Bad Boats by LAURA JENSEN                                 Idea by PAUL HOOVER

1977                                                                                           1987

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bad Boats by LAURA JENSEN

Ecco Press

1977

Recovered by JASON STUMPF

 

               

The sea connects and divides. It is beautiful, dangerous, and demands the attention of those who approach it, those on it. Where ships come in the foreign is disseminated and language is elemental, suspect. Many of the poems in Bad Boats take the sea or shore as their setting, and many more are informed by the sea’s nature and our encounters with it. Like the sea, these poems are shifting and include palpable risk. Their movement is fierce and irresolvable. At any moment one may be flung from safety. Cast upon the sea, one may fight but must ultimately surrender to its forces.

 

The title poem, “Bad Boats,” begins:

 

              They are like women because they sway.

              They are like men because they swagger.

              They are like lions because they are king here.

 

This catalog of similes suggests a subject difficult to capture while the title implies an easy distinction between the bad boats mentioned and good ones we can only assume exist. The poem does not answer the two questions it suggests: “What are bad boats, finally, like?” and “What makes them bad?” More unsettling is that, by the poem’s end, one is unsure whether the speaker has turned her focus to one of the other nouns in the poem:

 

              In their egomania they are glad

              for the burden of the storm the men are shirking

              when they go for their coffee and yawn.

              They are bad boats and they hate their anchors.

 

Are boats used to describe women, men, lions, or is it the other way around? As I read the poem, the question is the question. The poem’s movement occurs in the way it links these things together. Its primary interest isn’t women, men, lions, or boats, but the ways one suggests another. Thus, the poem becomes an interchange rather than a static description, much the way a Shakespearean sonnet’s subject is not its opening line or final couplet but the distance it travels between the two.

 

In Jensen’s poems, a single object can harbor many narratives and valences. So Jensen’s labor in Bad Boats is to decode the landscape she sees. Our view of this world suggests a narrative of someone both nervy with resolve and hobbled by obsession. Jensen speaks from extremity made all the more severe by the fact that she doesn’t strive to impress her reader of extremity. The poems are buoyed by a quiet authority expressed through Jensen’s diction and a tight focus on conundrums, no matter how unsettling. She doesn’t allow us to question the poems’ logic or broader contexts. Jensen has her readers rapt and puzzled but always receiving more than we could have thought to seek.

 

Many of the poems in Bad Boats record unintended journeys into strangeness where the speaker is first repelled but quickly succumbs to its powerful surges. One example is her poem “After I Have Voted.” It opens:

 

I move the curtain back,

and something has gone wrong.

I am in a smoky place,

 

an Algerian café.

They turn the spotlight toward me;

the band begins to play.

 

This poem evades expectations much the way its events elude the speaker’s expectations. The poem is not political; nor is its surprise humorous. Quickly, the poem’s exotic and public setting turns from something “gone wrong” to a delight and wonder to which the speaker surrenders. The poem ends:

 

              The Jell-O sighs into the candlelight.

              My eyes turn into stars.

              Ah—the colored spangles on my clothes,

 

              the violet flashlights and guitars!

 

Throughout, the poem’s loose and inconsistent end-rhyme (e.g. “café” and “play”; “stars” and “guitars”) adds to a sense of the poem as a musical dreamscape. However, “surreal” doesn’t quite describe this poem’s movement. Rather than being set free to roam widely and wildly, the speaker of these poems is flung into a territory that is increasingly bizarre. Non sequitur, here, is less artifice than a means of describing an experience. Also, rather than suggesting disjunction, non sequitur creates connections between democracy and theater, private and public, small and large.

 

The two poems I’ve mentioned – along with “Redwing Blackbird,” “The Harvest,” and “Here in the Night” – are among the finest short lyrics written in the last thirty years. The first of these is worth quoting as an example of Jensen’s mix of plain language and difficult emotional ideas. “Redwing Blackbird” begins:

 

Yes, a locust drilling, yes, its dwelling;

how did I wish to be a little sad?

 

But my mention of these poems is to say nothing of the experience of reading the whole collection which is no less severe than a long sea voyage or paralysis. Bad Boats, the first and best of Jensen’s three books, is not only a strong collection in its own right but the announcement of a startling sensibility sustained through Memory (Dragon Gate, 1982; to be re-issued by Carnegie Mellon University Press in 2006) and Shelter (Dragon Gate, 1985). Together, Jensen’s body of work shows the kind of fierce attention to its subjects that can only come from and lead to attention to the self. The work and wonder of these books are made all the more intense and necessary by Jensen’s near silence over the past twenty years.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Idea by PAUL HOOVER

The Figures

1987

Recovered by NATHAN HOKS

 

charm, v. 5. fig. To influence, enthral, powerfully attract or engage (the mind, senses, etc.) by beauty, sweetness, or other attractive quality; to fascinate, captivate, bewitch, enchant, delight....

-Oxford English Dictionary

 

Idea opens with a poem called “Idea,” but the salient feature of “Idea” is not its ideas but its form; it is a sestina without an envoy. They say sestinas are among the most artificial of poetic forms and thus they require great skill, control and order. Nonetheless, sestinas also produce a kind of dizziness. A refined dizziness, perhaps. The end-words work up a frenetic whirling energy switching places like contestants in a game of musical chairs. The envoy brings this frenzy to a close, repeating the end-words in quicker, emphatic succession. In foregoing the closure of the envoy Hoover unleashes the sestina’s controlled yet dizzying whirlwind onto the entire book as if to suggest that this is the way ideas begin.

 

The poem “Idea” does more, of course, than work up this formal tilt-a-whirl. It does present ideas, significant ones that can help us read this book. Hoover begins in the thick of the problem of language, writing and poetry:

 

If writing is lying, nothing is true

and pressure is on the mind, not eye,

as if in a single sentence a thousand

phenomenal objects fled a single thought. (9)

 

These lines are hypothetical. This platonic world of pure ideas, Hoover reminds us, is part of a mythic past: “But that was paradise, and this is the charm / one has with snakes...” (9). And when snakes are lurking, we know we’re in a fallen world where the exact contours of the “true” are difficult to discern. If there is salvation here, it is not in a religious mythology or an investigation of platonic forms, but in the potential “charm” of language as it fluctuates rapidly and violently between the everyday and the sublime, between the immanent and the meditative, between a playfulness and control, between seriousness and outright hilarity. As Idea registers these ambivalent movements in the lyric, Hoover’s charm provides a stable tonal groundwork.

 

Idea was Hoover’s fifth book of poetry, and five more books of poetry have followed, among them the book-length poem Novel (1990) and a selected poems (Totem and Shadow, 1999). Along with co-editing New American Writing, Hoover has also published a novel, Saigon, Illinois (1988) and a book of essays, Fables of Representation (2003), and edited the Norton anthology, Postmodern American Poetry (1994). His earlier work is often pigeonholed in a post-New York School comedic vein, though the recent Winter (Mirror) (2003) moves toward a more austere and objective sensibility. Idea, while very much of the comedic tradition, wedges itself between a playful goofing around and a high-minded inquiry. This balancing act results in the book’s charm, which is not only a tonal variant of wit and irony; Hoover’s charm revives a potential magic in a  poetry which finds itself caught the quirky qualms of language. Hoover’s charm unites both sense of the word—it is at once comedic and enchanting.

 

To put it another way, charm is the book’s rhetorical gesture par excellence. The argument might say something like: in the face of philosophical dilemma, mimetic problematics and the iffy reliability of language, at least a poet can come along with a magic wand of poetry and start charming the heck out of things. Things aren’t that simple, of course, so the wand charms in all the wrong directions. This is what happens when the world of ideas somehow slips away from the philosopher’s stronghold and into the hands of a poet.

 

Thus, problems of speech and language creep up time and again:

 

We wanted to talk

like gods, but how do our gods talk, comprising

Tony Lestina and tuna patty melt? “Oh, yeah?”

and “So what!” are among the sounds we hear

on a furtive pink sand island in one of the

neighborhoods.

(“After Cotton Mather,” 49-50)

 

In this way we are bombarded by radical shifts of diction, shifts which span from the extreme colloquial -- “So let’s forget it, pal,/ but call me once in a while, OK?” (“Calm Song,” 57) -- to a humorously archaic and artificial iambic -- “My mind to me a Kingdom Is” (“Subject Matter,” 52). Hoover’s is a world of mishearings, puns (i.e. “spoken forward” above) and misunderstandings:

 

Last year a Russian baker, not knowing English

well, wrote in kind of jelly, ‘Happy Dearthday...’

(“After Cotton Mather,” 50)

 

To write, to wreathe, to writhe

and other declensions of turning...

(“This About That,” 32)

 

And as we “decline” through these twists and turns, we become prisoners observing strange effects of language:

 

Whispering into the language,

the edge of talk itself touches tongue to thought.

We stand by as observers in the spoken forward

movement of exactly what we are, something

mumbled through a wall like prisoners saying

goodnight, and again there’s the sound of wind

leaving a trace of itself.

(“After Cotton Mather,” 50)

 

Here we sense the tenuous force of language: it constitutes “what we are, something/ mumbled...”; yet this mumbling, conflated as it is with “the sound of wind/ leaving a trace of itself,” threatens to drift off into pure sound. In these poems, the traces Hoover leaves us retain all the raw energy of wind and rise just enough above the mumble to remain audible on that “edge” between talk and the world.

 

Idea not only investigates the phonetic hazards of language, but engages in the ancient quarrel between philosophy and poetry:

 

A person can’t be

too careful when it comes to the use of words,

and poetry is lies--that’s what people think.

It wants to put you at ease with one or two

great words, like ‘oranges’ and ‘birds.’

It wants to make a scene where a Cadillac

sinks into the river, its radio still playing.

And maybe it’s delightful, like a cheap suit

full of polkas, because of the truth it reveals.

(“Others as Ourselves,” 25)

 

These stanzas illustrate a characteristic move in Hoover’s poems: an answer to the problems of art and truth is sought in the everyday -- cars, suits, commons words. But then again, this isn’t any old everyday. Paradoxically, Hoover calls attention to moments of subtle strangeness, goofiness, beauty in the everyday -- the run-of-the-mill sublime. In short, common moments in which an element of charm arises, such as the humorous disparity of

 

                        The School of

Metaphysics used to be

located over Harry’s Bar...

(“The Orphanage Florist,” 37)

 

As the everyday and moments of privileged insight constantly intersect, language acts as the third element in the equation:

 

Kinda wish you’d been there,

between a blur and that thing there,

the thickest kiss, innate ideas,

and a neon sign that reads: EAT DIRT CHEAP

since that’s the name of the place.

(“What Can Be Shown, Cannot Be Said,” 35)

 

The sign stands between the “blur and that thing there,” a charmingly colloquial phrase illuminated in neon.

 Finally, it should be noted that Idea registers a deep discomfort with the personal lyric and the I that comes with that territory. These poems hover artfully between the radical destabilizations (of syntax, speaker position, etc.) of Language poetry and more conventional stances of the speaker-centered lyric. Hoover exposes a dynamic dialectic between the “subject” position of the poet and the force of language: “This is the language talking, / but this is also Paul” (“Urge,” 19). Hoover parodies the problem of the poetic self:

 

It’s a serious business being yourself,

but nobody else would do it.

You walk around with neon hair,

do ninety in maybe an alley.

(“Innate Ideas,” 17)

 

and we feel a pull in two directions at once:

 

...if there are angels

they’re reading instruction manuals

on how to start a car, how to comb their hair,

plus they’ve got their clothes on backwards,

so walking here is going there.

(“Urge,” 19)

 

Compare that ordered, very legible notion of going two ways at once (i.e. ambiguity) with the following section from the long final poem “From a Gazebo”:

 

I have found a brief wing should

too much of weight the felt have who

be need must there for Souls some pleased

if plot of ground scant song’s within

bound to be time twas moods past day

me hence for is and selves a twist

doom price we gloves to firm this high

bells fox by hour fair hair strong ants

bells peak near night for track undone

bloom soar that sell a bee’s bent dance

loom wheel weaves wheel at maids nor pure

sift here her pens their blood serves four

cells she her mitts which are content

invent their sheiks past at not at fret nuns

(85-86)

 

The first five words start on pretty standard syntactic ground, but these lines soon start to work like quick sand. Prepositions go haywire, verbs get conjugated up, down and inside-out, and we’re pulled into the punchy rhythm and crunchy texture of these monosyllabic, anglo-germanic words. Each word ultimately finds itself in a state of grammatical ambiguity. Nothing new in that;  but the effective charms here are Hoover’s reluctance to remain in any fixed poetic territory and protean ability to navigate between these lyric positions. The push-pull work between language and poet remains intact to the very end: “The work is fashioning, being fashioned/ by the work... (“From a Gazebo,” 98). And, when this works itself out in Idea, “...you arrive at song shapes grown on prose,/ serenely serenade the tentative dream of sense” (“Calm Song,” 57).