In reading Gertrude Stein and Claudia Rankine, I really wonder what the two have in common (if anything). Are they doing a similar thing, just in two different ways? Or is there message just as different as their style?
Claudia Rankine's Citizen is poetic social commentary on what it means to be a black citizen of the United States. She has poetic style, for sure, but she also has a clear message. Her poems are normally easy to understand, even if they are disturbing to read. But there is not much abstractness to her. She also prefers to insert paintings or photographs into the text, rather than forming an image out of words.
Gertrude Stein in her Tender Buttons is quite the opposite. She always seems to be forming an image out of words, and it is rarely clear what she is saying (if anything). She doesn't have to be saying anything, that's fine, but I wonder if she is trying to say something that I'm missing. Her poetry has been likened to a cubist painting, and I would certainly agree with that assessment. In both Stein and a cubist painting, you never really know what it means, but sometimes you just enjoy it.
My theory for the core of the difference between Stein and Rankine is two-fold. Firstly, they are two very different people in very different contexts, and so they produce very different poetry--simple as that. Secondly, if Stein does have something she is trying to say, I don't think she is very concerned with the reader getting it. Rankine, on the other hand, is very much concerned with being heard. Her message is too important and has too many implications for her to conceal it behind vague abstractions.
Although I prefer the upfront and unveiled style of Ranking, those assessment shouldn't come as critiques to either writer. Stein has her virtue and Rankine has her virtue--their respective virtues are just very different.
Sunday, February 28, 2016
Sunday, February 21, 2016
Gertrude Stein and Elisa Gabbert
In my last post, I compared H.D. and Elisa Gabbert as two poets on opposite sides of the women's movement that are similar in content but dissimilar in form. Now I'd like to compare Gertrude Stein and Elisa Gabbert in a similar way. Gertrude Stein wrote poems that have a semi-traditional layout on the page, but she also wrote a major poem in an unorthodox form: "Patriarchal Poetry".
"Patriarchal Poetry" is about 20 pages of prose poetry. It has sections of line breaks that seem like traditional poetry, but much of it is just prose in paragraphs. She also breaks from the norm when she writes whole paragraphs consisting almost completely of a repetition of 3 or 4 words. The whole poem seems to be in form and content an attempt to break from all poetry that has come before it, which Stein would allege is patriarchal poetry. She breaks in content with the avant-garde nature of feminism in her time and content in almost every way. Though much less surprising in the 2010s, Elisa Gabbert attempts to do a similar thing as Stein. She writes about feminism, gender roles, and the self, all subjects that are still controversial, though much more common than in the early 1900s. One example of this is a poem where she says, "as the women's movement progresses, women report less happiness...Most people choose power over happiness" (The Self Unstable 26). Her form is also orthodox, as she has no titles or line breaks in her poetry.
Elisa Gabbert is certainly in conversation with H.D. and Stein, whether she knows it or not, and in many ways follows in their footsteps.
"Patriarchal Poetry" is about 20 pages of prose poetry. It has sections of line breaks that seem like traditional poetry, but much of it is just prose in paragraphs. She also breaks from the norm when she writes whole paragraphs consisting almost completely of a repetition of 3 or 4 words. The whole poem seems to be in form and content an attempt to break from all poetry that has come before it, which Stein would allege is patriarchal poetry. She breaks in content with the avant-garde nature of feminism in her time and content in almost every way. Though much less surprising in the 2010s, Elisa Gabbert attempts to do a similar thing as Stein. She writes about feminism, gender roles, and the self, all subjects that are still controversial, though much more common than in the early 1900s. One example of this is a poem where she says, "as the women's movement progresses, women report less happiness...Most people choose power over happiness" (The Self Unstable 26). Her form is also orthodox, as she has no titles or line breaks in her poetry.
Elisa Gabbert is certainly in conversation with H.D. and Stein, whether she knows it or not, and in many ways follows in their footsteps.
H.D. and Elisa Gabbert
Whether or not Elisa Gabbert has read and been influenced by Helen Doolittle, they are both woman poets on opposite ends of the women's movement. In form, they both match their times. H.D. was a part of the imagist movement, and puts her poetry on the page in a semi-traditional layout. Gabbert, equally fitting for her age, has no titles, line breaks, or rhythm to her poetry. Her poems are almost like short poetic commentary snippets on various subjects--profound and pleasurable to read, nonetheless.
In content, however, H.D. and Gabbert share much more commonality. H.D.'s poem "Eurydice" is based on a Greek myth in which Eurydice, Orpheus's wife, is bitten and killed by a snake. Orpheus goes to the underworld to save her and is told that if he takes Eurydice and does not look back he will be able to save her. Just like Lot's wife, of course, he looks back and loses Eurydice forever. In one of Gabbert's poems she ironically reports, "as the women's movement progresses, women report less happiness" (The Self Unstable 26). She counters this in the same poem, however, with, "Most people choose power over happiness" (26). She seems to be saying that whether or not women or more happy now, she's satisfied with having the power to influence her own happiness. H.D.'s poem seems to be saying the same thing. An unfortunate event took Eurydice's life, and from that point on her destiny was completely in the hands of a man. And that man let her down.
In content, however, H.D. and Gabbert share much more commonality. H.D.'s poem "Eurydice" is based on a Greek myth in which Eurydice, Orpheus's wife, is bitten and killed by a snake. Orpheus goes to the underworld to save her and is told that if he takes Eurydice and does not look back he will be able to save her. Just like Lot's wife, of course, he looks back and loses Eurydice forever. In one of Gabbert's poems she ironically reports, "as the women's movement progresses, women report less happiness" (The Self Unstable 26). She counters this in the same poem, however, with, "Most people choose power over happiness" (26). She seems to be saying that whether or not women or more happy now, she's satisfied with having the power to influence her own happiness. H.D.'s poem seems to be saying the same thing. An unfortunate event took Eurydice's life, and from that point on her destiny was completely in the hands of a man. And that man let her down.
Sunday, February 7, 2016
Ezra Pound and Tim Earley
At this stage in my ability to read poetry, I consider it a success if I can read a poem and feel anything, somewhat know what it means, and enjoy it. Ezra Pound and especially Tim Earley, then, come as adequate challenges for me. And these two poets seem to be on completely different playing fields. Pound was an American ex-pat who hated America and loved Nazi Germany. Tim Early is from Western North Carolina and calls his collection "Poems Descriptive of Rural Life and Scenery." Despite the attractiveness of that title, his poems are incredibly hard to digest for me. But the point is, these guys don't even seem to be part of the same conversation.
And in trying to compare or contrasts the poems of these two, that's the main difference I find. Pound hates America and its poet, Walt Whitman, evident in "A Pact." Earley, conversely, agrees that "america is the best country to die in" (Poems Descriptive, 23).
A similarity, though, is that I would guess they both pride themselves in crafting poetry that is hard to figure out. To read some of Pound you need an anthology of classical Greek literature and to read Earley you need a long day with nothing to do. These two poets may intersect and diverge at other points as well, but I've yet to find those points.
And in trying to compare or contrasts the poems of these two, that's the main difference I find. Pound hates America and its poet, Walt Whitman, evident in "A Pact." Earley, conversely, agrees that "america is the best country to die in" (Poems Descriptive, 23).
A similarity, though, is that I would guess they both pride themselves in crafting poetry that is hard to figure out. To read some of Pound you need an anthology of classical Greek literature and to read Earley you need a long day with nothing to do. These two poets may intersect and diverge at other points as well, but I've yet to find those points.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)