November 27, 2013

Jessica Jacobs

THE DOUBLE IMAGE

“I, who was never quite sure/ about being a girl, needed another/ life, another image to remind me.”
—Anne Sexton, “The Double Image”

I was invited to Hannah’s party by one of her friends, a woman I thought I wanted until I saw Hannah. Her summer house was a stunner, all wood and glass, prowing its very own Hudson Valley hill. “Her other place is a condo in L.A.,” the friend said proudly, as though knowing Hannah granted her equity. “Mary’s heading back there next week.”

“I’m shooting a documentary,” Mary added, leading us into the house.

Mary was Hannah’s girlfriend, yes, but that didn’t stop me from looking at the woman leaning against the knife-scarred kitchen island: Hannah was my height, blonde hair only glancingly tamed—the word leonine came embarrassingly to mind. Her skin glowed against the white of her men’s dress shirt, sleeves cuffed to reveal toned forearms and hands so large they seemed to belong to a woman a foot taller. She looked not only like someone I wanted to know, but someone I already knew.

As Van Morrison’s “Moondance” blared from a room off the kitchen, she handed me a beer and half a pot brownie from a neat stack of them on the counter, and walked me into a room flanked with floor to ceiling windows, dominated by an antique postal desk. In its center was a manuscript. I was about to ask what she wrote but, then, there was Mary, squeezing the back of Hannah’s neck as though corralling an errant pup, leaving with the presumption she’d be followed.

On our way out, Hannah behind me, I reached up as though to stretch and did a quick pull-up on the doorframe, my arms strong from a season of climbing. Even then, I knew that move was more fourteen-year-old boy than what I was, a nineteen-year-old woman, a girl really, awkward and more serious than my years. I wanted so badly to impress her.

* * *

Jessica Jacobs Rock ClimbingSix years earlier, at a summer camp ropes course with a pine tree laddered to the top by small boards, I was introduced to climbing. I made my way up, crying as I death-gripped the brusque bark, crying with every scuffling movement toward the top, until my tears were snuffed by an adolescent epiphany: I’d been terrified and embarrassed the whole way, but I’d made it. The next time I did something that frightened me—and the adrenaline thrumming my body insisted there’d be a next time—I’d keep that fear to myself, find a way to use it like fuel.

Obsessed, I returned home to the flats of central Florida, pored over climbing magazines, and began to swim and lift weights. Two years later, Orlando’s first indoor rock gym opened and I talked my way into a job, cadging climbing road trips from patrons and staff whenever possible. It was the only sport I’d done that pushed my body to failure, where I’d commanded my hand to grip something only to watch it spasm open instead; felt my leg pump wildly of its own accord, Elvising my foot off a ledge. In a life privileged with safety nets—supportive parents, top-shelf education—with climbing, my safety and survival were assured only by what I brought to it. It left me bloody-kneed and bruise-dappled, exhausted as I was exhilarated. But, from it, an image took shape: a self-reliant woman who not only didn’t avoid the things she feared, but sought them out.

That was what I was doing the summer I met Hannah: living in New Paltz after my first year of college, working in a gear shop, trying to stretch myself to fit the outlines of that ideal.

* * *

In the living room, Hannah bent over a small stereo and, from the speakers, another voice joined the fray.

Music pours over the sense, it graveled beneath the din, I mean it remembers better

“Anne Sexton,” she said, a beat before I could.

I nodded and breathed, “I know,” too softly for her to hear, took a long sip of beer that made my head eddy and purl. Anne Sexton: beloved poet of my angsty childhood, the first to make me feel there might be a place for the kind of life I wanted, one driven by passion and poetry … The night I came I danced a circle and was not afraid … I was handed darts and threw them in quick succession, each striking like magic. “Brava!” Hannah cried from astride Mary’s thighs … So it has come to this … Mary stood, spilling her to the floor … The business of words keeps me awake … the friend’s lips were suddenly on mine, my back to the wall, enveloped in her pressing weight, insistent bass, and the words, Hannah and Sexton chanting together, I am drinking cocoa, that warm brown mama.

I pushed my way outside, breath coming in shallow pulls. The heat had finally broken, the air laced with the summer scent of apples and sour of spilled beer, with strains of music from inside. Drunk and high, what could I do with this world I’d stumbled into, one of assured older women who were everything I wanted—to be and to be with. And Hannah. I’d known I wanted to write as long as I’d known I preferred women. She seemed to have already lived out the life I’d imagined.

“Where are you, kid?”

She appeared in the doorway, clutching an armful of long-sleeved shirts, the others behind her. Garlands of lights came alive in the branches. “There you are.”

I reached for a shirt from the pile, but she handed me the one she’d been wearing earlier. We all sprawled in a circle on the lawn, twinkling trees hemming in the night’s prevailing surrealism.

I took the moment to finally ask what she wrote. “She’s our famous neighborhood screenwriter,” the friend answered. While she named the films, Hannah crooked an arm over her eyes and said, “You haven’t seen them. They’re kind of obscure.”

* * *

My boyfriend in high school was a sweet, gangly boy. This was the dial-up era of the internet, before instant access to online queer communities, before Madonna kissed Britney to sell albums, before straight women gloried in saying they’d be gay for Ellen. The one out guy at my school had his ass kicked often enough he transferred. There were no out lesbians, and I wasn’t willing to wait for intimacy until one made herself known. So came a string of disposable boys. So came the boyfriend, the last and best of them. We spent our days biking and wakeboarding, easy access to water one of the few perks of living in Florida; our nights watching movies and having sex—if and when I felt so inclined. Three months into our relationship, the night he told me he loved me, I told him I was gay.

“But what does that mean for me?” he asked, face buried in his hands. “For us?”

“Well, I mean, I care about you and think you’re attractive.”

I paused, not really knowing how to finish a sentence that lamely inadequate.

“So I guess it means we can stay together until I leave for college.” And can date women, I added silently.

How I had the nerve to say this to the face of a poor boy who had just confessed his love is beyond me, so I’ll blame it on the lingering effects of too much Ayn Rand. But, as I was his first, in love and sex, he accepted this meager offering. Together for my last two years of high school, in contrast to the cynicism I’d bricked up to guard my differences—liking girls, liking sports, reading the OED for kicks—he was so kind, so ready to be surprised by what the world and I might offer him. I had moments of wondering if I were making a mistake, if being with a man might be easier, might, eventually, be something even approaching enough.

Then a TV movie kept me up until the small hours. A woman who did everything expected of her—married a man, had kids, held down a household but no job—suffered a breakdown and “went away” for a while. Upon her return, she fell in love with her children’s nanny, her feelings culminating in a rain-drenched kiss that made my stomach ache and hollow. By the end, she found herself but destroyed her family. Watching her movie-husband weep as he repeated over and over, “But I love you so much,” I cried with him. I saw the hopeful look on my boyfriend’s face each time I moved against him, the resigned, downward-eyed acceptance when I more often moved away, and vowed to myself I would never do that to anyone.

That was Hannah’s first film.

* * *

On the way out, I remembered I was wearing her shirt. I began to unbutton it, but Hannah reached out and stilled my hand. “You have an honest face. I’m sure it will find its way back to me somehow.”

The next morning, I drove to the mountains.

Climbing is, by necessity, a clarifying act. Think about anything other than the task at hand and there is the very real chance you will fall, be injured, possibly die. Yet with each move up the rock, with the burr of sediment and slick of quartz, I was distracted by how her broad palms might fit to my back, how her hair might trail my skin as she kissed her way down my stomach.

That day, self-reliance was a piss poor bet.

* * *

Two weeks later, Mary was gone and Hannah invited me over for dinner. Afterward, in the study, as I reclined in a white wicker divan, she drew her chair against it, brought her knees to her chest and tucked her toes beneath my thigh. I tried not to startle at her touch, tried to seem more experienced, more sophisticated than I was.

She asked about my family, what I wanted to do after school. Traced for me the outline of her life: farmed out to boarding schools at twelve; drove to L.A. at the bequest of a girlfriend (who promptly dumped her the day she arrived); worked in restaurants and slept on couches until a friend suggested she turn a short story into a screenplay. I watched as much as I listened. Her strong jaw and cheekbones as she leaned in an out of the light, eye color alternating between the shadows that haunted the corners of the room and that narrow stretch where ocean meets shore, sunlight refracting through the blue.

Pressing her shins more firmly against my leg, she told me she’d finished a novella the day we’d met. Its protagonist was a girl just out of high school—an idealized version of herself at that age. “That’s why I was so startled when I saw you, like I’d written a character so real she’d come to find me. The whole night, I watched you and, each time you talked, a part of me protested, ‘But I didn’t write that.’”

Then she took my hand and pressed it to her lips, her breath pooling in the hollows of my palm. I brought my other hand to her cheek and that was all it took. In a swift movement, she knelt above me, mouth sealing mine. Nearly twice my age, she knew exactly what she wanted, while I simply knew I’d never desired anyone or anything so badly. With boys, I’d kept myself at a remove, in a place of cool observation. With her lips to my neck, I was completely present, open. If she wanted to think she created me, fine, I could go with that. I traced her back, her face. Her skin, lacking the factory-sealed smoothness of girls my age, was instead weathered and pulled taut by years and experiences I wanted to understand. Eyes closed, I ran my hands along her body with the same concentration I brought to the rockface, awareness in my fingertips, feeling my way toward the next best hold. Could she feel that? I held her as though letting go would be the same thing as falling.

* * *

My real climbing education had begun only months earlier, when I met Carl, a man with big-wall, Yosemite experience. He practiced the old-school method of placing and removing anchors in the rock as he went, climbing with only what he carried. I apprenticed myself, belayed as Carl led, dutifully followed him up each route and retrieved the gear he’d left behind. On our last climbing day of that season, we stood midway up the route High Exposure, far above the treetops. Autumn blazed at our feet. Beginning up the second pitch, Carl fumbled at what local climbers had dubbed “The Move”: with left hand clinging to the underside of a massive stone shelf, feel blindly behind with your right to grip a ledge, then let your feet cut away into space, all your weight suspended for a moment from that single right hand.

After ten minutes, I began teasing him. After ten more, in a moment of teenage bravado, I said, “Come on, Carl. I could lead this one.”

He looked at me, face sheened with flop sweat, and said simply, “Fine.”

Retreating to where I stood, he lifted the gear sling from around his shoulder and hung it over mine. It was heavier than I’d expected. But that old epiphany was an exhortation to finish what my words had begun. I scrambled up the short slab and thrust my hand beneath the shelf, knowing if I paused too long, fear would have a chance to effect its heavy paralysis—the promises we make to ourselves often the easiest ones to break. With my other hand, I groped back and around until I had a lip of rock flush against my palm, a rough edge firm beneath my tensed fingers. Closed eyes. Deep breath. Letting go. Then out into the air, one move closer to the person I wanted to become.

* * *

I spent nearly every night at Hannah’s place, parking my car out of sight to avoid word getting back to Mary. It was an arrangement I didn’t question—I wanted to be with her; she wanted to be with me; we were together. Perhaps I thought that was what it meant to be an adult: to take from life what I wanted, when I wanted it.

She bought a small television and VCR. When rainy days kept me from the mountains, I lay in her arms and watched films like Cassavetes’ A Woman Under the Influence and My Life as a Dog. Her commentary through each was equal parts fangirl, technical observation, and masterclass.

Nights, I’d perch on the stool she’d bought for the kitchen so I could sit with her while she cooked, breathing in the heady scent of slow-roasted garlic and red wine whisked into simmering sauce. Cooking was something I’d previously disparaged as “girl stuff,” a fact she found unacceptable. “Anyone who’s smart and creative can cook,” she said, sliding a pan of pine nuts into the broiler. “There’s power in being able to invite people into your home and create an experience—for them, and for you.”

By the end of July, when daylight hours had begun to recede and breezes now and then pierced the summer heat, I led her along the gravel carriage road, where cliffs towered above the trees. She threw her head back in childlike wonder to take them in, just as I’d done to look at skyscrapers my first time in New York. Watching her made my chest hurt.

I spotted the split pine that marked the turn-off to Easy Overhang. At its base, I helped her into the harness and shoes I’d borrowed from my shop, went over the climbing rudiments I’d demonstrated earlier with a rope slung over a branch in her yard. Then I pulled off my shirt and finished my preparations in shorts and a sports bra. I was proud of the body I’d built that summer—the new definition in my arms and back, the deep brown of my tan. I thought then that I took her climbing because, after all she’d shared with me, I wanted to share something, too. But I see now I also did it to show off, to let her know there were areas in which I was the one who had knowledge and power.

Halfway up, she kissed me nervously, but said she was happy she’d come.

Jessica Jacobs #2Yet sixty feet up the next pitch, just as I lost sight of her beneath an overhang, I heard a garbled string of words lost to the distance and wind. I called down, leaning out to hear. All I could make out was, “Can’t.”

A climber appeared on a nearby route. “Your mom—” He saw my eyes narrow and started again, “Your friend’s kind of freaking out. I don’t think she’s going to make it up.”

I down-climbed as quickly as I could, an act far more difficult and dangerous than ascending, especially because, in my cocky self-assurance, I’d worn sneakers instead of climbing shoes. I found her wedged against the cliff, as far as possible from the edge.

On the drive home, Hannah said she figured the scare was caused by the vertigo she sometimes experienced. She said this in an attempt to make me feel better, but it just made me apologize more—even though she hadn’t mentioned a word of vertigo before I’d led her, and myself, away from the safety of the ground.

* * *

Mid-August, we walked from room to room, closing the storm windows. Having grown up in Florida, I’d never done this before and marveled at the weight of the extra pane, at the way the shuttered rooms—defined for me by their airiness and light—felt immediately stifled.

The next day, we stood outside in the cool morning air and kissed goodbye, Hannah on her way to L.A., I with a long drive to campus. I watched her in the rearview and remembered a few things I’d forgotten at her house. But I didn’t bother turning back, knowing I’d see her in Boston that October and spend the upcoming millennial New Year’s Eve with her—in New York or L.A., we hadn’t decided.

* * *

I started classes; she broke up with Mary. There were nightly phone calls, an exchange of letters. Then it was October. My fall break. I picked her up at Logan and we spent a night in Boston before heading to Cape Cod. Pulling up to the massive, marbled entrance of the Four Seasons, I tried not to gawk. She guided me through the steps of turning my keys over to the valet, even handed me a buck to tip him. The next day, she settled the bill: one night and room service, $500. I thanked her politely, as I’d been taught to do as a child when a friend’s parents took me to dinner, but sensed she wanted me to make a bigger deal. I’d been raised that it was rude to talk about how much you’d paid for something, but the deeper truth was I had no idea how expensive that was. It was the first time I’d been to a hotel with anyone other than my parents.

From the city, we made a quick pilgrimage to Anne Sexton’s house. We sat idling on her street, staring at the garage in which Sexton killed herself. “That crazy old kook drove these roads,” Hannah said, more to herself than to me. A strange diversion to begin a romantic getaway, but one that felt writerly and important. As with most things she suggested, I went with it.

Driving the meandering arc of Highway 6, she told me about college summers spent in Provincetown shucking oysters, working on a whale watching ship where the announcer had a pronounced lisp (“Look starboard and you can see what was once called a wight whale!” “Why did they call it that when it’s black?” “Because it’s the wight whale to kill!”), and dating like a fiend.

We parked and walked Provincetown’s main drag, which was thronged with middle-aged women in loose jeans and cableknit sweaters, with men whose ensembles ranged from burly lumberjack to spangled Speedo. A hot girl seemed to be on every corner. It was the gayest place I’d ever been. Weaving our way through, she continued telling stories. Half-listening, mesmerized by the crowds, it occurred to me that if we stayed together, I’d never have the types of summers she described.

This thinking only deepened during our week there. Removed from the protective bubble of her house, precocious as I might have been, I was still nineteen. Countless cultural references flew swiftly over my head. I was moody. She was tentative. I sensed I was entering a time in which I would be free to make bad, fun, wonderful choices; in which I would be too naïve to do anything other than expect the world to give me what I wanted—and so sometimes it would. But no matter how troubled I was by how staying with her might change and restrict me, the thought of losing her was still far worse.

Listening to a band our last night there, one of Hannah’s friends mentioned she liked the drummer’s shirt. Hannah, being Hannah, walked onstage in between sets and asked the woman for the shirt off her back, waving a twenty. The woman agreed. Show over, the drummer ignored the friend who’d been flirting with her all night and walked to where Hannah sat on a bar stool. She peeled off her shirt, revealing a filmy tank top beneath. She stood so close she was nearly between Hannah’s legs, and asked how long she’d be in town, if she wanted to get a drink sometime. All this despite the fact I was sitting there holding Hannah’s hand. It was as though I were too young to even be seen, let alone accounted for.

Back in our room, I fumed over the way I’d been treated, about how things couldn’t go on that way, until she pulled me into bed and surprised me by agreeing. Stunned, I lay beside her while she ended us, saying things like, “You’re nineteen. You need to be with someone your own age, and I should probably be with someone closer to mine. You’ll miss so many things if you’re with me.”

I curled into a ball, sobbing and not letting her touch me, though her touch was all I wanted. Despite my own doubts, I met that moment with complete disbelief. It had somehow never truly occurred to me that the future I had imagined for us might not play out.

“But I love you so much,” I said, ashamed to hear the movie-husband’s words leave my mouth. Yet I couldn’t help but add, “And you said you loved me, too.”

She took a long breath, her hand hovering above my shoulder before saying the words that marked the end of both my long-held romanticism and dreamy adolescence, “I know. That’s true. But sometimes that’s not enough.”

I drove her back to Logan the next day, dropping her off a full four hours before her flight. She kissed me and I tried to be stoic, forcing myself into the car, pulling away without looking back. A mile down the road, I caved: took the next off-ramp and sped back to the airport. Sprinting to the information desk, I asked after the flight to L.A. My doubts were gone. I was going to find her, along with the words I would say to change her mind.

In those pre-9/11 days, an unticketed passenger could go right to the gate. Suspecting she’d found an earlier flight, I ran for it, getting there just as the final passenger was boarding. I stood, hands curled into useless fists as the jetbridge door closed. I knew Hannah was on that plane, unquestionably, but I still went and looked in every wing of the terminal. I was right, though. She was on it. I never saw her again.

It’s the kind of thing you can’t put in a story because no one would believe it.

* * *

What I did not know as I drove back to school, weeping as though a family member had just died, was that upon graduating I’d write a letter that began, “I’m not even sure if you’ll remember me at this point …” and she’d write back a letter rife with questions and exclamation points and then never write again. I did not know that, for years, having learned just her outline, she would be for me Proust’s transparent envelope to the nth degree, a vessel into which I could imagine whatever was lacking in my partner of the moment. Or that I’d one day look out at a classroom of eighteen- and nineteen-year-olds, unable to see them as anything more than smart kids just past childhood, that I’d struggle not to question her too much on that score, attributing what happened between us to a beautiful fluke, a midsummer’s night kind of a thing.

I know now, through friends, that she’s married, that her wife is beautiful. But, still, I wonder if Hannah ever thinks of me.

I do, of her. Not as a long lost love—not anymore, but because during that summer she helped me find a way into my life, to not just imagine and plan, but to act. Images from that time stay with me, indelible. Like the night the summer’s final full moon rose above the cliffs and I returned to High Exposure. Full-moon climbing was a local tradition and, in full observation of that tradition, I climbed wearing nothing but shoes, a harness, and a headlamp. For the first fifty feet, my visibility was limited to the headlamp’s thin beam of light, making the surrounding trees and sky seem vast in comparison. The rope trailed down to a ground I could soon no longer see. Topping the treeline, the moon finally found me and I snapped off the light. The rock glowed gray-green, flashing with traces of quartz. Each hold was still warm from the day, redolent with the rich smells of earth and pine. I could hear only my breathing and the faint music from a hillside home. It seemed just minutes before I reached the first ledge.

Pausing to re-secure my harness, its heavy waistband dug into my bare hips, my thighs, making me aware of all that was left uncovered. But unlike my first time on that route, as I climbed toward The Move, I felt confident and strong. I reached back and caught the wide lip of rock, released my left hand, and swung into darkness. Bringing my left hand up to partner my right, I hung there for a moment and looked around. The moon was so big it looked like it could swallow the sky. I heard Sexton’s voice, that moon too bright forking through the bars to stick me with a singing in the head, and felt the air sheathe my skin. I thought of her then, of how being with Hannah allowed me to glimpse a future in which words mattered, in which a life with a woman was possible.

Then I pulled in my feet and began to climb, wishing every moment could be half as real as that one.

__________

Jessica Jacobs teaches literature and writing at Hendrix College and University of Arkansas at Little Rock. She received her MFA in Poetry from Purdue University, where she served as the Editor-in-Chief of Sycamore Review. Her poems and essays have most recently appeared in Beloit Poetry Journal, CALYX, Rattle, and The Los Angeles Review. (web)

Photos of Jessica Jacobs courtesy of author.

Rattle Logo

November 17, 2013

Matthew Wimberley

TABULA RASA

He still remembers how to move
sandpaper with the wood grain,
push back years of weariness
and start again. I watch
him strip away lacquer, deep maple
colored jelly pushed off of edges
and pooled on the floor. The smell
of chemicals eating at paint and wood until
the surface looks like chalk dust
or the shoulder-blade of some extinct mammal
in a museum. He brushes away sawdust
from the tabletop like a paleontologist pushing
dirt in the badlands, callused hands shaking
as he excavates. His own bones ready
for the earth. Hips replaced. Knees rebuilt. Man
made heart. Arched over the table dipping
his brush in a tin-can of stain propped
on an anvil, he lets the polyurethane give itself
to the wood and looks over to me.
Who are you? I give my best fake smile until he
sighs and goes back to work, taking
a kerchief out of his breast pocket to dab
away sweat on his forehead. Nana tells me
it hurts to forget. Eighty-six years don’t
disappear all at once. When the work’s done
he stirs the paint stick in the wood stain
and lets the lid rest over the top. Brushes
washed and put away, so only the table remains.

from Rattle #39, Spring 2013
Tribute to Southern Poets

[download audio]

__________

Matthew Wimberly: (North Carolina): “I wrote my first poem after reading ‘A Tree Grows in Brooklyn’ in the seventh grade. That poem changed the rest of my life. Growing up on top of a mountain meant I’d often have to entertain myself alone. I loved running down trails and skipping stones in the creek behind my house, and it became natural to entertain myself by writing poetry. To this day I love to play with words, to see how a poem can provide a new lens for looking at the world. If anything, I want other people to find something as alive in poetry as out in the wild.”

Rattle Logo

August 10, 2013

Review by Mary Harwell SaylerNatural Theologies by Denise Low

NATURAL THEOLOGIES:
ESSAYS ABOUT LITERATURE OF THE NEW MIDDLE WEST
by Denise Low

The Backwaters Press
3502 North 52nd Street
Omaha, Nebreska 68104-3506
ISBN: 978-1-935218-22-7
2011, pp. 185, $20.00
www.thebackwaterspress.com

Almost any innovative book that combines a discussion of literature with theology will get my attention, but when Denise Low set just such a conversation in a Midwestern locale, my interest soared even more. As a cautious kid growing up and mostly remaining in the South, I found stories of Native Americans, pioneers, frontierspeople, and cowpeople (boys or girls) intriguing because they were bold, and I was not.

As an adult accompanied by a brave spouse, I’ve since hugged the U.S. coastline, drooled over quaint little towns in rural New England, and said hi to Canada and other countries—but I’ve seldom set more than the stopover foot of an airline passenger onto the vast American plains.

Do buffalo still roam? Do people get along? Do the Indians of my childhood prefer to be called Native Americans now?

The latter question received an almost immediate answer when I saw the author’s reference to Native Americans not as Indians but Indigenous people. Good to know as I got to know the diverse voices in this “first critical study of contemporary Mid-Plains literature”—a book that includes much-admired poets and writers but also a wide range of Midwestern voices I had not previously heard.

Denise Low obviously knows each of those voices well. Not only has she taught at various universities and won prestigious awards for her own books, she’s a fifth-generation Kansan, whose roots go as deep as prairie grasslands. More importantly, perhaps, her personal lineage of European and tribal peoples have given her a uniquely blended background for intelligently discussing relevant topics—from the landscape to the Lakota to the contemporary literary achievements of native Midwesterners.

Taking cover under the book’s title, four sections come together in “A Revised Frontier Literature” (with a variety of accomplished poets and writers, including Denise Low), “Settlement. The Cities” (with Langston Hughes, David Ray, Mbembe Milton Smith, Stanley E. Banks), “Hard Land, Strong Character” (William Stafford, Robert Day, Patricia Traxler, and others), and “Natural Theologies,” which looks at “Ted Kooser’s Poetics of Devotion,” the “Poets in the Bible Belt” (Michael Poage, Jo Mcdougall, and Kathryn Kysar), and “Louise Erdrich’s Magic Spells, Prayers, and Parables.”

That fourth section drew me to the book, but touched on more than I’d imagined, such as how “American Indian religions derive belief from specific sacred sites,” or how poems by Ted Kooser “begin located in solid reality, but then surreal leaps occur.” For instance, the poem “Etude” starts with the narrator’s “watching a Great Blue Heron,” who, by the end, “would spear the whole world if he could,/ toss it and swallow it live.” As a poet who devours well-written poetry in big chunks, I totally understood the desire.

Also, in the last section, I learned that Midwestern poets who had a church upbringing seem inclined to “submerge Christian backgrounds in their writings” as they “raise theological questions and pose some answers.” For example, Michael Poage,” an ordained minister whose work I’m now eager to see,  gives voice to Mary the Mother of Jesus not as a “church authority here but rather a quiet person who lives each day among ordinary details.”

In discussing other poetry by Poage, Denise Low says, “Chance meetings occur repeatedly in this poet’s works, and the moments of contact that occur without warning, like bolts of lightning from a sky god, are moments of Christian grace.”

That particular poet-pilgrim “struggles in a global landscape without sure answers,” which helped the previous sections of the book come together for me, too, as I began to see that the “new” Middle West does not present the same scene or situations Hollywood scriptwriters typically depict. As those early myths began to fall away, I saw what the author meant by migration becoming “an inner journey, reenacted through poetry, fiction, music, and film.” Although cross-country travels still take place along historical trails, they most likely occur not by horse and wagon but minivan or RV where “broken lines crisscross open grassland, often alongside contemporary throughways, [and] the past intersects the present.”

For a little Southern girl who spent her weekly allowance on Saturday matinées featuring cowboys and Indians, the book brought an abrupt change of perspective. For example, I learned that the Lakota peoples “came to represent all ‘Indian’ groups, with their eagle feather headdresses, tipis, and horses” seen on the silver screen because of a photograph someone took when at least 300 Lakota of all ages were frozen, literally, in place and figuratively in time as temperatures plunged, instantaneously preserving those killed at Wounded Knee in the last military action against Indigenous people.

The feeling of “being under siege” lingers, and yet the literature of the “New Middle West” seems more apt to adapt, innovate, and follow Low’s insightful view of Poage’s work where “Sorrow can be overcome by wonder.”

Yes, and oh, what wonders! The winters, the weather, the overpowering landscapes, the open-wide spaces, the city life, the jazz music, the pool halls, the artifacts, the mounds, the floodplains, the buffalo, the coyotes, and the voices represented in these page somehow blend, harmonize, or note the discordances. As the book sweeps across the past, present, peoples, and prairie, the eclectic voices are worth hearing, literature worth reading, and places worth envisioning even if we, like the pioneers and frontierspeople of yesteryear, only get to travel through—almost always on the way to someplace else.

__________

Mary Harwell Sayler, a traditionally published poet, poetry advisor, and almost native Floridian, recently began a diverse group for Christian Poets & Writers on Facebook. Although she’d placed 24 books of fiction and nonfiction, Hiraeth Press published her first full-length poetry book Living in the Nature Poem in 2012. Since then she’s been playing with forms and free verse for an in-the-works book of Bible-based poems. www.marysayler.com

Rattle Logo

April 10, 2013

Review by Wesley RothmanThe Oracle of Hollywood Boulevard by Dana Goodyear

THE ORACLE OF HOLLYWOOD BOULEVARD
by Dana Goodyear

W. W. Norton
500 Fifth Avenue
New York, New York 10110
ISBN 978-0-393-08246-3
2013, 69 pp., $25.95
www.wwnorton.com

Whether you’ve walked or driven down Hollywood Blvd. or not, there is a mysticism associated with it: vendors pitching plastic souvenirs at Hollywood and Highland, the behemoth Kodak Theatre with its mall shopping, the tinseled Walk of Fame, Scientology’s home base, Ripley’s Believe It Or Not, sidewalk bucket-drummers, Grauman’s looming Chinese Theatre all red and gold, the homeless, the HOLLYWOOD sign, palm trees, burning hills, and celebrity impersonators. In short, an entire mythology of true magnitude. The poems in Dana Goodyear’s second collection, The Oracle of Hollywood Boulevard, use this place as a starting point, the epicenter of a great earthquake and its network of aftershocks.

The collection opens with “Springtime in Hollywood,” the first line of which calls to us, “I returned: to the bleached light.” This first poem gives us a speaker, the speaker’s place, and a direction in which to head. As a kinetic, impressionistic glimpse of Los Angeles, we come to know the poet and the place with flashes of a “birdlife,” “afraid to stop.” We witness the “jacarandas/ getting naked in the street” and “Capillaries bursting/ in the leaf’s pink cheek.” And there is “an engine idling” somewhere “behind/ a closed white door,” which this first poem can’t help but parallel. Goodyear shows us the door and gives us the gurgling vehicle to find behind it. We’re off.

As we’re thrust into Goodyear’s cubist or collagist or combustible, compact lyrics, so many pack their own natural power—abrupt earth-shaking, fluid-rush of brushfire, or the immensity and wind-knocking power of desire. The poet brings together the sparkling excitement of the city, people living in or near it, and its disaster-prone landscape, from sea to shining desert: earthquakes, fires, marriage, mudslides, floods, sexuality, churning surf, high-velocity car accident fatalities, pregnancy, misogyny, overdoses, and homicide. Goodyear stitches these qualities together, but in doing so must challenge her readers to think, feel, and imagine beyond their own limited experiences. This challenge is where the collection really shines. Each poem is built of somewhat common images, familiar language and syntax, not incredibly acrobatic or confusing, but the ideas and emotions formed in each poem are not always easily accessible to the reader—we have to work for it. Not all that dissimilar from life in L.A.

Now a look at some particularly terrific pieces that contribute to this impressionistic profile of the City of Angels, and some pieces that wander elsewhere. “Separate People” toys with identity, with states of mind, and the role relationship plays in them:

I have been beside you
all night like soaped windows,

[…]

“That’s why I’m a mountain,
I am cold and pointy at the top,”
I said, asleep,
the Oracle of Hollywood Boulevard.
Your sad question:
Where were we?
Then, knowing that you weren’t,}
Was I there?

Not long after this mind-turning piece, Goodyear gives us the instructional “Kit for Civilization”:

Want hearts. Make a religion of sex.
Separate the sick. Teach the smart ones
greed. Decide small pieces are important,
and divide them (two for you, one for him).
Tell your story on a bowl.
Paint skulls and weapons; give them eyes
and smiles. Learn to deal.
Soften, grow more pompous. Exult
in the love between this and that,
or you and your god. Abstract. Talk peace.
When the enemy comes, eat this.

Compact yet eerily comprehensive, this poem is a perfect example of Goodyear’s manipulation of poetic craft, her intriguing strangeness that, in the end, doesn’t really feel all that unfamiliar. She breaks the line with purpose (“Teach the smart ones/ greed”) and builds a strikingly pertinent, ongoing ending: “Abstract. Talk peace./ When the enemy comes, eat this.” Every time I read this poem I spend more time than I should wondering, Why should I eat this? Who is the enemy? Who don’t I want to be part of civilization? Should I eat this to keep it my own and no one else’s? This is the poignancy of Goodyear’s poetry.

“Freeway” keeps us moving through the infrastructure of L.A. and, appropriately, of the book as we pass into the second section. She speaks of the river running alongside the freeway:

It begins with thought and ends with speech,

while the road just drains and drains, gray
nervous miles. I drive all day under a strike surface
scratched by skywriters’ mistakes …

As she does quite literally in “Freeway,” Goodyear travels in every poem and with this collection, and we can’t help but travel as her readers. Her lyricism moves like thought, erratic and improvisational, but always meaningful and well-considered. In “Conception” we see the full force of the poet’s cubism—it’s not a single story or view of conception, but a piecing together of situations that somehow weigh on the concept.

“Choose Life” says the hand-drawn sign
at the edge of the almond-pale, crystal-pink grove
on Interstate 5.

A pole of teenagers in Hollywood asks
“What is the opposite of youth?”
Overwhelmingly, they answer “death.”

Meanwhile, in the Magic Garden, the grass
begins to build a crusty yellow tip, ice forms
on the volcano’s lip, the cone hole yawns clean.

And as Goodyear leaps from physical (and metaphysical) place to place, she lunges somewhere new with each poem. The formally and topically diverse parts of “The Singing Bowl” could be considered the collection’s crescendo for its dexterity and completeness. Goodyear demonstrates her ability with different modes of poetry here, including poem- and line-length, stanza breaks, innovative image and scene, and constructing a believable, comprehensive “universe” for the poem. I would reproduce the entire poem here, but instead, here one part, and I enthusiastically encourage anyone to find it, and read it!

6. The Dreams of Pregnant Women

“Water, talking animals, tall buildings, sex…”
witnessed crimes, spilled fluids, falling down
an elevator shaft, seducing the interrogator,
his one fat finger pressed against my lips.

There I was, on my knees, wailing,
while my mother searched the bedding
for the baby and found stained lace
dresses and discarded china dolls instead.

Her recurring dream, she told me
later on the phone, was that she had a baby
she forgot to feed. Then, after a pause,
“I guess I’m the baby.”

Other dazzling moments of the book include “Lüsterweibchen” with its meditation on a German-style chandelier combining a pair of antlers and a wooden woman’s bust; the persona poem “Pornographer at 84;” the wrenching “At the Dildo Factory;” and the paranoid “Mirage.” And as this particular journey comes to a close, Goodyear arrives “Home:”

The furnace burnt the underbrush;
electricity shocked the pool;
dry as hands, the poison leaves
of the poison tree flew from the roof,
where one night, years ago, while
we watched Play Misty for Me,
wind played the fence wires’
anguished vocal chords, a lowing
loud as a mourning cow.
This imperfect world.
We are going, we are almost gone.
An accident: your globe dashed,
blue fragments puzzling the floor.
A cosmic question on your face.

While there is certainly inertia to the structure and organization of Goodyear’s collection, narrative is muscled out by lyrics and an emphasis that this is a collection of individual poems. In many books of poetry it seems narrative or a project dominates: series of poems, individual narratives, a theme. The Oracle of Hollywood Boulevard may have an arguably loose theme, but more so offers glimpses of Los Angeles, its nature and anti-nature, its people and überstars, but the collection doesn’t only concern itself with this place or its people.

The collection is lyric, just as many of the individual pieces are. This is a powerful characteristic of the book for at least two reasons. Firstly, it reminds readers that these are in fact autonomous poems, pieces of art that stand alone, and, in this case, together. Secondly, it accurately constructs a concept of Los Angeles and its surrounding areas by not telling stories that connect to one another. In Los Angeles there seems a prevailing sense of being “miniature, coked, afraid to stop.” And I say “appropriate” because there is definitely a lyrical quality to the city and its sprawling domain. There are certainly other modes of living in the metropolis, but even as a native of the city I can’t help but remember and think of it in this way. There are wild fires and freeways and Mexican radio stations, coyotes and dirty wind and news, magic and pornography and suburbia and strange concoctions of life—all of which appear in The Oracle of Hollywood Boulevard. Goodyear’s book contributes to what the term “collection” means for the art of poetry, and offers us visceral, strange, and seductive lyrics through which we can see some of our worlds.

__________

Wesley Rothman serves as an assistant poetry editor for Narrative, senior poetry reader for Ploughshares, and a member of Salamander’s Board of Directors. A recent Pushcart Prize nominee and finalist for the 49th Parallel, McCabe, and Consequence Poetry Prizes, his poems and reviews have appeared or are forthcoming in journals including The Bellingham Review, Salamander, Ruminate, Newcity, and The Critical Flame. He has worked at Copper Canyon Press, and now teaches writing at Emerson College and the University of Massachusetts, Boston.

Rattle Logo

March 5, 2013

Review by Preston M. Browning, Jr.In Vitro by Leland Jamieson

IN VITRO: NEW SHORT RHYMING POEMS POST-9/11
by Leland Jamieson

CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform
ISBN-10: 1441471219
ISBN-13: 978-1441471215
2009, 146 pp., $13.95
www.createspace.com

I am a prose man. Although I spent more than thirty-five years teaching in English departments and though my wife, Ann, was a  poet and my daughter, Sarah, is a poet as well, poetry was never my real cup of tea. (I probably should confess here that after my first date with the woman who became my wife, I spent the night writing a sonnet for her.)  Shakespeare, along with Donne and Milton, had taught me to love the sonnet; Wordsworth’s and Keats’ sonnets also left an indelible memory of greatness. Both in Chicago and in Yugoslavia, where I spent a Fulbright year in the late seventies, I experienced unbounded joy when leading a class through an hour’s discussion of Emily Dickinson’s poems. Teaching Frost, Eliot, Gwendolyn Brooks, Roethke and Sylvia Plath was an unfailing source of satisfaction as well. I have more recent favorites, among them Ernesto Cardenal, Martin Espada, Sam Hamill, Carolyn Forche, Richard Wilbur, Daniela Geoseffi, Roberto Bolano, and Derek Walcott.

But the life blood of my teaching career lay with the fiction writers—Melville, Edith Wharton, Fitzgerald, Hemingway, Flannery O’Connor, Ralph Ellison,  Walker Percy, Saul Bellow, Toni Morrison and Louise Erdrich, among many others. And  Faulkner. Divine Faulkner! More than a decade since my last class, the high I experienced when observing the excitement of students as we explored together  that tortured labyrinth Joe Christmas traverses in Light in August still remains fresh in memory. Great poetry I admired; great fiction I virtually worshipped.

Thus when asked to review Leland Jamieson’s second book of poems, In Vitro: New Short Rhyming Poems Post-9/11, I hesitated. But not for long. For Jamieson is a poet of  great talent, who has mastered the practice of writing formal verse, and whose work deserves to be more widely known and read. In this volume one finds at every turn of the page poems exhibiting  extraordinary agility in yoking together contraries and sometimes (strange) conjunctions leading to the kind of revelations that  truly superior poetry always provides.

Specifically, what the reader finds in this poetry is a world  where the personal and the philosophical reside harmoniously—and make music together. Many of the poems are dedicated to friends or family members and a good number are rooted in events or relationships involving the poet or close family. Yet Jamieson’s poetry—much of it, at any rate—is nothing if not intellectual. By this I do not mean that it is freighted with big ideas,  though it doesn’t hurt to have read some of the writings of Rupert Sheldrake such as The Sense of Being Stared At: and Other Aspects of the Extended Mind or to be familiar with the legends concerning the Anunnaki astronauts that supposedly visited earth many millennia ago, as recounted “in cuneiform on clay tablets sometime prior to the collapse of Sumer in 2023 B. C.”[1]  Jamieson’s major sources for this lore are books by Zecharia Sitchin, Earth Chronicles and The Lost Book of Enki. I shall return to this subject when discussing some of Jamieson’s final selections.

No one contemplating these poems can have any doubt that this writer has spent many years reading philosophy, theology, and  recent scientific theories and discoveries; or that the knowledge thus acquired permeates his reflections on life’s disappointments, triumphs, and ironies and the pitfalls that inevitably await those who refuse to learn from the past or whose hubris leads them to assume that their generation or they individually will escape the fate that all humans suffer when they willfully ignore the lessons history or nature might teach them. But these themes are almost always dealt with without the odor of moral superiority—this former preacher seldom preaches.

Another way of coming at this matter is to note that reading In Vitro from beginning to end is like listening as Leland Jamieson recounts memorable events from his life, a sort of poetic memoir—one might even call it an intellectual or spiritual autobiography—highlighting such occasions as the death of his father when the poet was quite young, his mother’s remarriage, going off to an Episcopal boarding school in North Carolina, transferring from Trinity College to UNC at Chapel Hill, getting married to Gretchen, his sweetheart of many years, studying for the ministry, disillusionment with his role as a clergyman, and various efforts—none fully satisfying—to find the right vocation until, that is, he hit upon writing  formal verse. Like the accomplished artist he is,  this poet brings to bear upon the subject or event an oftentimes surprising discovery of meaning, a kind of “ah ha” moment. Though it’s a minor example in this collection, the following sonnet tells the story.

Scotman’s Prophecy

“I doubt you’ll easily find a line of work
you’ll step irrevocably in, long term,”
a college prof  had said. “Your knee may jerk,
but wiggle-worms in you will make you squirm.”
If you’re like some, you’ll think you’ll go beserk
as you try out each job, ‘til one affirms
your joy in it, and lifts your civil smirk
with eyes more lively than a pachyderm’s.”

Turns out my teacher had sure sixth sense.
I first tried out the church, then show biz, life
insurance sales, consulting, thence
recruiting—tiresome, all. Where was that fife
and drum corps I could prance beside for miles … ?
Retired, my ”feet” dance rhymes—my eyes bright smiles.

Here the final two lines do the work of the traditional heroic couplet with  revelation laced with irony: Only  in retirement did the poet find the vocation that had eluded him in each of the careers he had undertaken. Now it is with dancing “feet” of  poetic lines that end with rhymes that a wholly fulfilling vocation has been discovered.

In Vitro contains 88  poems, all of which exhibit Jamieson’s commitment to creating formal verse. Jamieson has stated that “teaching myself to write end-rhyming metrical verse is the single most liberating thing I have ever done in my entire writing life. What it liberates is feeling.” There is nothing very original about this discovery—we might recall Wordsworth’s description of poetry as “emotion recollected in tranquility.” Shortly, however, we will examine Jamieson’s theories concerning  how  in formal verse  feeling and thought are given equal expression to create a holistic “harmony” in the brain not possible in poetry that eschews regular meter and rhyme.

The sonnet appears to be Jamieson’s favorite form and more often than not the metrical pattern is the traditional iambic pentameter. In this volume, however, we encounter poems of various lengths; one, “No Razzmatazz?” contains  nineteen stanzas of seven lines each. Because this poem presents in miniature the poet’s search for and discovery of his true vocation from the time of his arrival, a green, introverted “Florida Cracker,” at Trinity College in Hartford to the moment he knows he’s arrived at his soul’s home, it is worth quoting a few lines from this piece. Here are three stanzas that appear toward the poem’s end.

Such brightness often made him blink,
surprised to stumble on a view,
an overlook that was in sync,
with more than he had known he knew!
Why, he’d not dreamed he had a clue.
Thus deep within each heaving lung
his voice fledged wings for Mother Tongue.

She chants of consciousness man shares
or slowly withers up in drought.
She greens his outlook when she dares
him, “Gaze beyond your known redoubt,
and venture on a walkabout.
Seek vistas new to your eyes’ reach.
I, Mother Tongue, will give you speech.

I am the Future, Presence, Past.
I’m morphic Resonance. I form
chaotic thought and feeling massed
like iron filings quick to swarm
magnetic force fields and transform
themselves with order on a saucer—
looking to force fields for their author.

At this juncture I wish to explore Jamieson’s rather passionate dedication to rhyme, regular meter and all the other features of formal verse. I shall in a moment summarize his own explanation of this commitment, but first it may be helpful to quote a few lines from Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi’s Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention. In a chapter entitled “The Domain of the Word,” this scholar writes:

Anthony Hecht is a lyric poet whose verse has been published in numerous collections and in The New Yorker and other leading magazines … Hecht’s poems are crystalline, elegant to the point of refinement, constructed with a rigorous attention to form. A Vivaldi concerto could provide a passable musical analogy to his writing. He often uses the sonnet, or even earlier canzoni of the kind used in the Middle Ages … The rules of these forms are so rigid that even Dante complained that to write according to them was like hanging chains upon himself … Yet, paradoxically, it is by following such demanding discipline that poetry can liberate the writer—and the reader—from the jumbled onslaught of raw experience. [2]

In a slender volume entitled Making Metaphor Poems by Simile & Rhyme: A Guide for High School Teachers, Jamieson offers his own rationale for writing formal verse. First, he calls attention to recent research about “the effect of line, meter, and rhyme in poetry with regard to its impact on the human brain” and then  notes that in numerous languages ranging from English, Spanish, Greek, and Hungarian to the languages of Zambia and New Guinea,, “all utilize in their most well-established poetry lines that are a similar length in elapsed time when spoken.” Jamieson continues:

… the line length in all these  languages does not exceed the elapsed time that the conscious mind consumes as it speaks, grasps, and understands the line’s content within what is called ‘the present moment’ of hearing. On the other hand, the line is not so short that it allows other thoughts to intrude into the unconsumed “present moment.” The biological or “neural length” of a present moment of hearing is roughly 3 seconds.

Jamieson notes that iambic pentameter and iambic tetrameter are both securely established as favorites of English-speaking poets, with pentameter taking “an average 3.3 seconds to speak, tetrameter 2.4.” Jamieson claims that “these are congruent with lower frequency brain waves associated with the brain’s heightened creativity.”[3]

In reading iambic metrical end-rhymed poetry aloud we are drawn by the underlying auditory rhythm (ta-TUM, ta-TUM, ta-TUM) as well as by the periodic end-rhymes. Scientists say the brain is driven by them. These rhythmic drivers bring about a cooperative feedback loop across the corpus callosum between the (rational) word-strength of the left hemisphere brain and the (feeling) image-strength of the right hemisphere.[4]

The conclusion that this line of reasoning leads to appears to offer definitive support to the theories of  Csikszentmhalyi, to wit: “When the right and left hemispheres are united in this feed-back loop, we (whether as poets making a poem, or readers of it, or listeners to it) experience our world more holistically. This is especially true for experience we consider ambiguous.” Left-brain thinking by itself  “cannot accomplish this holistic integration for us.”[5]

Does the writing and reading of formal verse really help in making sense of the jumbled, often chaotic matter of everyday experience, allowing our apprehension of and response to a world as “holistic” when it seems almost daily more fragmented and random? Obviously Jamieson believes it does and thus his commitment to creating formal verse has about it a kind of “religious” fervor. Perhaps it is true that, as Auden wrote, “poetry makes nothing happen”—certainly not in the world of  politics where “Ignorant armies clash by night,” as Matthew Arnold famously observed. But individually, I think we can affirm with certainty, the creators and readers of poetry are changed by the words, the ideas and the cadences of poetry. If it’s mere fancy word play, why bother? A skillfully wrought parody of  “The Love Song of  J. Alfred Prufrock” might then be as valuable as the original.

As suggested earlier, in this body of verse, we find great depth of feeling, always restrained by a slightly mirthful irony; before we read far into the book, we come to expect a witty turn as the poet discovers where his intellectual and emotional peregrinations have led him. One of my favorite poems in this volume is “Persimmons,   Pseudopods and Such,” in which Jamieson rallies all his skills as a craftsman while addressing weighty subjects: mind, romantic love, sex, cultural restraints and the collision of the four. This is a poem of six stanzas of varying length. Here are the first two:

Which is more worthy to live by?
Romance (a dreamland in my head)
or groin-gland instincts close to thigh?
Which makes the richer planting bed?
Plus my reptilian brain’s a gland.
So’s  limbic. Neocortex  too.
(How easily glands get out of hand
deciding what is best to do.)

More, mind’s non-local, linking heads.
Its resident pseudopod projects
and “vibs” with other ‘pods whose spreads
(invisible) each intersects.
So? Head? Groin? Mind? It’s hard to say,
given how glands all interplay.

The classic mind-body split: intellect versus sexual drive; glands interacting to the confusion, even consternation, of the individual. The human condition caught in fourteen lines—a perfect sonnet. A lesser poet might have ended here. But Jamieson sees multiple possibilities yet to be unraveled. In the fourth stanza he reflects on “puppy love(or fear)” and the adolescent’s narcissism driving the novice in such matters to the point at which “we’d play so brazenly we’d drown/ in mirror-pools that serve the throne/ of Estrogen-Testosterone.”

The fifth stanza begins with a question normally not asked, “Now I’m grown up—what is grown up?” and proceeds to reflect on how the commercial world depends on human glands and the fluids they secrete for its successful functioning:

No ad man eats unless adroit
cajoling me with training cup
to juice the glands he would exploit.
Testosterone fuels auto sales.
Estrogen seeks out “buys” for women.
But glands dry up as we furl sails
and munch our rock-hard green persimmon.

As a country boy in Virginia seventy some years ago, I was frequently impatient to savor the succulent flavor of the ripe persimmon, a wild fruit that needed a few frosts to dissipate its bitterness when still green. I can still conjure up the quite disgusting taste that caused my entire mouth to revolt when I bit into a green specimen.

The final stanza again employs the persimmon image and blends it with an image of the pseudopodium (or “pod”) as goad (here sound comes into play, with “pod” being virtually identical to “prod”). This word is used in zoology to describe “A process formed by the temporary extension of the protoplasm of a cell or a unicellular animal, serving for taking food, for locomotion, etc,”[6]

Persimmon-bitter, culture’s pod
projects against both yours and mine
from birth to death. Although a fraud,
it’s common … and thus seems benign.
Its pseudopod can make us ashen—
though it may school us in compassion.

The word “pod,” first used in the second stanza, reappears in the third: “When stared at from behind, I turn/ The starer’s pod directs my eyes./ Our eyes now touch by sight, and yearn/ for more, or none, and mobilize/ according to intent I read/ as he or she acts well, or odd.” This word denoting a  mere—but functional—protrusion of a the most basic unit of  life is here called into service to describe a fundamental human interaction—a friendly greeting perhaps, though it could be a frightened or embarrassed moment of mistaken identity: “A friend? Or not? My ‘brains’ accede/ as starer calls—or turns, faux pased …”

This image of  the pod as a primitive human accessory or faculty gets picked up in the final stanza, now identified with culture, that bundle of do’s and don’ts, of restrictions and injunctions, that weight of shame and guilt from which few individuals are entirely free; from childhood most  feel its goad. And though its demands and prohibitions may seem a “fraud” (arbitrary?), they do frequently perform a function essential to civilized life—the teaching of compassion. And compassion, or, more precisely, its oftentimes absence in human affairs, many of Jamieson’s poems wish to proclaim, is the point of it all.

Frequently, and especially in the final selections of this volume, Jamieson makes refers to the theories of  Zecharia Sitchin concerning alien creatures who once invaded Earth and, in fact, created the human race. Some readers may be put off by Jamieson’s seeming credulity, ascribing verity to what, at first glance, appear to be at best fascinating myths. And not myths shared by any “primitive” tribe, nor by the bulk of the primitive tribe we call “homo sapiens.” Who were these creatures from the planet Nibiru, these Anunnaki astronauts who supposedly invaded Earth millions of years ago in search of gold and, using in vitro technology, implanted in apes a human mind tainted with an avaricious, violent spirit? (It was these slaves who mined the gold taken back to Nibiru and they and their descendants who have wrecked planet Earth with their greed and lust, raping the Earth and dominating women in the process.)

I suspect many readers of In Vitro may respond like a library clerk at Yale who, when displaying for Jamieson and his wife the cuneiform tablets on which Sitchin has based his theories, replied to a question regarding Sitchin’s books, “We don’t do sci fi at Yale.” Although I have read with delight and taught a couple of books by Ursula LeGuin, I too don’t normally “do sci fi.” While I don’t wish to enter a debate as to whether Sitchin’s ideas can be taken seriously as based in fact, I have found Jamieson’s use of those ideas in his poetry immensely engaging and sufficiently tantalizing to impel me to seek opinions from scholars who can shed light on those ideas’ authenticity. The following comments by one of them,  Kenneth Pollinger, inspire me to seek further evidence:

Having read 13 prior books by Zecharia Sitchin I can attest to his superb scholarship. There Were Giants Upon the Earth, his latest, is probably his most important since he states that there are SKELETAL remains in the Natural History Museum in London which could possibly finally end the debate about whether his works are “myth” or historical FACT. His main approach here is built around Pre-Diluvial and post-Diluvial “gods, Demigods and Pharaoh lists” (the Lists of Kings of Manethro; and also those of Borossus), as well as the genealogical line of the Hebrew Bible. He accumulates much information about all these beings thus presented and weaves a fascinating history of their interrelationships and how they are related to: a) the beginning of creation, b) the beginning of evolution, c) the creation of Mankind, d) the Deluge, e) longevity, NOT immortality, f) and finally, how there are skeletal remains of a “Queen Puabi” and a “Prince Meskalaindug”(who are, respectively, a “goddess” and a “demi-god”), which, if their DNA and mtDNA are tested, could provide the MISSING LINK (that small but crucial group of  “alien” genes—223 of them?) that genetically upgraded a Homo Erectus or Homo Ergaster to Homo Sapiens, some 300, 000 years ago.[7]

I consider unarguable Prof. Pollinger’s subsequent speculation that if DNA testing should prove that Sitchin’s theories are, in truth, historical fact, a revolution in biblical and religious interpretation would be inevitable . Clearly, Leland Jamieson came to this conclusion some years ago, and his later poems reflect, I think, a rejection of the Judeo-Christian account of how the creation and human species came into existence. Moreover, the later poetry embodies a “system” of ethical and quasi-religious beliefs that comments on the proclivities those slaves of millennia ago passed on to their descendants over the ages and unto our present generation—violence, warfare, oppression of the weak, including women. Let us examine two poems in which these theories of Sitchin’s play a part: “Bagged in Baghdad” and “Woven in Sun.”

Bagged in Baghdad

With thanks to Zecharia.Sitchin

For G. K. J.

Before I lay me down to sleep
I pray—the Lord?—my soul to keep … ?
But Deity’s no astronaut
from Nibiru whose first cheap shot
was pirating away Earth’s gold
deep-mined from every vein and fold.

Nor was the cheapest shot gold ore,
but stealing apes’ genetic core.
Lords hybridized ”Man” with lord code—
designed “smart apes” to bear the load
of muscling gold ore out of mines
while lords lay back on their behinds.

Lords taught us, too, to fight their wars
for land and wealth—slave  matadors …
Before I lay me down to sleep
in reeking bloodshed we now reap
For Our lord—wait! Let’s not torment
Astral intelligence’s intent.

Einstein said , Dark is lack of light—
cold, heat—and evil, good.
(Despite
man’s intellectual overlays,
it’s plain—it’s no cathedral maze
of stone we grope, our fingers crossed,
bloodied, cobwebbed, and, like us, lost.)

I thank Astral Intelligence
for feeling still intact with sense
which thrives and guides us as evolved—
that’s free of need to be “Absolved.”
It calls us toward a common good
and seeks, for Earth, one neighborhood.

But greed shouts out “Technology!”
as though it were the end-all-be-
all. “Gulp the black gold. Yellow! More!”
Dismissing Light, and Good, we war—
the leitmotif of leitmotifs
of  Niburian lords’ beliefs

Jamieson’s poems are instinct with “Astral Intelligence,” that is, the mind’s activity that avoids the pure abstractions of Descartes’ cogito but instead binds together emotion and thought interacting to bring about, as noted earlier, holistic results. In this poem and others Jamieson takes aim at the modern world’s naïve faith in science to always make life on planet Earth “better” and its addiction to technology to achieve that end. Blinded by greed, we moderns continue to pursue our destructive ways, consuming heedlessly resources that are not inexhaustible, always crying for more. And, ignoring the common good, we employ warfare as our chief modus operandi. Reverence for and preservation of the Earth—and the creation of a global community based on principles of justice, peace and sustainability—should claim our unwavering attention.

Now let us return to “No Razzmatazz?” in order to determine what light the final stanza of this somewhat autobiographical poem can shed on the entire intellectual enterprise In Vitro represents: “I do not answer when called ‘Anile’/ My rhyme and meter help you scroll/ the ground-waves of Gaia’s channel./ Now, bear with me and slowly troll/ those force fields we two can cajole—/ no razzmatazz—to break real news/ ’til consciousness is what folks choose.”

If I understand him correctly, Jamieson is here telling his readers—conjuring his readers may be more precise—to read his poetry as a kind of manifesto; to join him in a process of expanding consciousness that will eventually permit our species to escape from the pathologies—blood-drenched strife, ruthless oppression, soul-destroying addiction to accumulation of wealth—that have plagued us throughout all our ages on Earth. Gaia (Earth) should be our teacher, but always Gaia studied by “mindfulness.”

In a sonnet entitled “Woven in Sun (A poem for Valentine’s Day),” Jamieson begins the third quatrain with this line: “Poetry calls on hearts’ and brains’ joint wit.” Now his consummate skill in creating brilliant metaphorical language is manifest as he continues: “aligns and lifts it in a weft that’s one/ felt shuttling mindfulness—so lickety-split/ we glimpse new holograms woven in sun.” As we would expect, the  couplet pulls together the threads of this poem but seems, to my mind, to raise a perplexing question: “These guide us, storm-tossed Astral word-winged birds,/ homing by vaster means than wings or words.”

The “holograms woven in sun” would appear to be constituted of Astral Intelligence, a gift from the sky, the sun. But what of Earth’s (Gaia’s) role in teaching humans how to break the grip of  the psychological/spiritual pathologies imparted to the species when created? A possible answer may be this: mindfulness, the cure that could save humans from self-destruction—always implied in the species’ lust for more when living on a finite planet—is the fruit of collaboration between sky and Earth, sun and planet, Astral Intelligent and bodily urges, mind and heart, and, finally, male and female.

I have recently watched on PBS, for the second time, Ken Burns’ extraordinary Civil War series and have been reminded of how blood-drenched our US history is. According to a  Marine officer training recruits, the nation has been at war every seven or eight years since its founding. And our “American empire” is only the last in a long, sad trajectory of empires—call them “dominator societies,” if you wish—that have defied the efforts of churches, synagogues, mosques, wise men, bishops, priests, gurus, imams, theologians, rabbis, ethicists, popes, brilliant intellectuals, and Jack and Jill to understand those human propensities that lead to robbery, rapine and bloody conflict. And that cause humans largely to shun an all-out effort to create on the Earth a “neighborhood” where all inhabitants might share equally the bounty of the fields, the rivers, the “fruited plain.” The poetry of  Leland Jamieson deals, directly at times, but more often indirectly, with these questions. And seems to offer a kind of “cure.” Although he doesn’t state unambiguously that writing and reading formal poetry is a form of therapy, he implies that in the comments regarding  the holistic effects of such practice. And perhaps it is.

At the very least, to read the poems of  In Vitro is surely a mind-expanding experience. But neither Jamieson nor I should be thought naïve enough to believe that any kind of poetry will save us humans  from our “worst angels.” Perhaps we are hard-wired to bring about our own destruction. Jamieson apparently believes we are. For in the book’s final brief poem, “Coda for the 21st Century,” the speaker says as much, noting that humans are “spirits shamed, deep down, to be made fools/ of gold Earth can’t support in this abyss/ of conflict where your lust for power rules …/ Won’t solace cosmic souls awaiting lives/ you aliens tweezed with your in vitro tools …”

So, are we left with only the beauty of Jamieson’s language and thought to carry us through rough times? Maybe. I like to think, though, that there’s more. Dana Gioia has stated that “the writer’s most important spiritual obligation is to be truthful.”[8] Leaving aside the question of the factuality of the stories of aliens who created humans, Jamieson speaks the truth about our spiritual state. And thus helps us as we struggle to achieve the mindfulness that could lead to more sane, more humane, more harmonious lives in what might become a genuine global neighborhood. I now risk the charge of naivete: paradoxically, reading In Vitro causes me to give a very slight edge to the proposition that the human race will endure. And create of our strife-infected  communities a neighborhood? I make this very tentative prognosis haunted by Jake Barnes’ final comment in The Sun Also Rises: “Isn’t it pretty to think so.”

Notes:

 

  • See “Notes,” p. 131.
  • Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention (New York: Harper Collins, 1997), 249. Emphasis added.
  • Making “Metaphor Poems” by Simile and Rhyme: A Guide for High School Teachers (CreateSpace, 2009), 29.
  • Ibid., 29-30.
  • Ibid., 30.
  • Funk and Wagnalls Standard Dictionary (1960).
  • Kenneth Pollinger, “Myth or Reality: The Scholarship of Zecharia Sitchin” (Amazon Review, May 24, 2010). It should be noted that a number of scholars posted on Amazon consider Sitchin’s scholarship less than professional and his conclusions unreliable.
  • Interview in The Formalist, Vol. 13, 2002.

 

 

__________

Preston M. Browning Jr. holds degrees from W&L, UNC at Chapel Hill and the University of Chicago (Ph.D., Religion and Literature). His translations of Central American poems have appeared in Another Chicago Magazine and The Literary Review and his own poems in, among others, Poetry East, Mobius, and The Lyric. He is the author of Flannery O’Connor: The Coincidence of the Holy and the Demonic in O’Connor’s Fiction and Affection and Estrangement: A Southern Family Memoir. He is currently working on a manuscript tentatively entitled Struggling for the Soul of One’s Country and Other Subversive Essays. He lives in Ashfield, Massachusetts, where he manages Wellsping House, a retreat for writers.

Rattle Logo

January 13, 2013

Sarah Freligh

SEX EDUCATION

How is it I recall so exactly the clatter
of film unspooling from loop
to loop, the musk of perfume radiating

from my wrists and throat, the warm gush
of Juicy Fruit, the rasp of stockings
as we crossed and uncrossed our legs. The heat

in that room, a flock of girls cooped up
away from the roosters, the almost men
of our fantasies who we dreamed

would stand beneath our window
one day and crow for us the way
Romeo had for Juliet. How we laughed

when an army of sperm ejected
from a cannon into a body
of water where they swam or died,

cartoon smiles disappearing in tiny peeps
as one by one they drowned, leaving
one last lonely sperm to swim up

the long isthmus where the river
opened to an ocean and I still recall
how the orchestra soared as he swam

and swam toward the round ship
of the egg, and how we stood
and cheered when he docked, exhausted

and triumphant, this tiny survivor,
this sturdy sperm we would spend
the next ten years trying to kill off,

and because of the stupid movie I felt
like a murderer each time I imagined him battering
frantic and headlong against the barrier

I’d erected down there, shouting
defense de la defense! as he died in spasms
of agony and once—because I was drunk

and didn’t give a damn, because I wanted
only to sink into the soft chance of carelessness—
I let the whole bunch of them skinny dip

without a death sentence of chemicals
awaiting them at the end of their swim
and because I’d forgotten what

my sex ed teacher said that day
when the film ended and the lights came up:
Remember, girls, it takes just one.

What chance did I have anyway?
They were as fit as Olympians, hardy
and well-trained. They came in droves

in armies, entire Caesar’s legions, coming
and coming and coming, so
many of them against one of me.

from Rattle #37, Summer 2012

__________

Sarah Freligh: “My poem ‘Sex Education’ emerged from an exercise I give my creative nonfiction students: to locate a memory by recalling a particular taste or smell. On this particular day, I had twelve minutes to scribble in my own notebook and I conjured up the taste of a fresh stick of Juicy Fruit gum and the smell of Ambush, cologne that was popular at the time. Those details led me back to that sex education classroom and into the poem.” (web)

Rattle Logo

January 11, 2013

Art Beck

THE IMPERTINENT DUET:
TRANSLATING POETRY WITH ART BECK

#3: FINDING YET ANOTHER WAY TO SAY WHAT CAN’T BE SAID

The American Literary Translators Association is a loosely knit, unique organization where academics and professional linguists interact with an eclectic mix of creative writers and poets. (A number of its members wear all the above hats.) A perennial topic at annual conferences is the question of translating poetic form. What follows is adapted from my notes for a 2003 panel talk on translating form in poetry. “Reading papers” is strictly forbidden at ALTA panels, and hopefully this piece retains some of the conversational dynamic of an ALTA conference.

Let me preface by saying that I plan to talk about some specific Rilke poems—some of which I translated in “free-form” in the late ’70s. And re-translated more formally in the last several years. But before getting specific, I’d like to talk about what I think are some of the general questions inherent in translating form into similar form. Some of these have to do with something as basic as positing a definition of poetry.

I don’t know if my experience is similar to yours, but for years I happily wrote poetry without giving much of a thought to poetics. It wasn’t until I started translating that questions of theory began to get insistent.

Until then, I have to confess I never asked myself what constituted a poem. But when you take on the task of translating someone else’s poem in someone else’s language into a poem in your language—you do have to ask yourself—just what is a poem?

I began translating poetry in the early ’70s—a time when hardly anyone thought of writing in anything but free verse. This made defining a poem harder than, say, in the 19th or early 20th century when end line rhyme schemes dominated. Then a poem either rhymed or—it wasn’t a poem.

Along these lines, a 19th century American translator of Horace, William Peterfield Trent wrote:

When the translator makes up his mind to attempt a close approximation to the Horatian meter, it would seem that he should eschew the use of rhyme as likely to operate against that effect of likeness to the original which he is striving to secure. But, since the use of rhyme in lyric poetry appears … to be essential at present if the English version is to be acceptable as poetry, this close approximation can be desirable in a few special cases, only.

From the 18th through the 19th century, Horace was almost universally cast in strictly rhymed translations. Of course, this kind of thing grates today. Horace wrote in formal meters, but rhyme was only an incidental embellishment in his poetry. Why artificially impose a rhyme scheme that isn’t there? But can’t the same objection be made to ignoring a rhyme scheme in the original?

What Trent said is also good to keep in mind if anyone is inclined to question why the modernists felt the need for liberation from rhyme schemes. But, now we’re liberated and we face the other side of the coin.

There’s a 1948 entry in the Greek Nobelist George Seferis’ (mid 20th century) diary that contrasts formal and informal ages and implicitly points up one of the problems inherent when an “in-formalist” tries to mimic a formalist. To quote Seferis:

In Byzantine art everything is traditional, predetermined by tradition … It is a “god-given” art … it issues from the “Sacred Scarf,” the icons are miraculous because they are god-given; its basis is imitation. And yet, in spite of what people say, it has lived, with intermittent reflowering, for so many centuries. In this art the excellent artist excels by a minute deviation from the traditional …  The ultimate evil of the Byzantines is ossification, the ultimate evil for us is dissolution.

In other words, in formal periods the craft may lie in the constraints—but the art is always a jailbreak. The in-formalist trying to imitate the formalist needs to remember that breaking into jail isn’t very exciting.

Of course, informal poetry, as Seferis says, has its own danger—dissolution. The danger of becoming mere “words on paper.” For me, one working definition of a poem—formal or informal—is: an arrangement of words that has reached the point of becoming something that can’t be said in any other way—the point where language talks back to you.

But this is of course hopefully the case with the poem you’re translating. So how do you find another way of saying what can’t be said any other way?

I’m going to offer the opinion that one way you can’t do it is simply by imitation. From the time Robert Lowell used Imitations as a title for his collection of loose translations, I’ve always disliked calling translations “imitations.” And I think Lowell’s translations are the opposite of what I perceive as “imitation.” For me, imitation is akin to a slavish art forgery.

Conversely, I think a successful poetic translation reaches into the original, and draws as much directly from the landscape that’s portrayed as from the original poem’s portrayal. The object of the translation is, ideally, not the “portrait,” but the subject of the portrait: A new poem that attempts to tap the same source the original poem tapped.

That, of course, is what Lowell was doing and, while his caveat not to expect a literal translation was appropriate, I wish he had used a different word. I’d have preferred “performance.”

What I think is essential to a “performance” is—for want of a better word—what I characterize as the “internalization” process. The long, slow taking in of the original until you reach a point where you’re no longer working with the energy of words in the source language, but in your own. So that like a fledging swimmer plucked from a pool and tossed into a river, the poem and its images either sink or swim on its own in English. (Or whatever language you’re writing in.)

The implication with any performance is that the performer won’t be invisible. But that presence may be more or less noticeable. For example, you can’t listen to John Lewis’ adaptations of Bach without being aware that Lewis is a jazz pianist having a dialogue with Bach. What he’s playing isn’t quite jazz, isn’t quite Bach—but there’s a distinct sense that Bach might tap his foot and smile. Glenn Gould is a pure classical pianist, but are his renditions of the Goldberg Variations—music originally written for a plucked keyboard and reborn with all the dynamic nuances of the pianoforte and Gould’s rich ear—any more “pure Bach” than John Lewis’ syncopated renditions?

Which brings us back to breaking in and out of jail. What happens with Gould and Lewis—with any performer worth listening to—is that they’re enraptured—arrested if you will—by the piece they’re performing. They’re already in jail and free to plot their break.

 

ORPHEUS

In poetry, the “jailbreak” is the difference between writing into a form or out of a form. Perhaps it’s worth remembering that Rilke whipped out the 55 Sonnets to Orpheus in what he claimed was a two week space in 1922. It’s obvious he wasn’t writing into but out of the form—the way Charlie Parker might roll out chorus after chorus of the blues. I use Parker as an example, rather than someone more traditional, say Jimmy Rushing, because in the Orpheus sequence I think Rilke stood the traditional sonnet on its head.

The sonnet form often takes on an almost geometric progression leading to a “closed conclusion.” The Sonnets to Orpheus, and even some earlier Rilke sonnets such as Archaic Torso, tend instead to take flight and end with harmonic ambiguities and open statements. It’s worth noting, I think, that when Rilke returned to the sonnet form for this late in life sequence, he said he wanted an “open,” “conjugated” sonnet, i.e. something both akin to and yet not a traditional sonnet.

One of the problems in translating these poems formally is that I don’t think we have any precedent for them in the traditional closed iambic logic of the English sonnet. They almost require a new sense of form in English. I’ve always felt that Rilke stands with one foot in the 19th and century with the other firmly planted in 21st. So for me, the main danger in translating these essentially modern—maybe even still emergent—poems is that in chasing form we may risk pushing back into the 19th century rather than to following to where the poem is pulling us.

But conversely, how can you ignore the question of form in a poem like #5 Volume 1 of the Sonnets to Orpheus. My translation is still in an early draft, but far enough along I think to demonstrate a point.

As an aside, one reason I’m tentative about the quality of my translation attempt is that Rilke’s poem has such big historic echoes—Shakespeare’s sonnet #55: “Not marble, nor the gilded monuments of princes shall outlive this powerful rhyme … ”

And Horace’s Ode #30, book 3, which Shakespeare probably drew on for his sonnet #55. The Horace ode opens (in Burton Raffel’s translation): “The monument I’ve made for myself will outlast/ brass, reaches higher than Egyptian/ kings and their pyramids … ”

Rilke, in his sonnet, focuses not on his own mastery, but on the prototypical mythic poet, Orpheus, who serves throughout the sequence as a persona for Rilke, the poet and man. And distinct from its predecessors, Rilke’s sonnet speaks to the vulnerability as well as durability of poetry. It begins:

Errichtet keinen Denkstein. Laßt die Rose
nur jedes Jahr zu seinen Gunsten blühn.
Denn Orpheus ists. Seine Metamorphose
in dem und dem. Wir sollen uns nicht mühn …

Don’t erect memorials of stone. Just let the rose
bloom every spring as his token. Because this
too is Orpheus—another of his metamorphoses
into one thing or another. Why stress ourselves

deciphering all his names? If there’s singing,
now and forever, it’s Orpheus as he comes and goes.
Isn’t it enough that every so often he lingers
a few days with the rose petals in the bowl?

So much of him has to wither so you can know.
That frightens him too, as he fades. But just as his
word goes beyond what’s here, what’s now—

he’s already there: alone where you can’t be.
The bars of the lyre strings don’t cramp his
fingers. Even transgressing he obeys.

A poem, I think, not only about the coexistence of life and death in poetry, but, incidentally, about form and the jailbreak of art.

 

SOME SAMPLES—FREE VS. “COPY” FORM

Below are samples of my old and more recent translations of two of the Sonnets to Orpheus. The first versions date from a volume I published in the early ’80s and obviously the translations aren’t in sonnet form.

Let me tell you a little of what I was trying to do. At the time Rilke wasn’t the icon in America he’s since become. The only translations I was aware of were Mrs. Norton’s and Mac Intyre’s and a few others dating from the ’30s and ’40s. But this was also the time that David Young’s iconoclastic translations of the Duino Elegies started coming out in Field. They bowled me over. Young recast the Elegies in William Carlos William-like triplets that seemed to energize and focus the rambling poems. This was a poet I didn’t recognize in Norton or Mac Intyre. So I started playing with translating Rilke on my own—not the Elegies but the New Poems and Orpheus sonnets. Above all. I wanted to hang onto that “21st century leg.” Not only, sad to say, did I not have the slightest interest in the sonnet form, I couldn’t have written one if I wanted to. I was a child of my time.

I still like some of those old translations although I wouldn’t do them this way again. I imagine some of you may like them, and others will grit your teeth. But—I think—for reasons other than formal vs. informal. It’s interesting that the editor of the chapbook series these first appeared in was a budding formalist and I got surprisingly warm feedback on my 1983 volume from other dedicated formalists. But for a lot of people, these won’t sound like the Rilke they’ve come to love. It’s the voice not the form—and that voice was intentional on my part.

I’m also including my recent, more “formalist” translations. The new versions were prompted by a challenge from someone I respected, but the re-translation went far beyond a re-casting as “faux sonnets.” In revisiting the Sonnets to Orpheus, I found that in my young enthusiasm I’d often left half the poem on the table. But what didn’t change much, I think, was the voice—for me Rilke’s “voice” seems to live in the harmonic, half elusive images—not especially the rhyme or meter. Rather in a more subtle underlying music that resonates with what might be said as much as with what’s said.

I should note that I use the term faux-sonnet because none of these use full rhyme. Some of it may be a continued lack of skill on my part, but over time I’ve also come to feel that English has come from being the language of a small island to being a planetary language. There’s no longer any one correct way to speak it. It’s too dynamic and fluid. And for me at least, it likes assonance and corresponding words and hints of rhyme. When I find myself using full rhyme, it’s usually in a comic mode.

For readers accustomed to a “different” Rilke voice, I can only offer that as with any performance, the choices are personal and will vary between performers. I think it’s wonderful that America is rich enough to have dozens of versions of the Sonnets to Orpheus—the Germans can only have one. But, of course, they’ve kept the best for themselves.

from Rattle e.8, Spring 2010 (PDF)

___________

Art Beck is a San Francisco poet and translator who’s published two translation volumes: Simply to See: Poems of Lurorius (Poltroon Press, Berkeley, 1990) and a selection Rilke (Elysian Press, New York, 1983). His chapbook, Summer with all its Clothes Off, is reviewed by Ellaraine Lockie  in Rattle E-Reviews. His article on Rilke, And Yet Another Archaic Torso– Why? can be accessed in the Australian online journal Jacket at: www.jacketmagazine.com

Rattle Logo