EMILY ROSKO. Raw Goods Inventory. University of Iowa Press. 2006. $16

 

 

reviewed by KATHLEEN ROONEY

 

 

Akhmatova scholar Max Hayward observed of her school, the Acmeists, that most of them believed that language must be “treated with the respect that a craftsman accords his materials,” adding that “it was not for nothing that the Acmeists first referred to themselves as Poets’ Guild: the word tsekh in Russian can also mean ‘workshop.’ Language was like any other material, and in fashioning poetic artifacts from it, one had to take account of its natural qualities and limitations.”

Emily Rosko, clearly, is no Acmeist, but this notion of craftsmanship—of artisanal attention to the construction of the poem and the materials of which it consists— is useful when trying to figure out what it is about her Iowa Poetry Prize-winning debut collection Raw Goods Inventory that makes it so raw and so, well, good.

The book itself resembles a well-built house, with each room mindfully blueprinted and assembled accordingly. Divided into four sections—“Clearing the Yard,” “Tongues of,” “Hanging Out the Wash,” and “Spare”—each subdivision has its title, or prefatory, poem on light gray paper, like a painted doorway, allowing the reader entry into that particular space.

Intelligently crafted as they are, Rosko’s poems remain raw because, while they are not unfinished or unsatisfying, neither are they overdone. Her poems are concise, playful, and powerful in their syntax and word choice, as in “An Opening Onto,” which opens:

 

A field of sorts, fucked over

by flower: shepherd’s purse, cocklebur cordate

 

and hooked. A rather haphazard collection it is,

cordoned by wire, massed in clump

 

the greenbrier, the clover rooted and reaching

up from the in-between spaces…. (61)

 

While the poem can be said to be ‘about’ flowers, Rosko’s writing is not flowery, ornate, or overly polished; her rawness has not been worn away by workshopping, as some debut collections feel as though they have been. Raw Goods Inventory is a fresh first book, unified in its overall scope, but happily lacking the homogeneity from which other recent offerings from young poets sometimes suffer.

In many cases, these “in-between spaces” she mentions are precisely what permits the poems in the collection to deliver the titular goods. In “What’s Discovered is Wiped Out,” for instance, a poem about a suicide, she writes:

 

To say it was over and done with no harm

wasn’t really the case. The hemlocks wind-

 

burnt, losing. Fishermen wrestle with, hook salmon

in high lead content water. Stunned look, the red

 

frayed marks. It’s better: eyes averted, both

of us tucked in, knees touching. Placement,

 

the stars rocking in their cradles. Always:

the dreams of the dog alive again. Such childish

 

dreams, such disregard for the stock market. He

was kind enough to leave the proper notes… (4)

 

At times like these, she puts one in mind, favorably, of the Harper’s Index, that publication's assemblage of at-first-glance unconnected facts and phrases which on further examination offers up patterns to notice and paths to follow. Like the Index, Rosko’s poems don’t make an argument, per se, but rather give you the materials you need to persuade yourself of a point, to lead yourself to a conclusion.

She stacks the bricks of her poetic structures so skillfully that they stand without mortar. Her leaps and ellipses leave the task of making connections up to the reader, while still positioning the poet as the person of authority: the architect or the head builder. Rarely using metaphor, she derives her strangeness from syntax and off-kilter rhythms, and these quirky constructions give her poetry its weirdness and wonder. In any given line, you know exactly what’s going on, but between the lines there can be vertiginous jumps.

In this sense, Rosko is simultaneously a materialist and a poet of ideas—a materialist not in the sense that she’s materialistic (for if anything, such acquisitive materialism is a feature of the world she critiques), but more in the Marxist sense, in that she chooses to  concern herself with actual experiences of actual things in the actual world. In “Any Good Scientist Could Tell You”—a title which cleverly elides into the poem’s first line: “Accuracy is the mark of love…”—she writes,   

 

…Precision’s

 

in the splice, the genes matched

   and repaired: pig in tomato, human

     protein in rice. A greater yield

       for the me generation: quicker

       maturity, better plastics, newfound

 

viral strains… (10)

 

concluding, “there’s been some/excessive growth in the bloom/ department. Too much/ correction has made the cart/ tip. Yes, the garden’s overrun” (11). Here, we see how she takes risks in writing authoritatively about real-world concerns in a clear fashion.

That said, Rosko’s work never sacrifices beauty for the sake of a message, and it certainly performs the traditional function of literature in that she consistently employs the “strange or rare” language that Aristotle recommends in the Poetics. Yet she is hardly ever metaphysical, nor does she mystify the objects she represents. She refuses to resort to the strategy of making things appear more profound by being vague about them.

In her willingness to tackle such capital-I Issues as bio-ethics and genetically modified food, Rosko proves she is comfortable trafficking in the world of ideas, not unlike a Don DeLillo or a Joy Williams—or an Alice Fulton, to use a poetic example. Or, if you prefer, she is not unlike the outspoken vegetarian friend you take to lunch even though she might alienate your more conservative dining companions with a pointed comment. She seems to know that she might lose some readers unwilling to grant her that authority, but she seems comfortable in hazarding that loss.

When she writes in “Pigskin” of:

 

 …A sour-milk

stink like outdated candy

from the chocolate shop I worked

at that went to fatten hogs

 

in Illinois. They’d shove IVs full

of corn syrup, Coke—… (23)

 

she is not judgmental, but she seems well-aware that certain audience members might not approach the web of implications she chooses to weave. Rosko seems willing to test readers’ patience in order to talk about the stuff she believes is important to talk about. For that, she is a provocative, entertaining, and necessary poet.

The poems in Raw Goods Inventory yield and keep yielding, even after multiple readings, thanks to the fact that they sparkle with the fingerprints of the hand of their maker. You can see the intelligent and engaging consciousness moving across the lines, putting them together, presenting them to the reader, thereby inviting the audience in the best possible way to participate in their completion, to help with the thoughtful creation of meaning and understanding.