly like one’s own. Clearly Marjorie is not always rational, and Rudman maintains a kind of un-cool posture in relation that irrationality.

 

Rudman takes the poetic focus off style, surface, cleverness, and steeper ravines of syntactic invention to pay tribute to what his mother meant, set as they are in a clear and ingenious set of contexts: dialogue, narrative, prose, not to mention specificity and reflective summation. The ins and outs of story matter here: guilt, the mundane, the burden of caring for children and caring for parents, cities, meals. In “Late Lunch” he seems to reveal what piece of sand has been wearing on him, both causing him to remember and sometimes despise that determined woman. The reader can hear the volume summed up this way:

 

My mother didn’t manage my life, but she curtailed the satisfaction I took from my life.

 

Had all this not been so bitter, I could have grieved.

I could have written a lachrymose elegy. (89)

___

 

I don’t think she has a moment when she isn’t thinking about herself.

I’ve known thousands of people, never anyone like her. (91)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Like Wind Loves a Window by ANDREA BAKER

Slope Editions

2005

Reviewed by BRIDGET CROSS

 

 

As if a point of interest could be found where in place we are dilated with craving. I put a model of the drink in the model of the cupboard that represents the one in the real room. Try to understand behavior like our own.

 

We do understand this behavior: the poet’s attempt to gaze inward trumped by the need to make a model of all that must be looked at and consumed en route. Andrea Baker’s Like Wind Loves a Window encompasses that distraction in 56 sound yet scattershot pages—a prose-poem preface and three sections titled “gilda,” “bird,” and “body,”—and reading it is not unlike trying to write a poem: the fight to move through the mind’s noise in hopes of somehow making it back to the self.

Baker watches herself and gets watched in turn so that her efforts at explication are quickly unraveled. While her steady prose spreads through the book’s first section, it intersects eventually with the shifty lines that break through the rest—often only a quick smattering of words to a page, reluctant to offer a foothold: “birds hang / Suspended / Like a bird hangs.” What she means to explain pulls out of her reach so it’s unrecognizable: “pull your face off / from the tattooed face // my broken egg eyes.”

But she finds her fuel in the wild-goose-chase nature of her ideals, and what’s so enjoyable about reading this book is watching that dynamic unfold. She chases down definition and desire, all the while decorating the poems with obstacles. She tinkers in “gilda,” like she means to crack the code of herself but is constantly sidetracked by her own ornamentation. She catches and obsesses on her models, as if to say, This is not the real me, only my reflection: “the former yellow house hung as an ornament from a ceiling / all the cars were all in hiding / but the rooms had nowhere to go // and the center room was surrounded / by other rooms / so it had nowhere to go.” She blockades her senses: “ghost out my sight.” She insists on occupying only the figurative: “make me a bird / things are getting out of control.” (It’s worth noting, too, that the third section contains four poems titled “not a bird,” possibly in frustration: Not a model. Not a mirror. This is actually me.)

In the final section, “body,” Andrea Baker cops to her own devices: “every sight is an instrument / to absorb us.” The

diversions she’s inhabited now act as sustenance, as if her own need to be fed is replaced by that of her loved ones: “I feed you / all my little chairs…I feed you the round empty / spree of your mouth.” It’s a satisfying conclusion in that Baker has in no way renounced her distractions but seems to celebrate them. Once again, we do understand this behavior. It offers some hope about turning chaos into form, harnessing obsession with a poem’s visceral elements, and allowing that obsession finally to feed the poem, the way “the window waits to be fed / one minute more.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Natural History by DAN CHIASSON

Knopf

2005

Reviewed by GIBSON FAY-LEBLANC

 

 

If this review were written in the style of a Dan Chiasson poem, it might begin with the immortal words of Robert Frost, or Chiasson’s rendition of them: “I’m delighted with Dan’s poems, particularly the one that quotes me.” You see, Chiasson likes to assume other voices and doubly likes to talk to or about himself in those voices. The poem “Randall Jarrell” begins, “I’ve never written in a way that really pleases Dan”; another, in the voice of Horace, is titled “To Dan Chiasson Concerning Fortune.” While this is definitely a strange sort of navel-gazing, it’s also a funny and strangely effective part of the sad, fanciful world Chiasson creates in his second book. 

In Chiassonland, which is “a little true, for verification’s sake,” you hear the channeled voices and stories of figures like Gorky, Raleigh, and Shakespeare, not to mention Frost, Jarrell, and Horace; you are captivated by a heartbreaking elephant named Frederick or by Pliny himself, whose voluminous encyclopedia of natural science is the touchstone for the long title sequence. I don’t want to mislead, however, for the poet’s own voice is an unmistakable part of this world as well.

In fact, Chiasson’s own voice is often at its sharpest when riffing on someone else. The short poem that begins “as if regret were in it and were sacred,” a line from Frost’s “West-Running Brook,” ends this way:

 

Once was a mindful current: now leaden, still;

it is ourselves we most resemble, now. Now

 

the maples that had been nowhere gather. When

we look down what we look down on is our own.

 

That last sentence haunts the poem. It’s both a nod to Frost’s use of one-syllable words and completely Chiasson’s own. It sounds clear, but what exactly does it mean? We’re left to wonder.

Chiasson works in more modes and touches on more subjects than I can do justice to in a small space. What holds his collection together though has to do with how well-crafted the poems are and with their careful balance of humor and pathos—perhaps best exemplified by the poet-elephant who reappears in several of the poems.

Formally speaking, I’m sure some readers will be annoyed by Chiasson’s preference for well-groomed couplets and tercets—this is not a poet who shows any desire to crack his lines and gallop across the page. So what. If he can write this well, with deft slant rhymes and surprising leaps of thought and image and rhythm, let him write his neat stanzas until he’s 90. 

As for the elephant, we are told he “got drunk at the department party / and showed off that photograph of my anus” and also that, when the “ax struck, it was / so warm at first… / … I had a mouthful of dirt.” In so many of these poems and series of poems, it is that ass photo that helps make us see and feel how this world (Chiasson’s and ours) is “a wheelbarrow” that “hauls shit and dirt and hay.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My Kafka Century by ARIELLE GREENBERG

Action Books

2005

Reviewed by PENELOPE CRAY

 

 

What shall we wish for someone beset by history, plagued by too much information, by remembering? Courage? Wisdom? Oblivion? In her profitably dense second collection, My Kafka Century, Arielle Greenberg proceeds by making such wishes for anyone overwhelmed by what they know, offering, on the one hand, an existence “codeless, happy,” “sublimely plotless,” and, on the other, a desire to face G-d directly, to “get to know His middle dash up close.” While the collection shoots from a mostly postmodern hip, its bullets are neither ironic nor ambivalent in their aim, lodging deep in the heart of each poem’s experiment. Marriage, genocide, family, God, baseball, and fairy tales drive Greenberg’s poems, which variously attempt to evade, confront, and cajole these realties into loosening their grip on us. In “Joke,” for example, the speaker counsels:

 

If we are not eaten, then we become hungry, and we eat.

In the meantime, why not have a little good conversation to help the food settle? A little showtune for old time’s sake?

 

Yet Greenberg demonstrates that humor too “has its own bad history,” and, so burdened, sees suffering all around—even the park bench on which the two Jews in “Joke” sit “want(s) to die an interior death,” wants, in other words, to forget. “At the Cinema Lecture” elaborates this desire to get away from a part of the self, suggesting “<We need to get beyond the body because it’s all theory, theory, theory.>” And yet it is the body, our physical self, site of trauma and contact for memory, that allows equations to be made between ourselves and other things. The folding table in “Ok Hurricane” that declares, “I have the most rickety legs now, four of them. / But to call you Mom sounds weird in my mouth” becomes a later speaker’s concern: “Do I still remember the table, its wobbling limbs, my language locked inside?” (Other visual equivalents invite connections between this table and a crawling infant’s body, as well as a woman who, ravaged on “hands and knees, all fours, bad dog” leaves her body long enough to note “This is also a good position for birthing a child.”)

What does a violent history beget if not new ways to survive? Ultimately, Greenberg’s second collection is not only “another book about genocide / and my body” but is also about how those who went before remain in the ones who come after: “We could be anyone. / Under the bed, we are anyone. / Any genocide we’ve mentioned.” Equally so, “Some people, unnamed, do die in a plane crash. / Some young couple, my age, your age,”—if not genocide, then some other random or premeditated violence might take us. Greenberg’s poems make wishes for us all.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Thorn by DAVID LARSEN

Faux Press

2005

Reviewed by MICHAEL SCHARF

 

 

Larsen is the creator of such sui generis figures as The Crypt Tickler, a kind of Janus-faced over-modernist shade arising from the witch’s brew of foehn-fomented ideas and virulent poetic superstitions. He literally draws such characters and then puts the most surprising, sometimes shockingly beautiful things into their mouths. (See The Crypt Tickler here.) It’s graphic poetry. Gary Sullivan does it too, and, somewhat differently but no less captivatingly, Jim Behrle.

Larsen also was, for a run of months or more, the guest blogger at Alli Warren’s The Ingredient, where he (like she) was a must-read. The David Larsen blog that has the tag “Giving Thanks in All Circumstances” is not by the author of The Thorn, which carries on its back cover the following epigraph: “EASY TO READ / HARD TO BEAT / AND ROUGH ON/ THE CORONA / THIS TEXT / ANTICIPATES YOUR RESISTANCE / AND OFFERS IT / A MEAT-EATING / FLOWER.” Things get more complicated from there.

“The Thorn,” you’ll remember, is a Wordsworth poem about a gnarly thing, “a wretched thing forlorn,” ostensibly a tree but also a broken promise. The results of that broken promise include a child’s death, a woman’s ruined life—one that has driven her into acute abjection—and a deceptive, menacing landscape, all of which the speaker of the poem tries to reckon. The speaker of this book, who is consistent even as he commands and controls information and vocables from a variety of sources, does a very similar thing: He gives an account of the abjection . . . not quite of himself but of the person who is ordering him to be made and of the context that contains and, in some sense, produces his abjection and of the general menace that surrounds him. His eventual provisional, asymptotic, neo-Bukowskian resolution is part of what makes the book great.

A recent review noted that “[a]bjection, here, is a close cousin to violence, and both are directly linked to emotional cowardice—often in others. In a cumulative manner impossible to quote, the speaker doggedly tracks that cowardice at various levels of representation and relationship: from what roommates say to what Osama bin Laden does, from the words of ‘The Diviner Satih’ to all of Phoenix.”

To expand on that a little: There is a series of poems, each titled “OH GREAT,” that goes very far in describing with a kind of deliberately contained agitation what it is like to be in a fugue state, in the grip of an unnamed “it,” only to have that “it,” along with the series, get truncated unresolvedly—in this case by a page break—to a badly reproduced graphic of a Nuremberg stained-glass window, which seems as random as the things that, without our realizing it in the moment, blessedly take one out of oneself when it’s most needed, when (as one poem says) one is “intensely haunted by it,” even if only temporarily.

Larsen also manages to convey a great deal of the absurdity and pathos and circumstances surrounding real deaths related to the War on Terror, in the figure of “The Pancake Vendor,” who falls victim to Osama bin Laden in a manner that lets no one off the hook. The prose poem “The Diviner Satih” is, over the course of a few pages, an amazing send-up of zealotry and Western fetishism of zealotry, and at the same time a poem that takes attachment to ideas very seriously.

There’s a poem that claims to be, in all caps, about EKPHRASIS, one that says it’s about FIFTY PIZZAS, and another that claims COUNTRY CRACK as its subject. The LETTER TO JORDAN, for instance, describes the San Francisco winter weather to a New Yorker with a kind of exasperation and harsh delicacy just right for the former cold warm place.

All of these things circle abjection and its negation, which I think is something like expression, or expressivity, until the book finally bursts into handwritten “WILD SPEECH,” near its end, “ ‘I LIKE TO PARTY/ AND GET WASTED,’ LARSEN SAID, / ‘AND SMOKE AND BONE AND BONE AND FUCK / AND GET FUCKED ALL NIGHT LONG / AND THEN ILL HAVE A CAESAR SALAD.’ ” One believes him. The framing, too.

You see why I have avoided quoting until now the kind of direct statement that runs through the book. Other parts are much more baroque. They’re beautiful but equally impossible to excerpt, because they, like the above, require the book’s force field.

The thing about all of this is that it’s only some of what Larsen does. But the Caesar salad, with its spiny anchovies and its stripped-down classicism, is what one craves sometimes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pretty Young Thing by DANIELLE PAFUNDA        

Soft Skull Press

2005

Reviewed by THOMAS HUMMEL

 

 

The sordid and shifting monologues—utterances? testimonies?—that make up Danielle Pafunda’s debut collection Pretty Young Thing are, at their best, showcases of how rhythmic tension (now clipped, now discursive) paired with syntactical structures that unfurl over the periods (“The fireworks were loused up. // On a lone walk around the park. Counterclockwise or poorly executed.”) can enact the fractured yet searching psychology of a speaker. Pafunda’s speaker is staking a claim to herself, histrionics of (for) herself in all her forms: “Even my breakage. In the closet, I shook the vehicle. In the / back of the closet, I examined my own fur.” Which is not to imply solipsism—in fact, these poems read as evidence, proof, even primers for developing an identity in a landscape littered with sardine cans and bullet holes. Here, the poet’s commitment to a harsh, direct, spoken English is what propels the accrual and construction of a self. Count the monosyllables—it’s verbosity without varnish as the speaker shifts from desire to infuriation and all between. Hers is a voice that is decidedly a product of both our daily language and the cultural moment that gives rise to it, for example:

 

Took my hand off the handlebars. Took my hand off the suitcase.

Took my hands out of my pockets and they were the white pages

of a new diary. A stolen diary, and ready to chuck in the snow.

 

And, similarly:

 

The town was Dutch but the people were Republicans.

At night, we stood perilously close to the trains

and the trains were just the kind of men we’d read about.

 

These predominantly untitled poems both embrace and resist existing as sonnets, a choice that, when coupled with the speaker’s cognitive and temporal leaps, further complicates our expectations. Instead of using a formal constraint to ground us, she lets the sonnet and its effects haunt the telling. Each poem hinges on what comes next, yet each resists establishing a systematic pattern. As the speaker relays her disparate instances, we have to follow her, assert with her the vagaries of an existence.

Beyond Pafunda’s formal prowess, her ability to invoke figures intimately familiar with crises of identity—whether emotional, political, sexual, criminal—adds a subtle perspective to the work. One can’t help but recall Akhmatova’s “Why did you poison the water / And mix dirt with my bread,” when we read, “Wherein pearls are like worms, and / the stories about pogrom end in a bird’s wing. Wherein the gingerbread, / rife with buckshot, worn with larvae.” Or, in “Salon,” how Herculine Barbin, the 19th-century hermaphrodite whose memoirs were unearthed from the French Department of Public Hygiene by Michel Foucault, becomes an object of admiration in one of the book’s most memorable stanzas:

 

A suitor. At the doctor’s. We talked about the lovely

Herculine, as if we weren’t ourselves girls about to find out

that we were actually boys finding out that we were still

a little bit girl. Infernally. We weren’t ourselves the governess,

dreaming herself the renegade, tied to the tracks, untying herself

from the tracks, riding to safety, frothing as the horse does.

 

Even Lady Macbeth appears: “out of my mouth. Out. I had the rush rinsed out of me. Out.”    

 

If there is one overarching criticism it is a matter of length. The strengths of this collection are the direct results of its ability to surprise, to excite by illuminating its (often jilted) relationships between intent and action, desire and resignation, and for that reason fewer poems might only heighten the overall effect. That said, Pretty Young Thing is a book that offers more of itself with every reading. One can even admire the ways in which the first and last lines of Danielle Pafunda’s fierce and intelligent debut frame the collection and offer hints of the range, cadences, and intimacy within:

 

I saved part of the infection in a small plastic bag. A grievance.

 

At the end of Oklahoma, only the haystack was burning. The surrey.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Crush by RICHARD SIKEN

Yale University Press

2005

Reviewed by SAMUEL AMADON

 

 

Richard Siken’s Crush, chosen by Louise Glück for the Yale Series of Younger Poets, is a collection of 21 poems printed in a semi-square book that’s small enough to fit in your mouth. Crush begins with “Scheherazade,” an apt title for a poem that tempts the reader with an unfinished story. Imagery from “Scheherazade” will recur often, like water and light, which appear—“Tell me about the dream where we pull the bodies out of the lake”; “Look at the light through the windowpane. That means it’s noon, that means / we’re inconsolable”—and return later—“A man takes his sadness down to the river and throws it in the river / but then he’s still left / with the river”; “The light is no mystery, / the mystery is that there is something to keep the light / from passing through.”

One method Siken uses to control the discursiveness of his poems is to repeat, or vary slightly, the beginnings of sentences and phrases. In the 14 lines of “Scheherazade,” he uses “Tell me” three times and “That means” twice, as well as “It’s not,” “it’s more,” “How it,” and “how we.” Violence is only hinted at with the early line, “it’s more like a song on a policeman’s radio,” but the reader soon enters a world that’s armed with poison, a handgun, a bottle of pills, a lug wrench, a whip, a hacksaw, bullets, bandages, broken glass, and a buck knife. Reading Crush feels a bit like watching a bar fight between Walt Whitman and David Lynch, which is just to say its obsessions are sized more for the drive-in than the bookshelf.

Formally, the majority of the poems sprawl across the page in a Leaves of Grassesque hyper-long line. There are no traditional stanza forms, though a few poems like “Unfinished Duet” and “Saying Your Names” are in columns of five-beat lines. “You Are Jeff,” a 24-section prose poem, is a bit exhausting but, for the most part, the book maintains speed with lines like these from the end of “Wishbone”:

 

Do you know how it ends? Do you feel lucky? Do you want to go home

now? There’s a bottle of whisky in the trunk of the Chevy and a

            dead man at our feet

staring up at us like we’re something interesting. This where the evening

splits in half, Henry, love or death. Grab an end, pull hard,

            and make a wish.

 

When a poet’s voice is as fresh as Siken’s, one wonders What is he going to do with it? To answer, try reading Crush aloud. Notice how the book tries to shove itself down your throat? That’s because it wants to grab hold, to force you to pay attention. That’s because this speaker, like Scheherazade, tells stories to stay alive. This is a rare instance of a poet who wants his work to be as necessary for the reader as it seems to be for the writer. Willingly or not, “We are all going forward. None of us are going back.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Last Clear Narrative by RACHEL ZUCKER

Wesleyan University Press

2004

Reviewed by MATTHEW THORBURN

 

 

The difficulty of turning experience into narrative—to render in language not just what life is like, but what life is—hangs like a shadow over this second collection by Rachel Zucker. The poems zero in on major life transitions, including marriage, the physical and emotional transformations of pregnancy, mourning (for a great-aunt, who shares the book’s dedication), and the harrowing experience of a child’s difficult birth. With subject matter that might have trodden the familiar territory of merely confessional writing in a lesser poet’s hands, Zucker breaks stunning new poetic ground while also empathically advancing our understanding of marriage and motherhood.

Though Zucker can strike a self-deprecating, witty, and conversational tone (of a pregnancy test, she writes, “I read the instructions twice and peed on my hand by mistake”), her voice seems to come directly from the mind rather than the mouth. Crackling with jumps and skips from thought to thought, these poems at times break out of stanzas, scattering phrases across the page, or spill into breathless, unpunctuated prose. They leave a fair share of the work to the reader—to make the connections between episodes and utterances and piece together meaning—but this challenge is also one of the poems’ greatest strengths.

Language, Zucker knows, is an approximation. No two people’s experience is quite the same, even when the experience is shared in the same words. The prose poem “Having a Baby, Atom Bomb” begins, “three months later a friend has a baby describes the labor now we have babies we have babies and nothing in common . . .” The realization that each of us has a different take is elaborated, initially with a humorous flourish, in perhaps the collection’s best poem, “In Your Version of Heaven I Am Younger,” in which the speaker struggles to come to grips with the grief of a failed pregnancy through numerous “versions” of what’s happened:

 

In your version of heaven I am blond, thinner,

but not so witty. In the movie version of your version

of heaven you fight God to come back to me.

 

[. . .]

 

Put on the preservers! they announce. They are under your seats!

Time to tell your wife a few last things. People are puking

in the rows around us. The jackets sweaty and too big.

We are, in this version, an image of hope.

The broadcasters are just now sniffing us out.

I am pregnant but don’t know it and can’t know

the fetus would have been, in any event, not viable.

 

In the book’s strongest moments, Zucker cuts through the thicket of multiple, often conflicting narratives of suffering and joy to tell us, with stunning immediacy, what it is to mother a child: “he’s why I will not want to die.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Book of a Hundred Hands by COLE SWENSEN

University of Iowa Press

2005

Reviewed by MATTHEW HENRIKSEN

 

 

In The Book of a Hundred Hands, Cole Swensen catalogues the hand in a predictable sequence of perspectives from various aspects of the human conscious—memory, “The History of the Hand”; experiential, “The Positions of the Hand,” “Professions of the Hand”; functional, “Representations of the Hand,” “The Anatomy of the Hand”; symbolic, “American Sign Language,” “Shadow Puppets,” “A Manual of Gesture: Public Speaking for Gentleman (1879”); and the conceptual, “Paintings of Possible Hands.” Poetry should show us something we don’t already know, but we find mostly research and careful prosody:

 

Assyrian hands were carved of stone.

Egyptian hands were the point of the tale.

The Gothic hand, like no other, launched, while that of the Renaissance,

both early and

late, fragile and breaks, a wave on light. Ghirlandaio had hands of willow,

and every hand

that Dürer ever drew thrived. Most hands are startlingly small, like eyes.

 

(“The History of the Hand”)

 

Swensen’s assertions that the Gothic hand was “like no other, launched” and “every hand / that Dürer drew thrived” garner attention because of the syntactical variations in the passage, but throughout the book, interjections like these usually do no more than tell us what any observer would recognize unaided by the poet. The final sentence of the passage may be acknowledging an intentional “smallness” of observation, but the startling is too obviously crafty for me to appreciate it.

 

Yes, these poems are carried through by a consistent sense of mystery unique to Swenson. When she gives her voice over to the hand, we can almost hear her mind working around the thing:

 

Here the hand is usually bent;

if at the wrist, a chiseled arc         angles to an eventual    middle finger

is another dark

they say

is most often the most often curved. Darkness makes things

turn of their own. I’m sure you’ve seen.

 

(“The Palmar View”)

 

I’d much rather follow Swensen’s voice through such uncertain imaginings than watch her force metaphors to create the tightly wound, ineffectual poetry, as in “Garden,” where she begins:

 

The body is a circle, which comes home in the hands. Move

out and within it

                          are the phyla; orbit these

                                                (and if a sphere)

                                                (this can also be invited)

                                                            to pool in air

 

While the elegance of Swensen’s syntactical and structural delivery entices me, I find no reward in hearing that “[t]he body is a circle.” If intended to describe a yogic practice, then the imagery is too immersed in the practitioner’s experience to enrapt the uninitiated. Rather than enlarging the perspective, however, the poem becomes cryptically didactic: “keep planting the hands in increasing circles.” Though the poem suggests an enlarging consciousness through the outwardly proceeding concentric circles, the repeated circular imagery, rather than providing a contrasting tightening effect, draws our attention to Swensen’s efforts toward at a tidy poem.

 

Some of the best poems occur in the ekphrastic final section, where, as in “The Palmar View,” Swensen’s voice gets almost terrifyingly close to the object:

 

So much for the hills

                        that still their animal time. To geometrize

in long, articulated lines. The hand upon the world

bends down and down and down.

 

—“Norman Bluhm and Frank O’Hara, Hand, 1960”

 

When music, sensual instinct, and urgency overwhelm Swensen’s poetic sensibilities, she sings what fails when said.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Antidotes for an Alibi by AMY KING

BlazeVox

2005

Reviewed by BARRY SCHWABSKY

 

 

A poet appears and suddenly things look different. “How can you see with azure lakes across your eyes?” This question, which begins Amy King’s poem “Drowning Refrain,” concerns, perhaps, the relation between emotion and perception—if those lakes are hyperbolic tears—and it asks for an answer, not just a reaction. Not unlike the question with which Yeats famously ended “Among School Children,” King’s seems on the surface to be the sort commonly called rhetorical—not a true question but a forcefully indirect way of making a statement: Just as you simply can’t tell the dancer from the dance, you simply can’t see with azure lakes across your eyes. But not so fast. The poem’s power is to open up a space in which the question becomes urgent, in which one knows one ought to be able to distinguish dance and dancer but can’t tell how; likewise, King’s reader comes to imagine that it must be possible to see with azure lakes across your eyes—but how in the world do you do it?

    All too many poets opt either on the one hand for some form or other of objectivity, of formal/perceptual perspicuity, or on the other for an overflow of feeling. Not many are as scrupulous is King is in steering their poems through the meanders in which feeling and observation push and pull at each other, nearly indistinguishable in effect, though that is the terrain in which language is most at home. Here, to see something is not only a recognition but an encounter—what Yeats called a “brightening glance.” It makes something happen. As in King’s “The Spirit is Near”: “I like the capability of my eyes, the way they / brighten the woman on the curb by the church. / She will burst alive in two minutes.”

    Invoking Yeats might be seen by some as an evasion of King’s most evident stylistic influence, namely John Ashbery. (The most overt allusion in “Drowning Refrain,” to Stevie Smith, is a one-off.) Like Ashbery, she employs a collagelike accumulation of linguistic detritus, as if every few lines had been extracted almost at random from disparate strata of a culture where banality and vision coexist, yet this aggregate, rather than being presented in its raw state, is always suspended in the unifying medium of what can only be called the music of her ruminations. Although this “Off-Balance Romanticism” (as one of King’s titles would have it) can only have been learned from Ashbery, the older poet’s sibylline equanimity in the face of illusion and disillusion is impossible for the younger one. Her propensity to give way to a “fit of grief or rage” is Yeatsian. She seems always to be working toward a grand statement that inevitably turns against itself. In all earnestness the poems take on “religion, sex, and daily sprawl.”

    That provisional summary of King’s subject matter comes from one of the best poems in Antidotes for an Alibi, the aptly named “Delicate Tasks.” The poem opens with another one of King’s musings on the intertwining of perception and emotion—this time articulated through the sense of hearing rather than sight:

 

The distance of your whisper

becomes the proximity of whispering

as if discovering a loved one

with her telephone lover

speaking in tones.

 

One could speak here of a hermeneutics of jealousy. The fine distinction between a sound (“whisper”) and an activity (“whispering”) comes at the cost of confounding opposite qualities: not knowing whether one’s relation to the beloved is that of distance or proximity. The poise King shows in her insouciant refusal to characterize the “tones” in which the loved one speaks to the unseen “telephone lover” is brilliant. Any tone at all would be false, not because of any desire to deceive but simply because any tone implies an unstated understanding between speaker and listener, which is inherently unstable, even or especially when it seems like playfulness:

 

                        Each party

enjoys using another one’s voice

even when it’s not their own.

 

The sentence’s frazzled syntax reflects the confusion it describes. Borrowing already-borrowed voices is hardly a formula for stable identity.

 

I am among them a pronoun

of loose weight. I envy their density,

anchor their destiny, one thinly drawn

sign of stardust on fire. Outside,

homes press side by side

composing a direct correlation

of religion, sex, and daily sprawl.

 

How a “pronoun of loose weight” could conceivably “anchor their destiny” is hard to imagine—as hard as to understand whose voice has been borrowed when it is already second-hand. And the “envy” that is the product of all this unknowing reproduces itself over and over, a recurrent (and recursive) structure.

Even without following “Delicate Tasks” through to its, as the poem says, “highly qualified” conclusion, it becomes clear its pinpoint emotional accuracy has not been developed at the expense of attention to the sticky, refractory qualities of language as a medium—quite the opposite, the two are as intensely and perhaps as conflictually intertwined as a drowning swimmer and her would-be rescuer. The dialectic can stretch meaning to its limit. Perhaps that’s why Antidotes sometimes seems like a series of excerpts from a bigger, less easily contained, perhaps even endless rumination on basic words, one that crop up often (though not ostentatiously) throughout the book: words like woman, love, God, sex, mother, child, man…. King is a lyric poet who can pack enormous surprises into concentrated doses of, typically, ten to thirty lines, and for that matter some of these poems contain single lines so capacious you almost want to stretch out in them and spend the night, not move on, especially when they’re opening lines like “I’m learning to give disappointment an honesty,” “She was soft and sentence,” or “Light’s residue on my tongue.” Yet the flow from line to enjambed line can be irresistible, with the end of a poem leaving you wondering how you got so far so fast. It’s the force of that movement that makes me wonder what King would do with looser, messier, more open forms. This is a first book of unusual power, but I suspect that King has it in her to succeed on a bigger scale.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Free Again by JOSEPH LEASE

Xantippe 3

2005

Reviewed by THOMAS FINK

 

 

The Oakland-based literary magazine Xantippe included a poetry chapbook by Rachel Zucker in its first issue, and in its third number, it features Joseph Lease’s Free Again.  Lease has authored two full-length collections, The Room (Alef, 1994) and Human Rights (Zoland, 1998, reissued by Jensen/Daniels) and the chapbook My Sister Life (Jensen/Daniels, 2001).  By virtue of the verbal power and dramatic complexity of such long poetic sequences as “Apartment,” “Slivovitz,” “The History of our Death,” and the long poem under consideration, Lease deserves to be regarded as one of our strongest contemporary political/experimental poets.  His work has been praised by the late Robert Creeley, Forrest Gander, Donald Revell, Maria Damon, and various other significant poets and critics.  When Coffee House Press publishes his next book, Broken World, in 2007, my judgment will probably become commonplace.

    In the mean time, Free Again, a 30-page poem in 26 sections (all bearing the chapbook’s title), some entirely in prose-blocks, others in verse, and others in both, is not only Lease’s longest poem but one of his most accomplished.  There are relatively few commas and periods; the dash is the main form of punctuation.  Resemblance to Dickinson is slight, not only because few quatrains appear but because dashes are often used to separate full sentences in paragraphs.

    The tense imagistic prose of the opening section presents the poem’s prime themes, crises in individual subjectivity and the collective ethos during the W. Bush era U.S.:

 

When I can’t sleep I am full of red buds and torn curtains and

shiny cars parked in a lot. My lower-middle class manners tear  

through my upper-middle class manners: I stared at braided         

colors in water while my peers figured out the art of the deal. I  

was (I wanted to be) a Midwestern boy with a disco in my    

eyes—Chicago Jew, greengolden suburb Jew, son of a Coney   

Island Jew. When I drank I got punched up by luminous waves   

of anger. I thought I had to choose between winning in New  

York and being a good person. I’m not a good person: a good    

person doesn’t talk about himself—or so good people tell me.  (36)

 

Like other experimentalists who have learned from seventies and eighties “Language Poetry” but question some of its early proscriptions, Lease utilizes what he has called a “representative” (never universal) “I” to probe social questions.  This “I’s” insomnia seems to be caused by multiple agitation.  Though “red buds” could be a trope of passion and natural vitality, this image’s proximity to “torn curtains” brings out a sense of spiritual bleeding.  Privacy is “torn,” and advertisements for material acquisition (“shiny cars”) stimulate either disquieting, obsessive pangs of greed or equally upsetting distaste, or perhaps both.

    As Lease demonstrates, class conflict can be be fought within a person, the “middle” functioning not as a place of equilibrium but as an anxiety-producing site where the uncomfortable, if appealing presence of the past (“Coney Island Jew,” explored in earlier poems like “Slivovitz”) struggles with the attempted mastery of “upper-middle class manners” (encouraged by the “greengolden” suburb environment).  Lease happens to possess a tremendous gift for the rendering of sensory elements.  A poet or artist entranced by compelling images (“braided colors in water”) seemingly foregoes further class mobility and even endangers his “middle” status by not focusing on what enriches Donald Trump and his ilk.  However, what constitutes “winning in New York” is open to dispute: in the sphere of the poem, aesthetic and progressive political values seize the opportunity to challenge the hegemony of capitalist accumulation as the most valuable “art.”  And Lease’s sudden change of focus in the final part of the section makes social contexts of individual distress clear:

 

What is our country. Did it start as blank, as blank blank, as   

blank blank blank. I would love to fly to Vegas for the punk  

festival—we aren’t the first culture to ”monetize relationships”—

force steel splintering, force breathing, moisture in the air: the   

city dissolves, one long story of corruption: USA means the            

outer miracle kills the inner miracle: history has to live with   

what was here: no images, no lightning, no letters of flame:   

leaves move, clouds move, money moves, night pushes through

the money—    (36)

 

For all their talk about “virgin territory,” “America” was no tabula rasa when Europeans arrived.   Until fairly recently, the “official” version of U.S. history multiply “blanked” violence against Native Americans and Africans that characterized beginnings and foundations.  Co-option enabling forms of oppositional culture like “punk” to be utilized in a “festival” in a strangely alluring center of fatuous greed and appropriation is not only comparable to the whitewashing of these national origins but also a good example of how “the outer miracle” of capitalist expansion, including, impressively, the largest middle class in history, “kills the inner miracle” of progressive collectivity embodied in the ideals of the Declaration of Independence and of spiritual potential.  The allusion to Robert Lowell’s sense of history as determinism (fatalism?) in his book History must be ironic, as Lease follows neither Lowell’s patrician liberalism nor his confessional aesthetic choices.  In the poem, Lease often points out problematic trends and conditions through highly general assertions that serve as dramatic, heuristic devices.  The overall effect of juxtapositions encourages a subtlety of analysis in the reader.

As the poem unfolds, Lease elaborates on how serious constraints collide with an indomitable will to increase of freedom.  The title “Free Again” echoes but differs from Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “free at last.”  It seems to imply the goal (not present realization) of a recuperation of something already known, but it could also refer to reiteration of the call for freedom.  The poem dramatizes a dialogue between haunting and the hope of freeing a community from such haunting.  One element that keeps returning to haunt is the concept of “shattered selves” (64).  When Lease’s speaker asserts, “We need to know why voices fall apart” and adds the moral judgment, “our claims of innocence are false” (39), this is no pomo celebration of the decentering pluralization of selves/voices, even if Lease might acknowledge the value of identitarian flexibility; instead, the poet names a faltering of vision (imagination): “he visualized himself but he knew he was lying—he could not make his life come true—his father hid pain in a pot of gold, his mother hid pain in a hollow tree” (57).  Parental models are only part of the problem; Lease keeps reminding us that “the I lives in an empire—community of headlines, community of video loops. . .” (61).  Representations produced by media empires are largely legislated by corporate imperial forces, and in the face of large uncertainties managed or encouraged by these forces, an individual might resort to the unsatisfactory shield of extreme self-assertion, imperial selfhood:

 

                        A light bulb fails, and each town fills

And empties, empties and fills—  

 

this town could be Eden, for us—the

freedom of each one—this is God risen—I was a rock     

star, a shaman, a buffoon, a hero—

 

each of these experiences was very good

for me—        

 

I have an indomitable will to win—like true   

love, I conquer all—like death and taxes, I am certain—

 

it’s all within my reach—   (64)

 

Simultaneously, on the poem’s penultimate page, one may see the potential for greater social fragmentation (via uncritical individualism) and a gathering of utopian energy.

If this “I” is recontextualized as a collective voice, thus emphasizing the phrases “for us” and “the freedom of each one,” personal “experiences” are placed in the service of something beyond one woman or man’s welfare.  The dangerous certainty of narcissistic posturing gives way to the salubrious assertion of “an indomitable will to win” over antidemocratic trends, to put a shared freedom “within [our] reach.”           

Lease’s speaker, early in the poem, asks, “Why don’t people talk more about corporations and power—“ (38).  Perhaps he alludes to how analysis by critics of rampant multinational corporatism like Michael Moore did not get enough of a hearing from working and middle-class voters to unseat George W. Bush in 2004, or to how the Democratic ticket, also indebted to “corporate sponsorship,” did not go far enough in articulating this link.  Not directly providing the supplement for this lack, Lease repeatedly cites ecological damage as evidence of corporate power to do great ill:

 

            You never slept under a bridge—what blurs you—tell me common     

stories—there’s a brownfield in Alma—petroleum processing—he

says he’d rather work at 7-11 than live over there in Midland near all   

that stuff—you can smell it in the wind—   

 

Letters shine outside “low-income housing”—there are arrows on    

the water—crab-apple colored—thaw reaches up through mud,     

 

                                                      drenching wet opens stink,             

 

                                                stains concrete moss-colored—    (49)

 

In its juxtaposition of the sadly ironic paucity of choice (for those who “never slept under a bridge” but are near the poverty level) with evocative descriptive language that is at once strangely beautiful and horrifying, this passage exemplifies sections pertaining to pollution’s “stink.”  Three pages later, in a reference to what goes on at “Dow Chemical,” there is a repetition of the stinking evidence: “you can smell/ that stuff in the wind” (52).  In general, recurrent motifs like “Choirs of repetition fired from graves—“ (50, 57) contribute to the text’s haunting quality.

W. Bush struck out in Midland, Texas to make his oil fortune and, unlike his father, it appears, struck out.  But as a “mid land,” it also points to Lease’s preoccupation with the middle class and how, in his view, it has been ideologically poisoned: “I want you to stand there in your brightly frisky middle-class personalities and chant after me: ‘How about another tax cut, how about another tax cut—‘ ‘our wilderness’ and liberty and justice for us: just equal the course of empire, the game of life—the self that wins and wins—American self, sleepy self—“ (51).  Bush’s promise of a tax cut is a trope of entitlement, of the middle class “self’s” “victory” over “big government,” which would “give away” its money to the poor.  For those embracing this logic, “all” do not deserve “liberty and justice,” or at least, given an alleged scarcity of resources, class warfare is necessary for self-preservation.  “Wilderness” is “our” possession, and thus ecological concerns are not compelling, so long-term effects are ignored: “We are moving, swallowing pockets of garbage in our fat/ harvesting tumors—“ (56).

Given the poem’s overall emotional/informational architecture, Lease does not have to say directly that the Bush team in 2004 engineered a victory of the upper class over the other two by persuading enough of the middle to accept this inaccurate, short-term view and thus vote against their own class interests and in favor of the upper class’s. The Republicans fed on the insecurities of a group heavily affected by such corporate practices as downsizing and too dependent on credit: “we’re the middle class—venting:// collectors really began hounding us, but luckily our mom saw an Oprah show about non-profit debt management—“ (46).  Quick fixes, whether found in the Republican platform or on talk shows, attract the desperate, and Christian fundamentalism reinforces conservatism without much compassion: “America// named you, said you are “I”: strip/ malls equal temples or clouds that drift to the words we/ can’t speak—// singing hyms for no reason: and, and,/ and, and, and—I, I, I, I, I—“  (51).

I have insisted that Lease refuses to embrace despair, but this refusal is more subtly manifested and takes up much less space than implicit and explicit negative critique of the current national situation.  Not far from the middle of the poem, he articulates a various actions that an unspecified “it” “could” perform— “It could be gorgeous, it could be/ loss, it could be broken, it could fold— // . . .  it could dangle, it could fall, it/ could glisten, it could freeze—“— before revealing “its” identity: “the soul inventing the world—/ the soul inventing the soul—“ (45).  We could make different things of the reminder that “soul” self-construction must precede “world”-composition, which in turn must precede individual and collective decision that affect material freedoms and constraints in the social world.   In another context, it could be a turning inward and a rejection of focus on the political, but here, it includes the hopeful assertion that “gorgeous,” “glistening” possibilities of social relations might arise from a dialogue among “souls” engaging in self- and world- “invention.”  Even more dramatically, six sections from the end, Lease’s condensed lyricism and elegant visual balancing of lines evokes excrement, enchantment, and quasi-utopian promise:

 

                                                 Stillness in red, stillness in green—I

have no words, light hangs like rope—    

 

                                            We breathe our eyes, promise the   

wind, boxes of shit, pieces of glass—

 

                                            Color the wind, we breathe our yes,     

open the doors, one vote one corpse—

 

                                           One seed of light  (60).

 

The imaginative synesthesia of “breathe our eyes” infuses perception (that had been dulled by so much deceptive political/commercial advertising, like “boxes of shit”) with (re)new(ed) spirit.  In the removal of a mere “e,” renewed “eyes” morph into the breath of affirmation (“yes”).  To “promise the wind,” a grammatically uncertain clause, is either to assure an audience that prophecy is on the way or to assure prophecy itself of something.  In either case, it seems an alignment with positive spiritual forces.  To “color the wind” could be to recognize pollution’s stain, but it could also be to bring one’s subjectivity to bear on potential energies.  In the revision of the phrase, “one man, one vote,” there is also a pregnant doubleness.  “Vote” and “corpse” are associated because war often purchases the franchise in democratic nations, and yet, alternatively, “one vote” might be regarded as a mere residue of what it could be in a more truly representative democracy.  President George H. W. Bush made “a thousand points of light” a symbol of volunteerism replacing federal responsibility for social welfare.  While Lease’s trope, “one seed of light,” like Bush Pere’s, could also be misused, the notion of “seed” as potential, as life emerging (after “corpse”), keeps the goal of the chapbook’s title awake, in play, in struggle with what would drown it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Iowa by TRAVIS NICHOLS

The Hatmaker’s Wife by DOROTHEA LASKY

Secret Architecture by AARON KUNIN

Braincase Press

 

Adventures Three Through the Isles of BrainCase: A Chapbook’s Excursion

by BRAD FLIS

 

 

NEARING NICHOLS BY RAIL

 

I am sped, my head lifting out the train window. A series of dynamic self-histories, richly compiled, opens the air. Am I leaving or entering Travis Nichols’ Iowa?  Some history: the Pioneer found himself in the middle.  He felt sorry for the Dad’s darkness…The Dad’s small light, refracted from his kids and tobacco, lit most of the Midwest which was flat and thinking of eating its own body. At last, a tremor. Who else is in this car? Madame and Katie and Ryan and Coach Al and Ol’ Ha Ha and His Failure and My Bones Are Wheat And My Blood Is Vinegar. Nichols enlists them, glass witnesses. The window threads with rain, and now the engines stoked with radically expressive image-torquing, For I was no longer what I believed…but a new thing born into heaven though still with movie camera eyes…and the body of a buffalo held to our earth by a gossamer cord, and then, they were horrified when he said it was impossible to forbid a man to run genetically closer to the antelope and make a big wax doll to kiss it. Though the exhaust seems preeminently grounded in more subtle teasing out of the achingly nostalgic and bewildered, Us kids played on The Big Was because our parents said, ‘Secretly in your sleep the police care.’ Then, why are we here, if not to exoticize the torments of our pasts? Under depressing cumulus, the plains flood with Notely’s Margaret & Dusty and Michaux’s Miserable Miracle until we’re lagooned. I didn’t obsess as much as wash out these times.  My friends were here, what happened?  With my last 25 cents I try phoning home but no one answers. All the Moms seemed to the kids barely glued with Chablis, Virginia Slims, Chanel, Scotch, other Dads, and nighttime transports from other dubious households. How one Mom had, from the station wagon to the bed, been exiled. I pull from the letter compartment a red pen and a yellow debit card transaction slip, hoping to draft something consequential and sincere, something unhesitant before the faces I’m passing in mirrors, but it’s already written on your belly, Why don’t you revolt against this stupid Of There? The question rings true again…what marginalization? With this perpetual illumination in hand, I have sat up in my berth, and read in the brightest daylight, until from mere exhaustion I would fall asleep.

 

 

 

 

ON & ABOUT CAPE LASKY

 

Seen from a great distance, a brilliant book forming an island looks like a man’s hat floating away in the water, the crown and broad rim being distinctly silhouetted. It is called The Hatmaker’s Wife by one Dorothea Lasky, and halfway up the crown, which is eight hundred feet high, I almost had a run-in with the nurse./ It would have been just me and the nurse! The captain’s lover shot and pierced her brother’s hat with an arrow, She kept asking me for a pen but I told her I had none./ Something inside me froze as I imagined my two good ones deep in my bag.  And at each luminous pinnacle, ten wives, all but one ineffable, Her house was immaculate, like she had never been born. Amid this solitude and salacious landscape,  in a dark lit bar, my love said my poems were shit/ And I, in the light of the candles,/ Pushed a sword into myself and fell over a cliff/ Into a neverending ocean./ Once a man 5 years my younger/ Loved me and then gave me up./ I raged around him like a bear. Thus you curse rueful islands like a lemon on fire with ebullience and ubiquity in larger-than-leitmotif colours, calling at the fishing hamlets to leave mail, freight, attentive passengers. You pick the salmon off stalks and gills,/ And the wine-plum Santas with their mouths all afill./ And I know you are true--a veil of oxters, the Cyclops with a sad pool of nurses. From the marshy banks of concession we observed, in traditional garb and with a pikeman’s lance, Eileen Myles skewer a young Paul Eluard, deservedly so (for his “conversion” we’d been told). But perhaps strangest of all, in the small fjord of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, we bore witness to an act expressively criminal. The murder took place on a day that was made for the children.  He took the children and mashed them into a bucket.  He made us eat it.  I had to eat it! The effect was most candid, beautiful, and salient. I would go so far as to call the experience miraculous. Categorically, those who possess the time at their disposal and the inclination to venture through The Hatmaker’s Wife will return much benefited in health by the pure and invigorating air of the poet, those midnight sunbeams of a sun which has no setting.

 

 

 

 

EXPENSES & KUNIN TOPOGRAPHY

 

The following sketches of aerial forays into Aaron Kunin’s Secret Architecture are given to the public in the hope that their perusal will furnish information concerning the poets, and poetry, of worlds being explored by Americans more and more each successive year, worlds having been surveyed in duplicate, revised, our pilot noted, as The hum of the fish tank kept him awake, so he got up in the middle of the night to turn it off./ The glow of the fish tank, placed directly behind the sofa, made it impossible to sleep, so he reached out pettishly in a fit of half-sleep and turned it off./ The fish boiled in their tank; someone having (maliciously or accidentally?) turned the temperature dial as high as it would go during the night. Aphoristically, the locals, baring no small resemblance to Queneau and Ted Greenwald, encouraged intersection in many directions, The lies they tell are more reasonable than their truths./ Reason gets in the way of their effort to tell the truth./ “Why didn't he assume I was lying?  He's clearly lying all the time--I assume.” Having acquired an Uncanny ability to say the same thing every time as though discovering it for the first time, he would nosedive for several minutes, helplessly struggling with his h’s and u’s before he could say ‘hu-hu-hu-hu-humane.’ Maintaining radio correspondence was even more reproachable. Aren't you afraid that this cheap hotel pen is going to corrupt your writing?/ As I sign my name it appears on my face in glowing letters./ He writes his name in one place and it appears in another place. To hear it again, we worried. Déjà vu interred us for weeks under sweltering red lights of our nutured immediacy which could not be avoided at the level of

Content from Nov. 18 to Jan. 24

Form                    20 “       25

Time                    22 “       17

 

Whatever ‘hell’ may signify in Kuninian, this place is decidedly different as regards the climate of inspection. My name doesn't look like me, but it sounds like me./ There is nothing wrong with being tainted. Luminous azure balls, like steel-fastened yoghurts, hung above us, in haste now to aviate homeward, a retreat which partakes, if only in limited degree, of my enthusiasm over the admirable character of these writers and the ever imposing grandeur of imagination, the object, and the book.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Iterature by EUGENE OSTASHEVSKY

Ugly Duckling Press

2005

Reviewed by MATHIAS SVALINA

 

 

If you like rhyming couplets then Eugene Ostashevsky’s Iterature is the book for you. If you like rhyming couplets that wrench the syntax in favor of the rhyme and often guide the poem through its ideas how my old neighbor would pull her schnauzer’s leash so hard the dog would be briefly, though I imagine uncomfortably, airborne then Eugene Ostashevsky’s Iterature is for you. If you like a kind of chucklemonkey personality-driven absurdism that hides its biting intellect in self deprecation and one liners then Eugene Ostashevsky’s Iterature is for you. If you like your Russian émigré poetry brash and self aggrandizing with a saccharine twist of near-parody hip hop style and the American pop culture fascination then Eugene Ostashevsky’s Iterature is for you. If you like your Russian émigré poetry with a deep seeded knowledge of the classics of Western and Eastern Europe and a clear reference point to Russian absurdism and avant garde poetics then Eugene  Ostashevsky’s Iterature is for you. If you want to read a book that challenges you to think of it as bad poetry (bad in the traditional, non Run DMC-ified sense) all the while displaying an enviably delicate intellectual grace and dazzlingly complex level of humor and thus proving its quality then Eugene Ostashevsky’s Iterature is for you. If you want your poetry to linger in your head like bathroom graffiti, or perhaps like the raw-tonguiness of having eaten too much candy then Eugene Ostashevsky’s Iterature is for you.

If nothing else, this book is an amazing display of dedication to and exploration of a personal style. Ostashevsky pushes all of his language and ideas out, seemingly as quickly and nakedly as possible. His absurdism manifests itself in drastic jumps in ideas, the following of language into cul de sacs of meaning, a mixture of bravado and self deprecation and
ubiquitous, devious humor. While much of his humor and style relates back to the Russian absurdist movement OBERIU, of which Ostashevsky has been an effective popularizer and translator, he is in no way a mimic of their playful childlike style. One might consider his voice more frantic, a breathless surge from line to line, attempting to jump on the next rhyme, the next joke, the next idea. He’s more Artaud in his confrontational style than Kharms writing his
little tales for his drawer to read. In this respect he is a poet of autobiography, of near confessionalist moments of laying bare the self. He attempts to control the chaos of intellect with language. He jokes and sputters in search of control, in search of anchors.

In much of the book, Ostashevsky employs the rhyming couplet as his controlling agent and this formal element is what I find most compelling in his work. He is so dedicated to the form that I want to file his work next to Pope, though on the willfully unheroic side. These couplets often wrench the poem in favor of the rhyme: “Yes, my mind spins and my stomach too./Should you look at me from the ceiling, you,” “In the forest of onerous sadness/ I pranced around,
mine own onanger that is ass” and “I would rather fall on the floor in my elbow a saber/ than figure out life from the agony of my neighbor” are three examples, though you could find them in nearly every poem.

Other portions of the book explore different formal styles. The section entitled “Smotherland” uses more concise couplets with less obvious rhyming play. And “The Ambassadors,” shows Ostashevsky at his most Dadaist, with choirs of penguins and insects intoning gibberish. But the heart of Ostashevsky’s poetry is the rhyme. This creates a nearly Shel Silverstein-like preference for play above intentional progress of the poem. The rhyme demands a sing-songy reading that links the Silverstein voice with the exploratory nature of freestyle hip hop. Just as often as the rhyme takes precedence over the line or idea this exploration leads Ostashevsky to images of shocking correctness that are dependent on the rhyme, such as “Your body flopped around like a sturgeon,/ though five minutes before that you were a virgin” and “and other mutilations most favored by nations/ as they make orations among carnations.” And there are moments when he turns a rhyme that makes me nearly stand up and salute the poets ability to find that
connection: “You’re acting like a character from Theodore Dostoyevsky!/ Thus proclaims I, Eugene Ostashevsky!” He at turns invites groans, out-loud laughter and shock at the way he can occasionally pull ideas of depth and imagination out of the morass of his form.

If you’re anything like me, though, this book is going to piss you off at times. Ostashevsky presents a theory of language just below the surface of the playfulness of this book. All philosophy becomes a matter of semantics in Ostashevsky’s poems, all ideas are reducible to useless blobs of language:

     Cantor questions the swallow
     They discuss

     The equivalence of parts and wholes
     The precise meaning of transcendental

     Whether the crib is a crib
     I’m not a child

     cries Cantor
     and stomps on his bib
               from “Cantor in the Aviary”

     We say to you,

          Teach us love
          Teach us love
          Teach us love
          Teach us love
     
     You say,

          Know reads No

     That’s all you know
     That’s all you do not know
               from “Language”

     So what was your conclusion?
     we ask the philosopher
     
     Tell us
     Tell us
     Tell us
          Deaf man, dead man
          ancestor god

          Deine Zung ist rot
          Your tongue is rot

     The philosopher in the photograph
     only clutches
     
     his favorite monograph
     cause language, what can it say
               from “The Two-Dimensional Philosopher”

Sure, it’s Wittgensteinian and so much more, but the poems continually dance away from the ideas stated within them. And yes, I understand that this is the whole thrust of the pomo mistrust of language and that an absurdist approach to a philosophy of language enacts the philosophy. I understand that the movement of Ostashevsky’s dance is more meaningful than the ideas themselves. The play and absurdism is a layer of cloudy ice that allows you to see the ideas below the surface but always the ideas are obscured.

Yet the ideas of language, like the ideas of cultural affiliation and the understanding of the self in relation to history, are laid out so baldly that it seems that Ostashevsky wants to be able to develop them into arguments. His devilish humor and absurdist ideology continually undermines this attempt. And beyond the at times virtuosic formal play this undermining is what I find most engaging about this book. Ostashevsky does not create a balance between the personal and the absurd, but instead poems are in constant battle between their ideas and their performance. If you want an orderly enactment of philosphical and prosodic ideology then this is not the book for you. If you want the delight of a poet writing poems that admit to every intellectual desire and defeat then this is the book for you. If you want
a book of poems that will force you to return to it continually both as a puzzle and model of puzzling then Eugene Ostashevsky’s Iterature is for you.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interview with BRENDA HILLMAN

by JEN TYNES

 

Brenda Hillman was born in Tucson, Arizona in 1951. After receiving her B.A. at Pomona College, she attended the University of Iowa, where she received her M.F.A. in 1976. She serves on the faculty of Saint Mary’s College in Moraga, California, where she teaches in the undergraduate and graduate programs; she is also a member of the permanent faculties of Napa Valley Writers’ Conference and of Squaw Valley Community of Writers. Her seven collections of poetry -- White Dress (1985), Fortress (1989), Death Tractates (1992), Bright Existence (1993), Loose Sugar (1997) and Cascadia (2001), Pieces of Air in the Epic (2005)-- are from Wesleyan University Press; she has also written three chapbooks, Coffee, 3 A.M. (Penumbra Press, 1982 ), Autumn Sojourn (Em Press, 1995), and The Firecage (a+bend press, 2000). Hillman has edited an edition of Emily Dickinson’s poetry for Shambhala Publications, and, with Patricia Dienstfrey, has co-edited The Grand Permisson: New Writings on Poetics and Motherhood (2003). Among the awards Hillman has received are Fellowships from the National Endowment for the Arts and the Guggenheim Foundation. She resides in the San Francisco Bay Area; she is married and has a daughter. To read more of Brenda Hillman’s poems, interviews, and reviews, please visit her website: http://galileo.stmarys-ca.edu/bhillman/

 

JT: In a 2003 interview with Sarah Rosenthal, you say that making a poem is like "knitting a sweater and someone is unraveling it on the other end." Pieces of Air in the Epic includes two epigraphs that reference spinning and weaving, the act of or potential for making. I don't know my Odyssey very well and had to look up the context for the quotation you take from it, but in the meantime I tried relating another instance of weaving in the The Odyssey -- Penelope's shroud weaving -- and it raised some questions for me about how a project exists in time. The same week I read "Nine Untitled Epyllions" I heard an interview with a woman who's making quilts for the families of American soldiers who've died in the Iraq war; she can't make them fast enough. In the interview mentioned above, you also talk about "the regularity of the way that an artist works in relation to a day." How do you think about time and artists in this book, and how does time become its own element in a long project like your tetralogy?

 

BH: I started thinking about time in this contrasting way when working on Loose Sugar, ''time resembles sugar''—I'd been interested in alchemy, in alchemical process—and when I was working on Cascadia  I thought about time not as a different dimension but as a set of relations we construct from our sense of the elements in relation to what's not human. I think a lot about mythic time, and guess after thinking about the alchemists, their daily work, their frustrations, I got a sense of the determination of the life of art… Living in California, thinking about alchemy lead me to think about the periodic table, then about geology, then about California geology as a  metaphor for consciousness in time about the many manifestations of geology evolved in several ways there…Geological processes are so slow our life is so slight and brief in relation to these millions of years.  Whatever I intended, intention has little to do with how the poem presents itself finally…The artist, the poet, works along, at this pace, in pacing… In writing about the California missions, I was interested in the patterns in the churches and the way the artists making the patterns were not involved in ecstatic event, what religions are made of, but in the steady quotidian. In short, if you are a poet or an artist or an imaginative person of any kind, you work both in and outside of official time, steadily and faithfully putting in your hours. I have often had a sense of working parallel to the divine, which occasionally visits you.

 

The idea for the tetralogyof 4 elementscame about because I didn't get past the element of ''earth'' in Cascadia. Working on a larger scale refreshed my spirit somehow. Cascadia was published the week of 9-11-01; I began to write the poems in the Nine Epyllion sequence when the U.S. invaded Afghanistan. The sense that epic time, time in epic, has to do with warfare, is obvious if you've spent any time at all with Homer and Virgil. I've also had the notion that punching holes in time, in ''about,'' is part of the job of the artist and it seemed like a good announcement to make as a woman poet.

 

About the weaving and fabric metaphorcertainly not a very original one, especially for a woman writerbut I like to think metaphor, even clichés, are infinitely refreshable. To use another household industry metaphor: using clichés is like using sourdough starter for the baking of breadyou take off a little plug of the starter-yeast for the new loaf.

 

In this book I had the sense that the fabric metaphor connected with kinds of singingthe choral singing and the individual singing—in the epic, mostly in tragedy, actually, and about how singing motifs have varying threads. Of course, there are all kinds of ways in which threading as time, threading as consciousness can work: Penelope, the Fates spinning, weaving, and cutting threads. Thread throughout time, like, were the tights that Elizabethans wore really stretchy?  And all the ways the mind starts drawing things inthe idea that an industrial revolution could come in the fabric industries…So I was thinking about flags in war when all the bullshit about the American flag-worship started up after 9-11, and how flag worship doesn't even consider the makers of flagslike, the fact that some of the flags were made in Vietnamwhat an irony. The Epyllion poems put the idea of a seamstress who is making the flags of war throughout time next to poems that are kind of a seared vision of various invasions some of the imagery in those poems comes from Iraq War situations, and some from other wars. "String Theory Sutra'' expands on this. Vermeer's lace-maker, coupled with the lacey lightning in the last poem, is supposed to give a sense of peace and inner drama. I guessin all three of these booksthe time of the artist, the daily work of the imagination, is set in the context of the elements and of history.


JT: I've been reading Wendell Berry's Standing By Words, and a line from "Notes: Unspecializing Poetry" seems especially relevant to Pieces of Air in the Epic: "It is the thought of not writing poetry down that returns us to its mnemonic (its musical) character." The first poem in the book, "Street Corner," ends, "We could have said/ song outlasts poetry, words/ are breath bricks to/ support the guardless singing/ project. We could have/ meant song outlasts poetry." The relationship between poetry and song recurs in other poems, and throughout the poems there's punning, wordplay, and onomatopoeia, which make us conscious of the poem's existence as both sound and image. After reading Pieces of Air I had to return to Cascadia and reconsider how I'd understood the physical form of some of those poems. In Pieces of Air, "experimental" physical form definitely relates to sound, voices, for me. I hear choruses and conversations. In Cascadia I originally only *saw* the forms -- shape referenced topography. But I am now interested in how "point of view" can mean both sound/voice and location (point) in these two books. How do you think about these poems' physical forms in relation to both image and sound?

 

BH: This is a really good questionand really large! Physical forms reveal themselves in different ways. I sometimes have the sense of --I don't know how to put thissquinting into the gestalt of a shape before beginning a poemeven if it's going to reveal a shape of conventional, left-justified quatrains.  I believe inspiration is given by the gods and the human mind at work in its traditions in the case of forms or numbers, this could include both Oulipo and the Count on Sesame Street.  It's not fashionable to mention divine inspiration but the ancestral voices are there for me. I have a sense that the ragged free verse line that reveals emotional thrust, but also make use of the games of numerical constraint that Oulipo and French writing gave us. Obviously, all searches for form are implicitly trying to balance freedom and constraint, because purely ''free'' art doesn't show the ''idea of order.''

 

Yet when I try to will the poem into some preconceived form, it will refuse…Many things in the contemporary new lyric work for and against the song-like, the continuing of sense.  I've always liked multiples of six, and so sometimes a pacing of certain thoughts will put the poem into the twelve- or twenty-four lined poem.  I choose forms that interest me for the subject matter or the spirit of the poem; I seem always to want to explore new forms, almost like learning new languages or a new game… for example, the punctuation around the Mission poems in Cascadia really had to do with looking at the art in the churches and not with anything else… The split form in "String Theory Sutra" came from squinting at Horace while my husband was translating Horatian odes when we were in the mountains.  Horace's ''look''in which there were twice as many word on one side as on the othergave me the idea for the poemit's like Vinnie's remark in Saturday Night Fever"I saw it on t.v. then I made it up.''  There's much more to be said about this. Form and whether it will evolve fitfully or easily has everything to do with how I feel after making the first blobby forays into the poem, which, because I love ''re-vision''Duncan always hyphenates it and I love thatis often very far from the final version. Often not one wordnot one dotof the first draft of a poem will remain when I am done. Getting memorable words and thoughts in a compressed, original form is what I want to see in poetry, and what I find satisfying as a writer. 


JT: In "Forms of Activism for Overwhelmed People" you talk about poetry-making as "an imaginative spiritual practice that gives strength for everything else." I wonder how the poem itself also activates its audience. In this book you focus quite a bit on history-making, narrative-making, how we both desire story and resist its inaccuracies. In "Air In The Epic" you write "Try/ to describe the world, you tell/ them--but what is a description?" and later "Side stories leaked into the epic,/ told by its lover, the world." The development of the poem seems rooted in (quoting the same poem again) "a type of thought between trance & logic where teachers/ rest," which I understand to be intuitive movement. Can you say a little about the "air" in the epic? How do we write meaningful histories? And/or how do you approach the act of history-writing?

 

BH: I had the sense that the epic, with its grand sweep, its invasion-driven plots, needed a little air. Air seemed a matrix for cultural healing; I mean, originally I had thought to describe different types of California air. In lightor in dark—of the Iraq invasion and our present government, this particular horror does seem to call for a redemption from an imaginative realm and for actions, both inside and outside aesthetic situations. We spent some time in Berlin, so several of the poems in the book are sort of ''how to breathe in Berlin, considering what happened there.'' Poetic intuition, dreamscapes and the wisdom that comes from metaphor and poetic consciousness, from imagination, has a lightness that is the freedom of our spirit, not the freedom Cheney talks about. It is our nature. True freedom comes of course first of all from having enough to eat—but besides that, it comes from not being oppressed by ideology or servitude to false authority.

 

This takes me to a question I've thought a lot about: the connection between poetry and politics. (I'm think about this a lot because Bob and I just participated in a colloquium on politics and poetry at U.C. Berkeley)… Statements are often made like '' everything is historical in a poem,'' or '' all poems are political…'' These may both be true statements, depending on what you mean by poetry and history and politics, and I like French theory just fine. It is true that all choices about subject matter—even whether to leave the War—of your poems, are political in a sense? But it isn't helpful to not make distinctions.  Some poems have material that works with historical or political events, trying to make subtle re-castings of our notions of received history… Or, in various kinds of innovative traditionsthe use of the sentence against itself, or toward freedom or something…

 

Poetry can help us understand other disciplines and vice versa, so I like making use of historical and scientific materials and vocabularies, history of Geology , politics, culture or spiritual traditions and soul's processes. All poetry is symbolic, to some degree or another, and I employ varying realisms when making meaning. And I want to add the obvious: For people involved in legislative business, in the military or the anti-military, for people involved in activism, even frustrating activist work outside of poetryI've been working with Codepink to bring home the National Guardthere is a great deal of difference between politics in poetry and politics in Sacramento. So, my Buddhist friend says, everything is true. But it's also true that we need to write our poems and also do activism outside poetry and not just on the internet, either.

 

As for the latter part of your question: the way I approach the act of writing about these things is to work hard. When that doesn't pay off, I get on my knees and beg the goddess to give me the next poem. When the next poem begins to happen, I try to be a nice brenda, not a grouchy, flakey, crazy person.