I know that this relates to a poet that we covered in class quite awhile ago, but I recently read this poem by Wallace Stevens for my American Poetry class and thought that it fit into the modernist movement quite nicely. I thought I'd share!
"Of Modern Poetry"
The poem of the mind in the act of finding
What will suffice. It has not always had
To find: the scene was set; it repeated what
Was in the script.
Then the theatre was changed
To something else. Its past was a souvenir.
It has to be living, to learn the speech of the place.
It has to face the men of the time and to meet
The women of the time. It has to think about war
And it has to find what will suffice. It has
To construct a new stage. It has to be on that stage,
And, like an insatiable actor, slowly and
With meditation, speak words that in the ear,
In the delicatest ear of the mind, repeat,
Exactly, that which it wants to hear, at the sound
Of which, an invisible audience listens,
Not to the play, but to itself, expressed
In an emotion as of two people, as of two
Emotions becoming one. The actor is
A metaphysician in the dark, twanging
An instrument, twanging a wiry string that gives
Sounds passing through sudden rightnesses, wholly
Containing the mind, below which it cannot descend,
Beyond which it has no will to rise.
It must
Be the finding of a satisfaction, and may
Be of a man skating, a woman dancing, a woman
Combing. The poem of the act of the mind.
The poem opens with the idea that Modernism seeks to break from what was expected, or what, "Was in the script" (line 4.) It is the idea that, for previous poets, the ideas of what they were supposed to say and how was already planned out and here was not really a whole lot of "finding" or creativity going on, and repetition was common. This fits with what we learned in class, where Modernists seek to undo what the past dictated and wanted to repudiate the commonly held assumptions about what art and literature/poetry was.
This is further emphasized at the beginning of the second stanza, where Stevens talks about a new theatre and constructing a new stage. Moreover, he goes into detail about how this new stage should be constructed. He says that "the past was a souvenir", which fits with a modernist idea (especially articulated by modernist T.S. Eliot in "Tradition and the Individual Talent") that, while forging ahead into new modes of art and expression, the past cannot be forgotten and should still be recognized. The past of traditional poetry is here represented by a "souvenir". Also in this stanza, Stevens presents the idea that, farther than recognizing the past, poetry should also recognize what is going on in the present and react to it. This is asserted in lines 6-8, where he says that poetry should be "living" and able to meet prominent people and think about war. "It has to think about war"(9), especially, reflects the modernist reaction to express the changes that participating in the war made on culture.
The next part of this stanza concentrates on the modernist idea that art is meant as more than mimetic or something to merely look at/read. Namely, it expresses the fact that much of modernism centered on creating a reaction in the reader that had nothing to do with interpretation and was natural. This is shown in the poem by the idea that the "actor", or poet, "speak words that in the ear,/ In the delicatest ear of the mind, repeat..."(13-14.) Here, "delicatest ear of the mind" can represent the extreme inner mind, or subconscious of the reader. Thus, the claim is that poetry should appeal to someone's subconscious, which is free from surface interpretations and meanings thought to be garnered from mere representations. This is also expressed when Stevens talks of the audience listening "to itself, expressed/ In an emotion as of two people, as of two/ Emotions becoming one"(17-19.) Apparent here, again, is the modernist tenet that art/literature/poetry should aim at the inner being of someone and affect him or her subconsciously, without that person really having to actively pursue a meaning.
The last stanza of the poem emphasizes this, with, "the finding of satisfaction"(26.) Also, the actions presented in skating, dancing, and combing serve to exemplify, "The poem of the act of the mind"(28). In this last stanza, Stevens is portraying the idea that poetry is more than words in a page- it should be directly attached to the workings of the mind. It should not involve analysis, and should instead directly produce true response.
It was fun to look a poem from a modernist writer and see so much of what we have learned about regarding the movement as whole apparent in his writing, and moreover, in his philosophy on writing. It provided a direct example of what the modernists did, and how they sought to get across their messages. Modernism is interesting, especially when directly expressed in a medium such as poetry.
Friday, October 29, 2010
Culture Differences
What a small, wide world we live in! I know, it's part cliché, part contradiction, but meeting with my conversation partner, Simon, has really showed me this. Simon is from China, and it has been so interesting getting to know him! He has only been in America since the beginning of the school year, and it is truly incredible to me how quickly he has grasped both English and the culture that surrounds him. For example, our very first communication occurred in the form of a text message. I had been having trouble contacting Simon, as his email service was down. Thus, one Thursday I was quite surprised when I received a text message from him introducing himself and proposing a time to meet. The text message was all in English, and I was so impressed with his confidence to text me about meeting!
Our meetings have been interesting, although they make me feel a bit selfish because it seems like I learn so much about him and his culture, and I'm really not sure how much he has learned about American culture from me. You see, Simon loves to talk and he isn't daunted by not knowing a word or perhaps misunderstanding my question. He bravely continues, and asks for help when trying to articulate a word that he does not know (I love helping him out here- it makes me think that I am somehow returning the gift of learning.) Seriously, I admire him so much for this! I am in my fourth-ish year of Spanish, and I am still so intimidated by the prospect of speaking to native speakers. I get so tongue-tied and shy, and it is generally altogether an experience full of struggles. Simon is not afraid to fail, though, and this greatly impresses me.
I am also impressed with Simon's ability to travel so far from home. China is many miles away, both in miles and cultural differences. One of the subjects we have often talked about is food. He does not like cheese to the extent that we have it here, and has been adapting to eating meat like pork. He says that it is not common back home, and that fish is eaten much more often (although here I tried to explain that Market Square is not a good representation of how often seafood is consumed. Fish is rather rare at the BLUU.) He has also bemoaned the lack of real Chinese food, and he says that one of the things he misses most about home is the food. This definitely made me further reflect over how difficult it would be to travel to another country where most everything is different, especially food that I perhaps take for granted here. Food is an automatic need, but it would be so strange to have to adjust to a whole new set of dishes, as Simon has.
Although there have been obvious differences between Simon's life and the life we lead here, such as the fact that high schoolers go to school 6 days a week for like 10+ hours, there have been some fun similarities to find that reinforce the "it's a small world after all" idea. For example, although the holidays of Halloween and Christmas are not very widely celebrated in China, some people do celebrate them. I learned today from a friend of Simon's, Mikko, that Christmas is especially celebrated among young adults. Other similarities have been found in sports and music, where Simon likes Kobe Bryant, Yao Ming, and Michael Jackson. And, of course, there's always the McDonald's globalization phenomenon.
So, in short, while I have been learning so much about a completely different culture, I have also been finding some threads that connect our cultures. I am looking forward to continue meeting with Simon and learning more (and hopefully helping him, too!)
Our meetings have been interesting, although they make me feel a bit selfish because it seems like I learn so much about him and his culture, and I'm really not sure how much he has learned about American culture from me. You see, Simon loves to talk and he isn't daunted by not knowing a word or perhaps misunderstanding my question. He bravely continues, and asks for help when trying to articulate a word that he does not know (I love helping him out here- it makes me think that I am somehow returning the gift of learning.) Seriously, I admire him so much for this! I am in my fourth-ish year of Spanish, and I am still so intimidated by the prospect of speaking to native speakers. I get so tongue-tied and shy, and it is generally altogether an experience full of struggles. Simon is not afraid to fail, though, and this greatly impresses me.
I am also impressed with Simon's ability to travel so far from home. China is many miles away, both in miles and cultural differences. One of the subjects we have often talked about is food. He does not like cheese to the extent that we have it here, and has been adapting to eating meat like pork. He says that it is not common back home, and that fish is eaten much more often (although here I tried to explain that Market Square is not a good representation of how often seafood is consumed. Fish is rather rare at the BLUU.) He has also bemoaned the lack of real Chinese food, and he says that one of the things he misses most about home is the food. This definitely made me further reflect over how difficult it would be to travel to another country where most everything is different, especially food that I perhaps take for granted here. Food is an automatic need, but it would be so strange to have to adjust to a whole new set of dishes, as Simon has.
Although there have been obvious differences between Simon's life and the life we lead here, such as the fact that high schoolers go to school 6 days a week for like 10+ hours, there have been some fun similarities to find that reinforce the "it's a small world after all" idea. For example, although the holidays of Halloween and Christmas are not very widely celebrated in China, some people do celebrate them. I learned today from a friend of Simon's, Mikko, that Christmas is especially celebrated among young adults. Other similarities have been found in sports and music, where Simon likes Kobe Bryant, Yao Ming, and Michael Jackson. And, of course, there's always the McDonald's globalization phenomenon.
So, in short, while I have been learning so much about a completely different culture, I have also been finding some threads that connect our cultures. I am looking forward to continue meeting with Simon and learning more (and hopefully helping him, too!)
& reality sets in...
The story we read for this assignment, "The Way You'll Never Be", was extremely interesting to me. On the surface, it represented a divergence from the type of Nick Adams story we have been reading, with simple prose and, especially, sparsely worded dialogue. The prose in this story is a bit more detailed, if only because it gives war terminology, and the dialogue is much more complex than the general one or two lines given to us in previous stories. Moreover, "The Way You'll Never Be" includes much more of a glimpse into the mind of Nick (or Nicholas, here.) The view into his mind that we see is frightening, and adds credence to the idea that the more complex dialogue and prose represent a Nick that has grown up, both in years and maturity. One of the most specific contrasts between this Nicholas and the Nicky of younger years I saw is the difference of Nicholas, here, after being shot and seeing the destruction of war, against Nicky after he has seen the violent birth and suicide in "Indian Camp." There, he felt as if he would never die, which means that, ultimately, the experience had little effect on him. In this story, however, Nicholas is experiencing post-traumatic stress, which emphasizes that he has been severely affected by all he has been through and seen. This is rather stark contrast, and it certainly, above all else, portrays the maturing of Nicholas from the stories that we have previously read.
Perhaps another one of the reasons I enjoyed this story was due to its adherence to something beyond the conventional. I mean, most of Hemingway's work was not conventional, whether it be because of breaching sensitive subjects or using simply narration, but this story seems to have another dimension to it. More specifically, it is quite confusing. Nick's perspective shifts often, from reality to dreams to memory, and there is little in the prose to demarcate these changes. Moreover, namely in the dreams/daydreams, the prose is confusing and unexplained. For example, on page 310 there is a stream of consciousness of a past time Nick had spent on patrol. It takes the form of a memory, but even within this memory there are shifts from pure stream of consciousness ("They'd all be worse. Break his nose. They've put it back to five-twenty. We've only got four minutes more.), to memory ("... you called me baby doll a year ago tadada..."), to reflection ("He never dreamed about the front now any more...".) There is so much going on here that it is difficult to take it all in or understand much of it. The same phenomenon happens when Nick talks about grasshoppers starting on 312, and when he talks with Para about war matters which we, as the readers, have to do with their history, which we are not given the details of. All of this acts to create a rather hazy tone over the story, one that makes it hard to truly understand what is going on. This is so interesting to me because I see it as a reflection of Nick's mental state. He has gone through trauma in the war, and this has brought chaos to his mind. The sudden shifting of time in the story is a reflection of this, and works to give the reader a confused experience that relates to the mindset of Nick. I love this aspect, as it provides a whole new dimension to the reading. Where some prose is purely for reading, it seems as if this is for feeling, as well.
The confusion of Nick is semi-comical at a couple parts, such as when he asserts to the adjutant that he, "would rather talk about grasshoppers"(312.) As I read on, however, I came to realize that Nick's dialogue is far from comical. Indeed, it portrays a man who is dealing with post-traumatic stress, or "it/one/", as is explained on page 314 with, "'I can tell when I'm going to have on because I talk so much'." This realization struck me hard because it presented such a departure from the 'Nicky' of the earlier stories we have read. He was so carefree in those short narratives, and it was extremely disheartening to realize that this was the same boy, only grown up and dealing with the horrors of a war that actually happened. I'm assuming that the war in this story was based off of World War I, and it really struck me that this war that Hemingway fictionalized, and its effects on soldiers, had such true roots. Literally, my stomach clenched a little as I thought back to the other stories that we have read, and how Nick's problems have progressed from heartbreak at losing Prudence to death and helmets full of brains. Having someone's life so laid out in front of us in the form of anecdotes really made me relate it to the lives of actual soldiers who fought in the war. They had the same innocence that Nick did, and, likewise, were made to suffer the same realities that Nick had to deal with, with the same consequences. How terribly enlightening. While I am, by nature, fascinated by literature and the thoughts it leaves when you finish reading, few stories have struck me and made me think as much as this one did. Truly, "A Way You'll Never Be" made me realize how much about war I cannot, and will hopefully never, be able to comprehend, and how different the perspective is of people who have gone through it. I think this is the point that Hemingway may have been trying to emphasize, and he definitely succeeded in making me realize it.
Perhaps another one of the reasons I enjoyed this story was due to its adherence to something beyond the conventional. I mean, most of Hemingway's work was not conventional, whether it be because of breaching sensitive subjects or using simply narration, but this story seems to have another dimension to it. More specifically, it is quite confusing. Nick's perspective shifts often, from reality to dreams to memory, and there is little in the prose to demarcate these changes. Moreover, namely in the dreams/daydreams, the prose is confusing and unexplained. For example, on page 310 there is a stream of consciousness of a past time Nick had spent on patrol. It takes the form of a memory, but even within this memory there are shifts from pure stream of consciousness ("They'd all be worse. Break his nose. They've put it back to five-twenty. We've only got four minutes more.), to memory ("... you called me baby doll a year ago tadada..."), to reflection ("He never dreamed about the front now any more...".) There is so much going on here that it is difficult to take it all in or understand much of it. The same phenomenon happens when Nick talks about grasshoppers starting on 312, and when he talks with Para about war matters which we, as the readers, have to do with their history, which we are not given the details of. All of this acts to create a rather hazy tone over the story, one that makes it hard to truly understand what is going on. This is so interesting to me because I see it as a reflection of Nick's mental state. He has gone through trauma in the war, and this has brought chaos to his mind. The sudden shifting of time in the story is a reflection of this, and works to give the reader a confused experience that relates to the mindset of Nick. I love this aspect, as it provides a whole new dimension to the reading. Where some prose is purely for reading, it seems as if this is for feeling, as well.
The confusion of Nick is semi-comical at a couple parts, such as when he asserts to the adjutant that he, "would rather talk about grasshoppers"(312.) As I read on, however, I came to realize that Nick's dialogue is far from comical. Indeed, it portrays a man who is dealing with post-traumatic stress, or "it/one/", as is explained on page 314 with, "'I can tell when I'm going to have on because I talk so much'." This realization struck me hard because it presented such a departure from the 'Nicky' of the earlier stories we have read. He was so carefree in those short narratives, and it was extremely disheartening to realize that this was the same boy, only grown up and dealing with the horrors of a war that actually happened. I'm assuming that the war in this story was based off of World War I, and it really struck me that this war that Hemingway fictionalized, and its effects on soldiers, had such true roots. Literally, my stomach clenched a little as I thought back to the other stories that we have read, and how Nick's problems have progressed from heartbreak at losing Prudence to death and helmets full of brains. Having someone's life so laid out in front of us in the form of anecdotes really made me relate it to the lives of actual soldiers who fought in the war. They had the same innocence that Nick did, and, likewise, were made to suffer the same realities that Nick had to deal with, with the same consequences. How terribly enlightening. While I am, by nature, fascinated by literature and the thoughts it leaves when you finish reading, few stories have struck me and made me think as much as this one did. Truly, "A Way You'll Never Be" made me realize how much about war I cannot, and will hopefully never, be able to comprehend, and how different the perspective is of people who have gone through it. I think this is the point that Hemingway may have been trying to emphasize, and he definitely succeeded in making me realize it.
Thursday, September 16, 2010
A Miracle?
Looking at the title for "The Miracle", one can see that the year it was published was in 1928. The date brings to mind some common stereotypes about the era, such as of a society where households complied with some of the more traditional aspects. For example, when I think of a 20's era house, I think of a house that is traditionally androcentric, with the wife as a keeper of the house and slightly submissive character. Ford's "The Miracle", however, defies this notion almost from the first line. Miss Sinclair is asserted as the main power in the story. It is largely written in her voice, and for this reason it seems as if she does most of the thinking. Her judgments of the Professor are the only ones we see, and she more than once displays her opinion in her superior position. For example, she is the one who hid the collar-studs from the Professor, and she also asserts that she is the one with the truly "Scientific Mind". All of this seems to contradict the traditional ideal of a woman as one who quietly sits back and is submussive, and who especially lets the husband do the science. In her function within the story, however, Miss Sinclair seems to still give off the impression of the submissive housewife. For example, we learn that she doesn't dare contradict him in his impression of himself as having a Scientific Mind, or that he subconsciously does things when he is thinking. Also, she does not let him know of the judgments (for purposes of eugenics) she passes on him. And, above all, she knows when to submit in order to, ultimately get her way. This is apparent at the end of the story, when it is clear that she does no believe in the Professor's faith, but she pretends to go along with it anyway. In this story, the role of the female is two-fold: to the reader, she is the strongest character and takes rule of the household, but, to the characters in the story, she is still submissive.
These roles become even more interesting when juxtaposed with the ideologies in which they represent. Throughout, Miss Sinclair is represented as calculating, scientific, and no-nonsensical. She considers herself to have the "Scientific Mind", and is interested in eugenics. The Professor, on the other hand, is represented as scatter-brained, absent-minded, and subject to his wife's criticism and manipulations. His most important characteristic is that he had a revelation while bathing, where he realized his belief in "Special Providence". Thus, there is an apparent contrast between the science of Miss Sinclair and the spirituality of the Professor. When these inherent characteristics are looked at in conjunction with the roles they play, a possible message of the story is seen. Perhaps, because of Miss Sinclair's domination in the story, and her power over the Professor, Ford is making the claim that science is stronger than spirituality, or faith. This is supported by Miss Sinclair's frequent interruption of the Professor while he is telling her of his revelation, as well as her guessing the end of his story, when he forgot the cigarettes. She always holds the upper hand. This is especially apparent at the end, where she tries to go along with his newfound faith by offering to go to church. From her earlier narration, however, when she explains that she has learned when "it is wiser to submit, the whole being greater than the part", we know that she submits only because she knows it will contribute to her plan as a whole. Thus, she is shown as having complete power over the Professor, especially after he has his revelation and becomes linked with faith.
As far as religion goes, I think that Ford discredits it by also including the whole collar-stud scenario. From this, we learn that he is prone to forgetfulness, which rather discedits him as having believable ideas. Aside from this, however, the collar-studs make the point that, when he is thinking, he does things that he doesn't remember doing. This becomes important in his story of the bombinb raid. He says that it seemed to take him hours to pack all the bombs in the knapsack, but that it went extraordinarily quick. Perhaps, it can be inferred that he was caught in thought where he didn't realize what he was doing. If this was the case, then he may very well have packed the cigarettes up without realizing it. This would mean that the miracle never actually happened, which would discredit his story and the whole reason for his faith. His revelation becomes illogical, and just a consequence of his absent-mindedness. Because of this, and because of Miss Sinclair's manipulations, the root of science is portrayed as winning out over religion.
These roles become even more interesting when juxtaposed with the ideologies in which they represent. Throughout, Miss Sinclair is represented as calculating, scientific, and no-nonsensical. She considers herself to have the "Scientific Mind", and is interested in eugenics. The Professor, on the other hand, is represented as scatter-brained, absent-minded, and subject to his wife's criticism and manipulations. His most important characteristic is that he had a revelation while bathing, where he realized his belief in "Special Providence". Thus, there is an apparent contrast between the science of Miss Sinclair and the spirituality of the Professor. When these inherent characteristics are looked at in conjunction with the roles they play, a possible message of the story is seen. Perhaps, because of Miss Sinclair's domination in the story, and her power over the Professor, Ford is making the claim that science is stronger than spirituality, or faith. This is supported by Miss Sinclair's frequent interruption of the Professor while he is telling her of his revelation, as well as her guessing the end of his story, when he forgot the cigarettes. She always holds the upper hand. This is especially apparent at the end, where she tries to go along with his newfound faith by offering to go to church. From her earlier narration, however, when she explains that she has learned when "it is wiser to submit, the whole being greater than the part", we know that she submits only because she knows it will contribute to her plan as a whole. Thus, she is shown as having complete power over the Professor, especially after he has his revelation and becomes linked with faith.
As far as religion goes, I think that Ford discredits it by also including the whole collar-stud scenario. From this, we learn that he is prone to forgetfulness, which rather discedits him as having believable ideas. Aside from this, however, the collar-studs make the point that, when he is thinking, he does things that he doesn't remember doing. This becomes important in his story of the bombinb raid. He says that it seemed to take him hours to pack all the bombs in the knapsack, but that it went extraordinarily quick. Perhaps, it can be inferred that he was caught in thought where he didn't realize what he was doing. If this was the case, then he may very well have packed the cigarettes up without realizing it. This would mean that the miracle never actually happened, which would discredit his story and the whole reason for his faith. His revelation becomes illogical, and just a consequence of his absent-mindedness. Because of this, and because of Miss Sinclair's manipulations, the root of science is portrayed as winning out over religion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)