[lit-ideas] Re: Violence as Destruction of Doubt
- From: Eric Yost <mr.eric.yost@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 09:27:59 -0400
Many things that can be "said" are none too clear - and many
examples, say from poetry, could be given. We can escape this
refutation by saying that such poetry does not in fact "say"
anything. But this is really a definitional manouevre (about the
definition of 'sense') that is hardly adequate to explain the
difference between a piece of nonsense like '$%q9 suit four' and 'in
Just-/spring when the world is mud-/lusicious the little/lame
ballonman/whistles far and wee/and eddieandbill come/running
from marbles and/piracies and it's/spring/when the world is
puddle-wonderful' (from 'Chansons Innocentes', e.e.cummings).
____
Let me offer another route here. What Mallarme or cummings or Jorie
Graham write is perfectly clear. It cannot be rephrased with greater
clarity. Skillful poetry, no matter how abstruse, is the most
concise description of its subject, the most clear formulation of
the poet's intentions. It is irreducible.
This proposition answers the question of clarity as well as Mike's
quibble about rationality.
It also answers that old anecdote about Sibelius. Sibelius played an
early recording of his Fourth Symphony to a critic friend. When it
was over, the critic asked, "What does it mean?" Sibelius held up
his index finger and played the recording again.
The intrinsic meaning of a successful work of art is the entire work
of art. Elements can be chipped off and held up for inspection, but
these only serve to illuminate some aspect of craft.
Poetry edges into the nonsense of "'$%q9 suit four'" when it is
poorly made, or as Valery would say, abandoned too soon.
Regards,
Eric
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
