Jun 102010
 

02_Étendards Arts 2010

16_Stéphanie Roussy_Douglas Glover

Stéphanie Roussy who painted the text

I had a terrific surprise this morning when I opened an email from Katie Vibert, an artist and teacher at the CEGEP de Sept-Îles in Quebec, and discovered these photos of an exhibition of banners painted by students at the college. You can see dg in the middle of the photo above. The project is called GENS D’ICI, GENS DE PAROLES and is meant to celebrate authors, songwriters, explorers either from the Côte-Nord or having some passionate literary connection with the place. Art students did the portraits on one side of the banner, and literature students painted an apt quotation on the reverse. And then all the banners

Nadine Bouffard with her portraits

were displayed at the front of the college building. Some of the inspiration for the project came from Pierre Rouxel, founder of the North Shore literary journal Littoral (more on this another time). Of course, this is all because of my novel Elle which was translated into French as Le Pas de l’Ourse. Elle takes place on the Côte-Nord, though somewhat to the north and east of Sept-Îles. But the windswept islands off Sept-Îles in the Gulf of St. Lawrence inspired the island where she is marooned. And the last scene of the novel, the contemporary moment between the new young bear woman and her older lover, takes place on the beach at Sept-Îles. The Côte-Nord is part of the country of my imagination.

It’s difficult to explain how much this touches me. I love the quotation Stéphanie Roussy picked for the banner. It happens to be true and goes to the heart of things. I am an Anglo farm boy from southern Ontario, and now I live far away in a foreign country, and yet these students, artists, and writers have included me in their exhibition. My imagined Canada has become part of their imagined Canada. This is the miracle of books. It makes you want to be a writer.

SONY DSC

Jun 022010
 

dg tree climbing

This one was just published in Descant (148, Vol 41, No 1, Spring 2010)—“The Search for Happiness” issue—in Toronto. It was also published in Best Canadian Stories last fall. Here are the opening lines. I am pretty sure several of you have heard me read from this.

I went to the hospital to visit my neighbour Geills after her suicide attempt. She explained that she had used a generic brand of garbage bag which tore inconveniently along a seam and that she had been in love with me since we met in the alley behind our houses the night the dog barked. I remembered that night for its knot of misunderstandings and embarrassments. Susan, my wife, had been asleep in the bedroom. I was working late on my dissertation in the kitchen nook, still wearing my teaching uniform, tie and a cardigan with leather patches on the elbows, my glasses smeared with powdered sugar from the donuts I habitually ate when I was working. She misinterpreted the sugar traces as evidence of a drug habit which intrigued her. She also thought my late night tie-wearing was symptomatic of a deep fetish attachment, perhaps an interesting S&M thing, she said later. For my part, when I realized it was her dog we were searching for, I began to berate her for disturbing her neighbours in the middle of the night. She began to weep, twisting her chubby little hands in the lap of her t-shirt nightie, dragging it off her shoulder and revealing the butterfly tattoo which alarmed me with its suggestiveness. In the silence that followed, we both heard the dog again, now baying woefully a block or two away.

—Douglas Glover

Buy the magazine–read the rest.

May 292010
 

In re the last post. Here is a site with a photo of Madame Jodjana and some text, English and, what?, Dutch?

I think there’s more material on the web if you track Raden Mas Jodjana who, I think, was her husband. Actually, I am just tracking this myself. Not sure who Raden Mas Jodjana is. But Madame Jodjana was actually Dutch.

More added May 31 in response to Natasha’s comment:

You know I am trying to piece this together. I think I recognize the guy sitting in the chair next to her in the photo. He was living in Paris with her, taking care of her, I think. She introduced him (I think) as the youngest son, an adopted son, she and her husband, she said, had adopted something like 50 children. I could be wrong. It’s been a while. (In fact, I probably am wrong. Memory doesn’t serve well at this distance.)

She told me she had been part of the Dutch colonial crowd living in Indonesia and had to leave when the Dutch pulled out. But she’d met this guy, a member of the Javanese royal family, and they got married and came to Europe. And she was living in Paris because the Dutch were peculiar about immigration. All this is from a vague memory of a conversation. She and her husband had made their living dancing and teaching. But he was much older. There were black and white pictures of them and their children and famous people all over the cluttered room in her house. She was a semi-invalid and never got out of her chair.

It’s funny how the blog brings all this up and then allows me to fill in blanks I didn’t even know were there.

Apparently, her husband was influenced by a Sufi teacher. Whatever it was she was teaching, it made an impression on me–oh, how impressionable I was in those days! Certain exercises I still teach to my boys.

May 292010
 

Suddenly everything makes sense. Read this BBC piece on art and schizophrenia.

On an autobiographical note: In Paris, Christmas 1969, I saw Salvador Dali emerge from a limo with a lovely young woman in a leopard skin coat (leopard or ocelot–some patchy feral cat). Ask me what I was doing in Paris. Getting into trouble mostly. Also taking acting and movement lessons from an aged Javanese temple dancer named Madame Jodjana.

Ah, more information than you need.

dg

May 272010
 

Ferocious, blood-thirsty, fearless, foolhardy--the walking definition

Dg’s cat Hobbes has slaughtered three chipmunks in the past two days. The last appeared at the back door this morning at about 8:30 a.m. Hobbes was still batting at the body, trying to get it to play. Then at about 9 a.m., dg was roused from a blissful nap (er, writing session, er, oh, right, I was doing packets) by Jacob’s shouts from the kitchen. Hobbes and a fox were crouched and staring at each other in the tall grass (lawn mower malfunction). The fox took off, and Hobbes shot into the house, looking twice his normal size, breathing hard. This has nothing to do with writing, I am aware of that, but dg thought you should all know what a War Zone he lives in with bodies piling up and blood everywhere.

dg

May 262010
 

Herewith the opening lines of new story  just published in Ninth Letter (Vol 7, No 1; Spring/Summer 2010).

I went to see my friend Nedlinger after his wife killed herself in that awful and unseemly way, making a public spectacle of herself and their life together, which, no doubt, Nedlinger hated because of his compulsive need for privacy and concealment, a need which seemed to grow more compelling as his fame spread, as success followed success, as the money poured in, so that in latter years when he could no longer control or put a stop to his public notoriety, when it seemed, yes, as if his celebrity would completely eclipse his private life entirely, he himself turned reclusive and misanthropic, sought to erase himself, as it were, and return to the simple life of a nonentity.

You will recall that Nedlinger began his career as a so-called forensic archaeologist specializing in the analysis of prehistoric Iroquoian ossuaries in southwestern Ontario and it was then, just after finishing his doctorate, before lightning struck, that he met Melusina, at that time a mousy undergraduate studying library science, given to tucking her unruly hair behind her ears and wearing hip-length cardigan sweaters with pockets into which she stuffed used and unused tissues, note cards, pens, odd gloves, sticks of lip balm, hand lotion and her own veiny fists, her chin depressed over her tiny, androgynous breasts–in those days she wore thick flesh coloured stockings and orthopedic shoes to correct a birth defect, syndactyly, I believe it is called. Only Nedlinger, with his forensic mind, could pierce the unpromising surface, the advertising, as it were, to the intelligent, passionate, sensual, fully alive being that hid in the shadows…

–Douglas Glover

Buy the magazine–read the rest.

May 192010
 

Sorry to obsess. But look at 1 Samuel 5 & 6, a passage that has the feel of parody. The Israelites have just gone into battle against the Philistines taking their Ark of the Covenant with them as backup. But the people have been backsliding again and the battle is lost and the Ark goes over to the other side. The Philistines of Ashdod put the Ark in the temple of Dagon, one of their gods, a statue of some sort. The next morning that statue has fallen over onto its face. They put the statue back up, but the next morning they find it with its head and hands cut off and placed on the temple threshold. This is an uh-oh moment for the Philistines of Ashdod who quickly make arrangements for the Ark to be handed off to another Philistine town. Thus begins a kind of musical chairs situation and God rains down destruction and slaughter: plagues of emerods (hemorrhoids) “in their secret parts” and mice. After seven months, the Philistines decide to put the Ark on a driverless ox-cart and send it down the road toward the Israelites. They include a parcel of trespass offerings, golden emerods and five golden mice! I love the emerods and the mice and the head of the god stuck in the doorway. I can’t escape the feeling that the author here was being a bit lighthearted at the Philistines’ expense. No doubt, I shall be reproved by biblical scholars around the world.

The Ark cart eventually trundles into an Israelite farming community called Bathshemesh where the people open of the cart and check out the offerings and make celebratory offerings of their own and notify the Levites to come and take the Ark back. This is all cool except that the poor Bathshemeshites unwittingly have made a fatal error: God whacks 50,070 of them for looking inside the Ark (more collateral damage).

dg

May 162010
 

Another of the gorgeous Dore illustrations

In Judges 11 we find another fascinating little story. Jephtha is another one of the “judges” called to save errant Israel. He’s an interesting character in himself. Son of a prostitute, he has to live in exile in the land of Tob until the Ammonites attack Israel. This echoes several Bible stories including the early life of Moses who has to escape from Egypt for a while before coming back to save the Israelites from Pharoah. Any number of Biblical heroes have to live in exile or in the Wilderness before achieving greatness (echoing shamanic practice).

The Israelites promise Jephtha he can govern them if he helps them fight the Ammonites. So off he goes to whack some Ammonites after promising God to sacrifice the first thing that comes out of his front door when he returns home victorious (what was he thinking? what was home life like? what sort of innocuous thing wandered in and out of his front door? goats? puppy dogs?). As luck would have it, the first thing that comes through the door to greet him is his little daughter who dances out happily expecting big hugs and, maybe, souvenir t-shirts. She asks Jephtha why he looks grumpy and he tells her, well, now I have to offer you as a burnt offering to the Lord. She is, to my mind, justifiably dismayed, but she’s a good daughter. She says, okay, but let me go up into the mountains with my girlfriends to mourn my virginity for two months. Jephtha says okay to that (the text emphasizes that his daughter is an only child–think of it). And the girl and her friends spend two months camping and hiking in the mountains bewailing her virginity (have teenage girls changed since then; I mean, really?). Then she comes back and Jephtha burns her on the altar. The KJV translation here is absolutely gorgeous in its description of a sweet, real little girl on the cusp of womanhood.

Continue reading »

May 152010
 

Gustave Dore illustration

I have surged through Joshua, Judges, Ruth, and part of 1 Samuel (Kings), catching mistakes and misinterpretations from the last time I read through. The Bible seems more strange and alien than ever, fascinating in its fierce anarchy. (Might I just mention in passing the plague of hemorrhoids God sends to the Philistines and their attempt to make a Trespass Offering by fashioning five gold statues of their hemorrhoids. 1 Samuel 6:4 I went to bed last night trying to imagine what a golden hemorrhoid would look like.)

Briefly, since I’ve been trying to keep track of what I called the slaughter of the innocents (or collateral damage), I want to draw your attention to the horrific story of the Levite and his concubine (Judges 19). This follows a murky little bit of text about a man named Micah who seems to set up his own mixed religion with pagan images and Hebrew sacred items mixed and a Levite priest to conduct services–this is during one of those backsliding moments when the Israelites have fallen away from the truth faith. Judges 19 seems to start fresh, but it could be the same Levite priest. He takes a concubine (later she’s referred to as his wife as well), but she “plays the whore” with him and runs away to her father’s place. The Levite goes to get her and eventually starts home. They stop for the night at a place called Gibeah where a nice old gentleman invites them to stay at his place. During the night a crowd of party animals called “sons of Belial” surround the house and ask the old man to send the Levite out so they can have sex with him (this is a repetition of the Genesis 19 episode at Lot’s house in Sodom). The old man offers them his daughter and the concubine instead, but the rowdies want the Levite.

Finally, the Levite convinces them to take the concubine after all. The young gentlemen rape her through the night, and when they’re done, they turn her loose. She manages to crawl to the door of the old man’s house, manages to reach up and get her hands on the doorstep, and dies. In the morning, the Levite gets ready to leave and notices the concubine. He tries to rouse her, but she doesn’t respond. He packs her on his donkey and takes her home. And then he gets a knife and cuts her body up into 12 parts (including the bones) and sends the bits off the the far corners of Israel. His reasoning is that he wants to gather a horde to wreak vengeance on the men of Gibeah–and he does. (This part of the story refers forward to 1 Samuel 11:7 where Saul cuts up a yoke of oxen and sends the pieces to the corners of Israel to summon the hosts. Weird connection, yes? concubine=oxen?) But my mind is still back there with the concubine for whom things have not gone well. Not well at all.

Here is the climactic bit of the story (my emphasis).

019:021 So he brought him into his house, and gave provender unto the
asses: and they washed their feet, and did eat and drink.

019:022 Now as they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of
the city, certain sons of Belial, beset the house round about,
and beat at the door, and spake to the master of the house,
the old man, saying, Bring forth the man that came into thine
house, that we may know him.

019:023 And the man, the master of the house, went out unto them, and
said unto them, Nay, my brethren, nay, I pray you, do not so
wickedly; seeing that this man is come into mine house, do not
this folly.

019:024 Behold, here is my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them
I will bring out now, and humble ye them, and do with them
what seemeth good unto you: but unto this man do not so vile a
thing.

019:025 But the men would not hearken to him: so the man took his
concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and they knew her,
and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the
day began to spring, they let her go.

019:026 Then came the woman in the dawning of the day, and fell down
at the door of the man’s house where her lord was, till it was
light.

019:027 And her lord rose up in the morning, and opened the doors of
the house, and went out to go his way: and, behold, the woman
his concubine was fallen down at the door of the house, and
her hands were upon the threshold.

019:028 And he said unto her, Up, and let us be going. But none
answered. Then the man took her up upon an ass, and the man
rose up, and gat him unto his place.

019:029 And when he was come into his house, he took a knife, and laid
hold on his concubine, and divided her, together with her
bones
, into twelve pieces, and sent her into all the coasts of
Israel.

dg

May 122010
 

Swoon

redel

/

Hazlitt said, “Every word must be a blow.” And that’s the way Victoria Redel writes. Every word and phrase a hammer blow, crafted along the edge of a twisty syntax that is taut, teasing, emphatic and lascivious.

Swoon is something else, is gorgeous, a complex triptych of a book, a classic three-step structure held together by the strings of eros and femininity and point of view (that woman poet) and the technical threading–the repetition of the italicized “Such Noises” prologue poems and the smaller linguistic and image parallels (see, for example, how “…bend into the microphone…” on p.4 in “Somewhere in the Glorious” transforms into “And with that she’d sing, tilting and leaning into/ the purpled head…” on p. 71 in “Tilted Woman”; and how Akhmatova, the “Russian woman” and “my mothers” in “Such Noises” on p. 3 return as the “old Jew” who kvelts in “Noisy Woman” on p. 77). And so, though the book moves through its sequence–the young lover in the throes of eros the bittersweet, to the mother, to the multiple female characters of the austere, Chekhovian prose poems in the last section–it is one complexly woven whole.

In Swoon, Redel has hit her form in a spectacular fashion. She is alive in language. She’s a mature poet, a knowing poet, a wild, romantic poet. But, in the end, what she is most besotted with (what the poet in the poems is besotted with) is language itself.

Look at that second poem already mentioned “Somewhere in the Glorious”; two lines in the middle go: “I have only all my waiting. For what have I waited/ by cross street and elbow, for what gadget of transformation?” Then, two poems later, in “Cabin Note”: “We are still waiting./ But for what?” And then in the next poem “Damsels, I”: “If not for paradise then for what/ do I rut, incorrigible in the palm of your hand?” Nevermind that I’d give anything to have written any of these sentences myself with their insistent and erotic parallel constructions, their open-ended and endless interrogatives, their theological and sexual weavings, their surprising turns of phrase. But Redel has actually managed to thread and suspend the thought through three different poems over several pages so that the mind of the reader, in the middle poem (with its acute exploitation of white space, the emptiness of waiting, quite specific to this poem), is really suspended, in suspense, unconsciously waiting for the syntactic pay-off. And the pay-off is spectacular, not because of the thematic surprise (the connection between desire for spiritual transformation and for love is an ancient theme) but because of the language, the bull’s-eye perfect “what”/”rut” rhyme in the third poem. It goes straight to the heart and the mind. It’s what makes Redel a masterful poet.

I love things like this: “What we do we do in this life with our clothes still mostly on.” A line I could write an essay on, an epigram made poetry by the atypical verb placement. Think how a line like this gets built up. It starts with the idea: We do what we do in life with our clothes on. (A slightly anti-romantic, pretty realistic view of what life is like after you’re grown up.) Redel inverts natural word order–“We do what we do” to “What we do we do”– to make the line surprising, give it rhythm and zing. What we do we do in life with our clothes on. An interesting idea but still not a line Redel would write. She adds the word “still” so that we get: “What we do we do in life with our clothes still on.” Which builds in the antithetical picture of what we do with our clothes off which, accordingly, is not what we really do in life. And finally she adds the amazing “mostly”–“our clothes still mostly on” which twists the whole sentence with a wry, ironic tweak. The epigram becomes story, it becomes the image of a couple doing what they do in life but half-in or half-out of their clothes, that sad, comic moment of struggling, half-dressed transition from passion to so-called real life.

—Douglas Glover

See also “Swoon.”

/
/
/

 

May 032010
 

Eglon, king of the Moabites, from Figures de la Bible (1728) Illustrated by Gerard Hoet (1648-1733), and others.

Procrastination has reached biblical proportions this packet round–on the other hand, not all my students got their packets here on time, so I have an excuse.

Over the weekend, I got through Joshua and part-way into Judges before I broke down. Joshua divides (like Caesar’s Gaul) into three parts. The first 12 chapters contain the dramatic crossing of the Jordan and the battles for Jericho and Ai (and various other places), also the stories of Rahab, Achan and the trickery of the Gibeonites. The next section is mostly an administrative  interlude in which the various tribes are assigned their allotments in the conquered land. And in the last section, Joshua dies. The first few chapters of Judges recapitulates Joshua, sometimes repeating chunks of text and story pretty much verbatim. And then we begin a series of cycles of backsliding (whoring after strange gods) by the Israelites (who, really, never seem to learn), punishment by God, and then rescue by a local hero who, for some reason, is called a judge. Some of the judges get a good deal of face time, their stories told in graphic detail (the Jael and Sisera story mentioned in an earlier post is part of the story of a female judge named Deborah).

The first time I read through all this material I came away with the impression that it was a kind of veiled history of the Israelites establishing themselves as a monotheistic community amidst a land teeming with polytheists. From Leviticus on, the emphasis seemed to be on establishing and maintaining cultural purity against contamination from the other regional communities. This seemed like a reasonable anthropological synthesis of what I was reading. Now, however, with my trusty Literary Guide beside me, I see greater complexity (and confusion). God makes a covenant with the patriarchs in Genesis to make their people prosper and bring them to the Promised Land. But as we read through the later books of the Pentateuch, we see God gradually introducing an override condition. At first the Israelites are the Chosen People, but then, it seems, they will be the Chosen People as long as they obey him. If they keep acting up (whoring after strange gods), he promises to obliterate them (and there is prophetic material that predicts just this). One of the conditions for God’s beneficence is that the Israelites completely eliminate (early ethnic cleansing) all the strange peoples who already live across the Jordan. God says specifically that they should not make any treaties or deals. Then Joshua goes across the Jordan and the very first thing that happens is that his scouts make a deal with Rahab the harlot which allows her and her family to live with the Israelites for always, thus breaking the covenant. The story of the Gibeonites involves a similar deal with the pagan Canaanites who are allowed to live among the Israelites–and the list goes on. Rather than expunging the polytheists, as they were meant to do, the Israelites keep them around, using them as labour, and then begin to intermarry with them, and so on.
Read the rest!

May 022010
 

Just following my thoughts earlier begun on the way the c(v)ulture industry skews our experience of war (“our” meaning those of us who haven’t actually experienced war). Here is a link to the beginning of an ongoing series of reviews of episodes of the The Pacific by a Marine veteran who did fight in some of the battles portrayed. Why does this man buy the HBO/Spielberg version of war while my student Ross Canton, a thrice wounded Vietnam veteran, doesn’t? Does this man want to remember his life as a made-for-TV movie? Is that what happens to memory and the imagination?

See also.

dg

May 012010
 

I finished up Deuteronomy and the death of Moses this morning and pushed on into Joshua through the well-loved story of Rahab the harlot and the cautionary tale of Achan, the poor guy who stole from the plunder at Jericho and ended up stoned and burned in the Valley of Achor. There’s a great scene in which Joshua gets him to confess by calling him “My son.”  When I was a kid we used to sing the old Negro spiritual (that is what they used to call them–what do they call them now? African American spirituals?) “Joshua fit the battle of Jericho” with hand actions. No doubt this set the stage for my later writing career. Here is Mahalia Jackson singing the song. I love the verb “fit” and the way you have to drop syllables in Joshua’s name to make the song work.

Excellent elucidation of the narrative structure of Deuteronomy in The Literary Guide to the Bible: First person narrator quoting Moses quoting God who is sometimes quoting himself (nested quotations technique). Also the time dance. Moses speaks of that time (in the Wilderness, on Mt. Horeb) and this time (now, when is addressing the Israelites beside the Jordan), while so-called Deuteronomist talks about that time (the time of Moses) and this time (the Israelites in exile in Babylon). The book is full of prophecy because Moses seems to know ahead of time that the Israelites will eventually transgress and God will abandon them and they will be conquered and enslaved and long to return to the Promised Land and he knows this just at the moment when they are about to enter the Promised Land the first time.

Great curses, lovely reference to arrows drunk with blood, also the well-named “hill of the foreskins” (this was after the mass circumcision on the banks of the Jordan–imagine it! or maybe not).

In haste, I am doing packets!

dg

Apr 292010
 

Jaak Panksepp and non-rat friend

This is how reading goes. A friend alerted me to a NY Times piece called What is Sleep? by Siri Hustvedt that led me to look up Morvan’s Syndrome (when you don’t sleep) and an Estonian-born researcher named Jaak Panksepp who is famous in the media (or was famous for ten minutes) for claiming that rats can laugh like humans. Of course, Panksepp is far more interesting than that. He does brain and behaviour research with an eye to investigating the differences between the ancient subcortical brain functions and the newer (in evolutionary terms) generalized gray matter we’ve grown on top of the old brain. Of course, there must be a difference. We trundled along, like most other animals, with those early brain parts for millions of years before we began to think and speak and make tools. All that is pretty new stuff, and much of what we feel and imagine and dream comes from much further back. This theorizing dovetails somewhat with a book called Origins of the Modern Mind by the Canadian neuropsychologist Merlin Donald. Donald’s book played a role in the way I read Don Quixote and formed part of the argument in my book The Enamoured Knight, especially in the last section “Night Thoughts of an Insomniac Reader.” But where Donald is interested in recent evolutionary developments (mimetic and representational functions and cognition), Panksepp is interested in basic emotional systems within the primitive brain. Deep in the older parts of our brain, we are quite similar to most other mammals. We separated from rats, for example, about 80 million years ago, but Panksepp finds certain rat brain structures that resemble parts of human brains (I always suspected this). He watches rats (he’s done lovely papers on the structure and function of play among rat cubs that yield suggestive ideas for autism, ADHD and early childhood socialization), for example, and that led to his notorious research on rats and laughter. His big book is Affective Neuroscience: The Foundations of Human and Animal Emotions, but there are several articles he wrote or co-wrote on the web if you can access them through a library database. Start with “The Seven Sins of Evolutionary Psychology” for a general roundup of current debates about brain evolution.

dg

Apr 232010
 

Raphael’s School of Athens

The University of King’s College Middle Bay version of the School of Athens. Jacob Glover is Parmenides, holding the book, talking to a young woman named Hypatia, centre left.

Apr 222010
 

The early books of the Bible are littered with strange names and peoples. I mentioned giants last time and the Sons of God who came down and had sex with human females. There are also the mysterious Nephilim or Refraim (I think I am getting the words right). And in Numbers and Deuteronomy, there are the giantish Anaks or Anakim. Of course, later on there is Goliath. The Anakim and Og of Bashan, mentioned in my previous giant post, are cited by Moses’ pusillanimous scouts to emphasize the might of the Canaanite hosts the Israelites will face if they go down across the Jordan as God wants them to do. Their fear (or prudence) is infectious. God gets angry and wants to kill his chosen people (once again). But Moses (once again) talks Him down, and God merely sends them off into the Wilderness til everyone in the cowardly generation dies off.

In any case, I find these giants fascinating, as I do the prophets (like Balaam) and the dreamers (like Joseph & Jacob) and the 70 tribal elders who sit down around the tabernacle, go off into an ecstatic trance, and can’t stop prophecying (although their prophecies aren’t true). I like the Children of Israel dancing naked before the Canaanite Golden Calf and whoring with the Moabite (or was it the Midianite) women (really a quasi-euphemism for lapsing into ancient religious ways)–all these are traces of cultural elements beginning to disappear before the book and monotheism, the first signs of modernity.

I also like that 1971 George C. Scott movie They Might be Giants about a wealthy man who thinks he’s Sherlock Holmes and manages to convince the psychologist his relatives hire that it’s better to live thinking there might be giants than not. Which is, of course, a re-working of Quixote. The words “they might be giants” are from the windmill chapter of the novel. Quixote convinces his friends that life is more interesting when he’s insane than when he’s not. The message of the Bible is somewhat different–there is so much effort put into stamping out the last vestiges of the ancient religions; those old beliefs are a kind of cultural insanity (uncleanness), though the problem for God and Moses is that they are also deeply attractive. As you all know (or maybe not), I wrote a book about Quixote which talks, among other things, about obsession, plot, and books.

I think I used to like Jack and the Beanstalk more than any other fairy tale. I seem to recall lying in bed a night, thinking of how I would approach a giant.

I don’t know where this is leading. Probably the fact that I drove 720 miles to Halifax on Monday and then most of the way back on Tuesday has something to do with this.

dg

Apr 172010
 

I started rereading the Bible yesterday; it seems quite different from the last time. Now I recognize favourite passages or structural elements that organize the stories. But the recognition of familiar bits also frees me up to appreciate new things. More on that later. Right now here is one of my absolute favourite verses from Genesis.

There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after
that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men,
and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men
which were of old, men of renown.

Read it out loud for the sonorous rhythms. This passage describes the era after Adam and Eve and before Noah, God’s little temper tantrum starts in the very next verse. What’s interesting to me, besides the poetry, is the claim that before the Flood there were giants and also that the “sons of God” (whoever they were) had sex with human women who bore a race of heroic men. This is stirring stuff, but it somewhat clashes with conventional biblical readings. I never learned about the giants in Sunday school, though I would have enjoyed hearing about them. (Also mentioned in Deuteronomy 2:11.) And, of course, in the New Testament, Jesus is God’s only begotten son–apparently, the author forgot all the others; either that, or we have here a little Orwellian rewriting of history. But, really, I don’t mean to trivialize the passage by descending into simple-minded textual comparisons. The verse about giants and the sons of God is one of those bits that slipped into the Old Testament from some more ancient myth cycle–there are lots of these textual erratics: I still keep puzzling over the famous “incident of the bloody husband”–something about a demonic apparition and a hasty do-it-yourself circumcision (Exodus 4:24),  for example.  But I love the words and the feel of an ancient speaker speaking to me.

This is written much in haste, first thoughts. I almost forgot Og of Bashan (if I ever have another son, I will name him Og).

Deut. 3:11 For only Og king of Bashan remained of the remnant of giants;
behold his bedstead was a bedstead of iron; is it not in
Rabbath of the children of Ammon? nine cubits was the length
thereof, and four cubits the breadth of it, after the cubit of
a man.

dg

Apr 142010
 

So I picked Jonah up from school and he was in a good mood. He had to sell chocolate bars for a Latin class trip. At lunch, he set himself up at a table with a sign that read COCAINE with the word crossed and underneath, in much smaller letters, Confectionery Sugar. Kids lined up to buy. A second ploy involved a group of boys, always at the same lunch, who hang around together and always bring an extra dollar for ice cream. Jonah went over to the ring-leader of the group and offered him a free chocolate bar if he promised to say how good it was and not share any. Jonah promptly sold several chocolate bars.

All the way home he was talking about getting an MBA.

dg

Apr 132010
 

So here’s what happened. I was at the gym with Jonah, and since I’m ancient and feeble I was done earlier than he was. I was in the lobby reading the Glens Falls Post Star, a back page article about the recent mine disaster in West Virginia. Jonah came down the stairs and, joking, said, Have you been crying? Of course, I hadn’t. I was just sweating. I was in a room full of 11-year-old gymnasts, their mothers, and a bunch of middle-aged tennis stars. But then I said, Listen to this. And I told him what I had just read. About how they had found, I think, 25 bodies and there were still four men missing. Rescue teams were trying desperately to find them. The state governor, a man named Minchin (I think I got the name right),  was in the room where the relatives waited for news. He was talking to a woman (I haven’t got the article, can’t remember the names) whose son and two grandsons (ages 20 and 25, just boys) were among the missing four. Then an aide came into the room and handed the governor a note that said the woman’s son and grandsons had been found dead. (It’s important to note here that this Gov. Minchin had lost an uncle in mine disaster, too.) He quickly ushered the woman into a private room and said, They didn’t make it. Her response was: Were they together? The governor said, Yes. And that put me on my knees because I could imagine her mental process and her value set and her feeling for what was important in death and love. The governor had the guts and grace to tell her himself; the woman knew that if they were dead, at least there would be some comfort if father and sons were together when it happened.

dg

Mar 312010
 

Okay, a couple of things I was reading about this morning that I can’t resist mentioning. First of all, it turns out Jesse James (not the cowboy; Sandra Bullock’s husband) had a 4-way with his gf Bombshell McGee, a tattoo parlor receptionist named Skittles Valentine, and her boss. There is something magnetic about these names. I am going to write a novel called Skittles Valentine.

The other thing is this video of militia girls in training. It made me want to join. Absolutely. About half-way through the video there is a blurred image that looks like a guy holding up a target for people to shoot at. Could this be true? How long did he survive? I guess life is cheap in the Michigan woods.

Soon I will begin writing about literature and deep things again, but this morning all I have to look forward to are packets.

dg

 

Mar 272010
 

Marine Eugene Sledge

Joe Mazzello as Eugene Sledge

This post is prompted by working with Ross Canton who is writing a Vietnam War memoir. Ross was a radio operator and a member of a mortar team til he was wounded the third or fourth time, dreadfully wounded, hospitalized, and finally sent home. In any case, we’ve both read the standard Vietnam books; I’ve read several World War One memoirs by British writers like Guy Chapman, Siegfried Sassoon, and Robert Graves. And I’ve read Paul Fussell’s The Great War and Modern Memory in which Fussell argues that the writing that came out of World War One established a template for describing certain life experiences ever after. Certainly, I think it is very difficult for people to write about war without falling back on types and patterns set in the early 20th century.

The other day I noticed promotional material for the Tom Hanks/Steven Spielberg 10-part, $195 million, HBO miniseries called The Pacific. The series is based largely on the reminiscences of three soldiers, especially Robert Leckie’s Helmet for my Pillow and Eugene Sledge’s With the Old Breed. Both Sledge and Leckie were enlisted Marines (Chapman, Sassoon and Graves were all officers). The Sledge book is the best by far; Leckie gets boring with all his teenage hijinks and his endless nicknames,vague characterizations, etc. But Sledge is good and he is tough to read (like my student Ross Canton, he served with a mortar team). We have become so conscious of battlefield “atrocities”–in Vietnam, atrocities seemed to define a moment of excess inside the bizarre horror of the battlefield, excess within excess–that his matter-of-fact portrayal of the debasing experience of war and its effects is fascinating and awful. In the Leckie book there is a Marine named Souvenirs who goes around prying gold teeth out of the mouths of dead Japanese soldiers. In Sledge, you get the idea this was pretty common and at one point Sledge himself starts to think about it and is barely headed off by a gentler, smarter friend. One wonders what Spielberg will do with Sledge’s Marine lieutenant Mac, fresh from the States, who takes his carbine and shoots off the tip of a dead Japanese soldier’s penis for target practice. Or the Marine who casually shoots an elderly wounded Okinawan woman to death while Sledge is off trying to find a medic to help her. Sledge is also good on the smell of war–the heat, the rotting bodies, the blow flies, the diarrhea, the maggots. Sledge makes it clear that experiencing war is a constant struggle to compose one’s self in a world of, to us, unimaginable horror, cruelty, boredom, and exhaustion. One of his worst fears is that he will give in to fear. Many do.

The Vietnam war books I recall (and I haven’t read them for a while) might be better written, but there is a truthful naivete in Sledge’s book. And he never gets up on a moral high horse which makes me trust him. His sense of the human capacity for moral corruption is wise–I feel as if we have become more foolish about war, or the media has made us so. By contrast, there is a book called The Pacific, a companion to the TV series, which is just dreadful, thin, unpleasantly breezy, cliched, distant, and abstract. Here as an excerpt. With books like this veiling the experience of war, it is no wonder we are constantly surprised by what actually happens. At this point, one is reminded that writing well is a moral act. Think about it.

This is just a pre-thought. I haven’t studied the matter. There is a book or a paper to be written on war writing that includes things written between World War One and the Vietnam War and the wars beyond that.

Or just for starters think about the difference between the two photographs at the top of the post.

dg

Mar 242010
 

acquainted

Karen Mulhallen

This is my introduction to Karen Mulhallen’s book of selected poems Acquainted With Absence, published last year by Blaurock Press in Canada. I selected the poems, did some editing and wrote this introduction.

dg

/

This isn’t a book, it’s a keen and a lament. It’s words shimmering over the void. It’s whistling in the dark. It’s lusty, lorn, fearful, lonely, melancholy, defiant, ebullient, mischievous, loopy, solemn, comic, mysterious, fragile, erudite, and grand. In “Letter V” (from In the Era of Acid Rain, 1993), the poet addresses an interlocutor: “You complain of my limited subject matter. Death, you say, it’s always death. Let’s hope we can keep up the supply of men, to fuel your ruminations.” To which the poet replies: “But, my dear, you are mistaken. It is not death but union, mating, bridgeworks, which is my subject. Yin and Yang. The severing of bridgeworks, my lament.”

Love and death, then are the subjects, and they are the same, for love implies loss, and death reminds us always of the living thing that was before and the two together are located at the limits of language where each word suggests its opposite and together they create diapasons of wholeness and loss. In the poem “Sheba Oenone” (from Sheba and Solomon, 1984) from which the title of this book is taken, Sheba addresses Solomon after returning to her desert kingdom.

The chronicler warned me
Of the return from your kingdom
Too long you will remain, she said,
After dark is dangerous.

She has remained too long in Israel, the lover’s realm, and, home now, she addresses him as if from the Land of the Dead in a series of paradoxes interspersed with the physical signs of arousal. So that love, loss and desire form a triumvirate of modalities defining the poet’s impossible state.

When it is damp, the water sinks
Eyes flicker
When it is dry, the fountain sprays
Veins pulse
When it is sunning, the prisms crack
Core throbs
When it is darkling, the stars shine
I am waiting.

Acquainted With Absence is about longing for the mysterious one, the fatal flawed lover, it is about travel–the poet goes away and writes back, the lovers call from far away or visit and disappear or hover just beyond reach–it is about the deaths of loved ones, a litany of loss with which we are all, yes, familiar, though for each of us the litany is different. That first book Sheba and Solomon seems now so significant, though it’s early and a kind of trailing harbinger–much later the books come faster–but it’s about a pair of legendary lovers whose courtly affairs mixed with affairs of state seem to belie the passion and eros that inspire the poems. Impossible loves are the only kind, it seems, in Karen Mulhallen’s poems, yet in Sheba’s realm eros has a bite, and an impishly libidinal smile hangs over heart and bier.

These are poems culled from each of the poet’s books, also some are uncollected, and one is unpublished till now. The result is a Frankenstein if we assume that the author’s intent was to create a separate living organic whole with each collection. A very elegant and original Frankenstein, to be sure, a Rudolf Nureyev of a Frankenstein, though no less the child of a radical surgery. I have put the arms and legs from one book with the heart and ears of another. The things I have left out haunt this collection and me. There is a rough narrative arc that is only notionally chronological (the author has had a notable life–Woodstock childhood, Blake scholarship, academic career at Ryerson University, more than thirty years of fostering the country’s writers with Descant Magazine, marriage and aftermath, romances, periods of creative sequestration, fierce, loyal friendships, wanderings, and, always, the writing). But I start with a poem from the author’s first collection and try to dance through marriage, lovers, family deaths and deaths of friends, and travels, vectoring toward that moment when she herself perished, technically, at least, in a diving accident and then came back. (Examining her afterwards in Toronto, doctors discovered her skull to be populated with several mysterious and charmingly named UBOs, Unidentified Bright Objects.)

Ripped from their settings and reordered intuitively (my intuition) the poems now hint at an autobiography that is not Karen Mulhallen’s autobiography but somehow recollects her emotional passage, her obsessions and the idiosyncrasies of an original and remarkable mind. Reading and rereading her, one begins to notice, beyond the narratives of love and death and the concrete references to loved ones and beloved places (ripped from context, the loved ones and beloved places become mysterious and mythic–the lover is a Demon Lover and the earth is Gaia, fecund, damp, sensual), insistent recurrences: water, islands, plant lore, horses, seahorses, even dogs–lovely to watch the imagery unfold into myth, comedy, eros and personal anguish.

Bear with me. An aside on horses. Watch the web and reiteration of words:

Each day on the beach the horses appear.
There are four of them, and a man.

Horses came with the dawn, hyracotherium,
and the dawn horse was small,
only four hands tall from withers to ground…

This is from “The Horses of the Dawn” (from Sea Light, 2003) in which the poet observes four Arabian horses on a Caribbean beach and her mind casts back to the earliest horse (she is always going back to the beginnings of things and tracking the eons forward). And it speaks to a parallel moment on the Toronto Islands in a gorgeous blank verse piece “The Changing Light at Gibraltar Point” (also from Sea Light):

The horses appear at the verge, closer to the studio window than to lake. The light is
strong, the lake is blue, cirrus clouds at horizon, beyond them a pale blue lofty sky. The
black raises its head…

And then, with a modulation of tone (the horse, by the logic of poetic structures, metamorphoses into sea horse, sea monster, part of the brain and a lover’s penis), to this poem “The Sea Horse” (from the book Sea Horses, 2007):

The Sea Horse

preoccupies me
its sweet curve at the edge of the crook of your loins and your thigh
enfolded like the hippocampus, a sea monster/
sea horse, no need to lift up to aggression,
so easily it can be asked to dance;
in repose it is simply at rest,
and age carries that tranquility
in its most sweet form

In Acquainted With Absence, the horse-sea horse-penis brings to mind flutes (for obvious reasons) and iguanas (which, the poet reminds us, have two penises and can be made into an aphrodisiac soup–mentioned twice), but the horse is also death (in a tanka she wrote as part of a multi-year back-and-forth poetic collusion with her friend Virgil Burnett–Renga Talk, 2007):

Death’s the grand stallion
leading us, not to finis,
but to ever, anon–

And at the end of the book it becomes the poet herself.

Wind

on the grass/
my fingers on these keys.

I have come to the place where what I desire
is not what others desire.
I have not yet reached the place where I know this instinctively,
but it is now part of my deep knowledge of myself
And of my relation to the world.

Some Sable Island horses do not drink from the freshwater ponds.
They dig their own holes for their water.

The title of this poem is “Wind” (from Sea Horses) which resonates with an earlier poem called “Winds” (from Sea Light) in which the poet touches on horses and horse latitudes, the verb “horsed” (to be placed in irons), horsing around and horseshoes, but the tone, the somber sublunary self-consciousness, recalls this tanka.

I wonder if I
am lonely, living as I
do. What do you think?

Is it wrong to be alone
always? Is solitude a vice.

For which there is an answer:

You’re right, of course, what’s
needed now is pleasure, of
almost any kind–love,

travel, friends, poetry, sun,
food, art, beauty, music, wine.

I indulge myself in following the horse motif (and there is more to it than I have mentioned) not because I think horses mean anything in the way of a hefty symbol but because with any good book of poems you can take a thread and begin to untangle the skein and it will lead you everywhere else in the book. Who can tell the deepest leanings of the poet’s mind, or would want to, except to say there is joy in metaphor, metamorphosis (a kind of pun, really) and the play of language? “Horse” is a word, and in the end the horses lead us back to the solitary poet and her Mediterranean pleasures (Woodstock, after all, is in Canada’s deep south–we are sun-lovers and pleasure-seekers, the whole lot of us), pleasures which, in the style of the book, take on a melancholy air of bravado. In “Dirge of the Polar Bear” (War Surgery, 1996), the poet writes:

I confess I am old:
In particular, this morning,
as I catch myself in the glass of ice and ocean,
as I begin musing, a-musing
on anabasis, the long march,
the eternal return of my alitros,
my rascal.

Pinpricks of light, entire rainbows
on the points of ice, prisms of air
where Socrates leads the dead to judgement
in the Phaedo, enchanted each by his own genius
entering the realm of myth
led by a daimon, the demon of self
our rascal, our genius, guide
into a territory where ghostly ice shrouds rise up
with each gust across the lake.

The poems in this book date from the 1960s to yesterday and the poet went through several stages of development corresponding to allegiances, discoveries and experiments: Charles Olson’s open field writing–that essay “On Projective Verse”, Whitman’s New World long line, William Carlos Williams’ three-line stanza, James Merrill–unlike many Canadian writers, Mulhallen is willing to admit the richness of American writing. But she is just as likely to be thinking of Thomas Wyatt or Yeats or Keats. The Grace of Private Passage (2000), for example, is written with a lot of those Williams three-line stanzas. The Caverns of Ely (1997, 2000) has a Tennyson poem in the back of its mind, but also contains two Michael Drayton poems, a line from a Jean Rhys novel and a passage of Laurence Sterne’s A Sentimental Journey rendered as poetry .

having been in love almost all my life
may I go on so ‘til I die

Sometimes Karen Mulhallen’s poems look like poems and sometimes they look like prose, although the prose look of, say, “Letter V” is illusory–the poem is written in blank verse buried in a somewhat Miltonic long line of iambic pentameter phrases; the lines run although the ear can pick up the line and stanza breaks and the caesuras throughout. Sometimes she explodes her lines with spaces to create open field poetry. Sometimes the ends of lines stand in for punctuation–periods or commas. Sometimes she runs capital letters at the start of each line and sometimes she doesn’t. All these variants have been left as they were despite the occasional incongruity in the current setting because to homogenize them would have insulted the original organic integrity of inspiration and the poet’s delight in self-transformation and growth. And what you find if you read carefully enough is a text in which the vectors of intention, influence, allusion, word-play, context and specificity (of place, time and gesture) criss-cross to form a densely layered and fascinating poetic matrix.

But this is house-keeping, and I really mean for this mysterious book and the passionate intelligence of the poems to carry themselves without explanation or caveat. Karen Mulhallen is a magnificent poet, prolific, protean and deeply, intensely personal. She is a metaphysical poet, concerned with ends and existence, yet she grounds everything in the specific and the concrete. Just to remind you of how this works, here are lines from “The Caverns of Ely” which echo the wind/horse pattern, quote from a Jean Rhys novel, speak of love and the writing of poetry and close with taking down the laundry.

The wind came up strong today, when you were absent–
I wanted to say away, but feared the closure of a rhyme–
I felt the sadness in the wind, so much sadness in the wind,
and thought of sending cards inscribed to all whom I love
‘It is very windy here’,
as I gathered the laundry from the line.

Everything (love, line, word, laundry, poet) hangs in the windy air between I and you, and the space between is absence, a state of being that informs every poem in this book. To be is to be in a relation and to write is to bridge the gap (watch the “bridge” pattern throughout the book). The paradox (the romantic paradox) is that if there were no gap, if love succeeded, there would be no room for poetry. Think of those courtly troubadour poets singing rhymes to their chaste and irreproachable lovers, the mystical she/other who might be a real woman, or God, or an occasion for a line. Then mull the implications of this elegant turn at the end of the brilliant “Spel Against the Author of Spel Against Love Poems” (from Modern Love, 1990) wherein the poet evades the lover in order to make the writing of love poems possible.

So I write this spel against the speller
I keep silent
evade you here in the light
where my mind is
and not in the body
losing itself to darkness and dreams
to the writing of love poems
I loved you with so bright a light
so wise
I could not write.

—Douglas Glover

/
/

Mar 242010
 

The world of literary translation knows no boundaries. David Helwig sent me the following, a piece of graffiti found on the wall of a brothel in Pompeii.

Arphocras hic cum Drauca bene futuit denario.

I looked it up on the web. The more or less accepted translation goes like this: Here Harpocras has had a good fuck with Drauca for a denarius.

But I sent the line to Jacob to see what he thought. He wrote back: Something along the lines of…Here Arphocras laid well with Drauca (my dictionary says this means sodomite, but it is a capital D so I made it a name. I think it is a pun.) for a silver coin. Basically… “Arphocras fucked the shit out of some male hooker right here for like no money.”

Then I looked up the quotation in Craig A. Williams Roman Homosexuality. Apparently, the price paid to Drauca was eight times the going rate (according to other notations on the wall).

The plot thickens.

dg

Mar 242010
 

In 1968, an American assistant professor at York University observed to me that in terms of political spectrums, the Canadian Right begins somewhere left of the leftiest American Left. Here’s an essay by Stan Persky on Naomi Klein in the online magazine Dooney’s Cafe. Klein used to edit This Magazine where I once or twice published stories (I suspect this was before Klein was even born). There are a couple of interesting message vectors here. The first is that these are people who come from a Canadian Leftist tradition which, in many ways, has its roots in a Prairie Protestant religious movement of community and co-operation (unlike the U.S. where Protestantism is mostly on the Right). The second is that Canada also has, through Marshall McLuhan and Harold Innis, another tradition of culture criticism that rises from a study of the social and cognitive effects of technology. These two threads seem to coalesce in Naomi Klein and her critiques of market capitalism. Oddly enough, as Persky points out, Klein is getting some traction on the American Right, which seems paradoxical and fascinating. All this talk of Right and Left doesn’t mean that much any more since both sides seem to assemble slogans without giving much attention to underlying consistency or purpose. It’s strange to think that Tea Baggers and anti-globalization demonstrators actually agree on some things. Anyway this is a interesting article, not the least because it’s about how to write a bestseller against the idea of bestsellers.

dg

Mar 212010
 

Last night I watched a movie called A Good Woman adapted from Oscar Wilde’s play Lady Windermere’s Fan. Very witty, packed with aphorisms. But it was also fun to look at the play and the script (this is not a movie script but a transcript just to give you an idea). The movie doesn’t seem to have gotten such good reviews, but the side dialogue crackled on occasion. Take a look at it if you get the chance.

Here are a few aphorisms I lifted from the play this morning:

I can resist everything except temptation.

Nowadays to be intelligible is to be found out.

Crying is the refuge of plain women but the ruin of pretty ones.

But my experience is that as soon as people are old enough to know better, they don’t know anything at all.

…nothing looks so like innocence as an indiscretion.

dg

Mar 192010
 

Dog

An aphorism is a rhetorical structure that more often than not functions as a balanced antithesis. This against that. There are many sub-varieties. Wit is introduced through surprising twists or juxtapositions, puns, and homophones.

E.g. “Obliquity of style leads straight to the Purgatory of vagueness.” (This I wrote in a student packet letter.)

“Separation gives one a chance to be a new person, but the new person has to take this huge, mangy, bloody, limping, rabid, mongrel dog on a leash everywhere he goes — this dog is the old person.” (This was a fugitive autobiographical thought.)

Here is one model exemplified by the Marquis de Sade. “There are two positions available to us–either crime which renders us happy, or the noose, which prevents us from being unhappy.”

And here is one of my own written after de Sade’s example. I wrote it to a student in a packet letter not so long ago. “There are two kinds of readers–the adventurers who glory in the breathtaking audacity and risk of a well-turned aphorism and the weenies who, lacking courage themselves, find it affront in others.”

Here is a Lawrence Durrell variant from his novel Clea: “‘There are only three things to be done with a woman,’ said Clea once. ‘You can love her, suffer for her, or turn her into literature.'”

And here is one of mine using the model: “Three people become famous as a result of any new artistic movement: the one who invents it, the one who does it best, and the one who parodies it.”

Here is an aphorism by Montaigne: “The world is but a school of inquiry.”

And this is one of mine using the same model. It’s from my story “Bad News of the Heart.” “Love is an erotic accident prolonged to disaster.”

This is from “The Indonesian Client.” “All sex is the manipulation of guilt for pleasure.”

Here is another from my story “Woman Gored by Bison Lives.” “Life is always better under the influence of mild intoxicants.”

There are many more variants of the form. Finding them and identifying them is a little like bird watching.

dg

See Numéro Cinq‘s First Ever Aphorism Contest below.

Mar 142010
 

There was Claw-fingered Kitty and Windy Ike
living the life of shame,
When unto them in the Long, Long Night came
the man-who-had-no-name…

So yesterday I drove Jonah to the woods of Middle Grove west of Saratoga Springs where he spent three hours with this amazing musician named Russell Slater. Listen to Slater at motherbinary.com. While Jonah fondled synthesizers and midi guitars, I wandered over to the Ballston Spa Antique Center where I stumbled upon a copy of Ballads of a Cheechako by the Scottish writer Robert Service; you probably all know “The Cremation of Sam McGee.” Service spent a good deal of time in Canada and became world famous for his poems about the Yukon. His brother joined the Canadian army and was killed in action in the First World War. Service’s poems are comic but have this mysterious edge, like dream figures coming out of the darkness. I love the lines above. He works with types instead of metaphor, but the types seem mythic, rock-hewn, and silly all at once. Take the phrases by themselves (notice the capitalization):

  • Claw-fingered Kitty (I can’t get much traction with Windy Ike)
  • living the life of shame
  • the Long, Long Night
  • the man-who-had-no-name

dg

Mar 132010
 

I was just looking through Keats’ “Ode on Melancholy.” It had never occurred to me to think of it as a poem about the aftermath of a fight with your significant other, the massive, hugely depressive feeling you get when things go south in the kitchen or the bedroom and the person you thought was your nearest companion turns out not to have the faintest clue about your inner being and no sympathy whatsoever. But, of course, that couldn’t be what the poem is about, right? Compare with D. H. Lawrence’s “Kissing and Horrid Strife” discussed in an earlier post.

I love the train of poisonous medicaments in the opening stanza, the piling up of death. This appeals to the baroque and macabre side of my nature which, as you know, doesn’t come out much.

dg