“And so when you read how worried are you about what a poem literally means?” he says.
i say:
this is a tough one because he’s got two words that don’t necessarily go together, those being “literally” and “means.” but of course they don’t not go together of necessity. you could say, for example, that “She squeezed my tie shut and popped my head off and then I floated away but she didn’t” [here i am quoting sasha's forthcoming book, which is a very good book, without permission], and i would have no problem imagining a certain narrator’s girlfriend yanking his tie until his head popped off (although it says he flew away, as opposed to his head) and flew away, in the context of the book, which is the only place the narrator is, of course. and this is a pleasing image to take literally and that is the literal meaning of that sentence.
i have this feeling that sasha is asking if i’m looking for a “deeper” “meaning” — in other words, a symbolic meaning.
and then there’s also “poem” to complicate everything.
the inclusion of the word poem reminds me of that emily dickinson poem about the narrow fellow in the grass. i actually love that poem, as i love a lot of dickinson’s poetry, but it always made teaching poetry difficult, because i wanted to insist to my students, who had been told by their high school english teachers that poetry had a secret meaning, that poetry does not have a secret meaning, that there is not a single key that the initiated use to unlock a poem.
but in some cases there is a single key. that narrow fellow in the grass? he’s a snake. until you realize that, the poem can’t be more than word music to you, and if it never becomes more than music to you, you can’t get on to the really interesting questions, like why does dickinson gender the persona of the poem male (“But when a Boy, and Barefoot…”), and why, after gendering the persona male, does she close with a feminized and arguably sexual reaction to the persona’s surprise encounter with a snake (“But never met this Fellow/Attended or alone/Without a tighter Breathing/And Zero at the Bone”)?
precisely. nothing.
i’m glad dickinson sprang to mind like that, because, and here i’m just projecting, i would doubt that she would recognize that description i quoted as feminized or sexual. feel free to school me if i’m wrong.
point being — what is the symbolic meaning here? i don’t think there is one. i don’t think it matters to literature or emily dickinson. i think emily dickinson wanted to write a poem about seeing a snake in the grass from a boy’s perspective.
okay, i said i don’t think it matters, but that’s a little disingenuous, because i do think it matters that (as opposed to what) we think about what a poem (or story or novel or television commercial) is saying, as object (as opposed to reflection of the world), because it keeps our brains spinning and creates new possibilities for things we can write and also do.
on the other hand, like i implied you absolutely have to be a good enough reader to see that the narrow fellow is a snake. or as a writer, you absolutely have to be a good enough writer to show me that the narrow fellow is a snake. this is a weird line and i’m not trying to draw it in the sand tonight, but i can tell you this — i know it when i see it. or i mean i don’t know it when i don’t see it.
this kind of calls back to my last post, the one about joyce.
anyway, my advice direct to sasha would be:
make sure your audience (however smart or dumb it may be — that’s your decision, at least until the book’s out, at which point it’s their decision, which sucks but there’s nothing you can do) (or it’s pretty in an absurd way) knows the “literal meaning,” that is, what is happening or happens. and then sit back and enjoy while they diagnose your philosophies, politics, sexual orientations, mis- or philanthropy, and pathologies. but don’t skimp on the literal meaning. sitting around trying to figure out “what happened” is only fun for teenagers who just saw their first david lynch movie.
everybody! — sasha and i are reading together at the dive with superstars blake butler, samuel ligon, and robert lopez in philadelphia on sunday, 9/20. come see us. details here.
“that poetry does not have a secret meaning, that there is not a single key that the initiated use to unlock a poem.”
Great stuff right there.
I personally love the “word music” aspect. If Dickinson wanted everyone to be aware that the narrow fellow in the grass was a snake, maybe she would have written it. Or titled the poem the snake, like I believe it was first published as, much to her dismay.
Have you ever loved a song so much only to actually listen to the words and find out that part of it sucks? I have and it’s not a great feeling.
Stay gold.
i hear you. i mean, i definitely don’t like reading stuff without word music, but — and i think i might be getting old or something — i’m getting less and less out of “pure” word music. like, re: the dickinson poem at hand, i used to always dig dickinson, but i just treated her like she was making pretty noise. the more i taught her, the more i saw she was putting in there, and i felt like she deserved my efforts to read her right. this is as opposed to writers who just mean you to free associate or somesuch. i think literary types are generally far enough up their own asses that i don’t want to give them anymore chances to do that. there’s definitely a place for people who just write pretty stuff, but i’m really into event and always have been, violence and comedy especially. i’m just coming out with it now.