EDITORIAL
Losers Weepers
   
 

In Finders Keepers Seamus Heaney gives a poignant account of the anxiety he experienced when he first encountered the poetry of TS Eliot. This was at a time, in the 1950s, when Eliot was the light and the way: a name synonymous with modern poetry itself. A volume of the collected poems was posted to Heaney at school ‘like a food parcel’, yet instead of supplying a longed-for pleasure, the words produced in him something resembling a panic attack. They were on a wave-length as inaudible to him as if they had been the squeaks of a bat. Physical symptoms – a growing lump in the throat, a tightening of the diaphragm - were not relieved by subsequent readings. Instead, and for years, ‘Eliot scared me off, made me feel humiliated and small, made me want to call on the Mother of Readers to come quick, to make sense of it, to give me the secure pacifier of a paraphrasable meaning.’

Was he exaggerating? I don’t think so. At the same time as inviting us to identify with the plight of the schoolboy, Heaney also says that the acute anxiety he describes is not a schoolboy reaction, or not merely. We are all learning from Eliot, and others, that a poem can never take us entirely beyond its language to a brightly lit and focused place – as if ‘obscurity’ were murky water that intelligent reading could render transparent and clear. ‘A poem must resist the intelligence almost successfully’ (Stevens) is the downright sort of assertion it’s easy enough to accept. But what is so attractive in Heaney is the frankness with which he admits to the anxiety of not understanding.

When Stevens writes ‘A man and a woman/ Are one’ we can understand without difficulty, but ‘A man and a woman and a blackbird/ Are one’ and we are flummoxed. We set off on a path in the anxious hope that we will arrive sooner or later at a single main sense for the poem that will include the blackbird. But, perhaps, losing our bearings is a fundamental part of the process. The playground game of Heaney’s title ‘Finders Keepers’ has loss as its counterpart.

A statement Heaney makes in a later chapter revises my image of the path: ‘Poetry is more a threshold than a path – one constantly approached and constantly departed from at which reader and writer undergo in their different ways the experience of being at the same time summoned and released.’ Perhaps it was the spatial imagery of the threshold as well as the theme of anxiety and loss that made me want to look again at the story about his grandson I’d read years ago in Freud’s ‘Beyond the Pleasure Principle’.

The little boy, in an attempt to cope with his mother’s alarming ability to vanish from his sight for hours at a time, plays a repeated game. Holding one end of a string attached to a cotton reel he hurls it over the edge of his cot and then spools it in, accompanying its arrival and departure with the words ‘Here’ and ‘Gone’. This stark game enacts his mother’s presence and absence – or so psychoanalysts say.

Part of the appeal of Freud’s story about his grandson, seen as the figure of the poet, is the idea that the desire for presence and the effect of absence are implicated in each other and even animate each other permanently. The game of Here and Gone is one that the poet plays in the little theatre of each sentence. With the Mother of Readers holding the poet’s hand, words play their familiar roles with a reassuring and consoling logic. Here is the static noun, the active verb, the spaces and perspectives of the prepositions. And above all, here is the rigid duality and separateness of subjects and objects. In fact, the necessary grammar of the sentence itself slots the world into arrangements on which our day-to-day sanity depends. This, as Yeats might say, is the language of the breakfast table.

But suddenly, within the reassuring flow of sentences, disturbances are created. Words are arranged into lines, lines into rows. They are turned over, turned towards each other to make musical patterns – to mention only a few of the huge disruptions poetic form introduces into language. Metaphor takes away literal meaning and Mother has fallen through a trapdoor out of sight. We are left in the scary yet vivid zone Yeats described as ‘phantasmagoria’ where our awareness of the subjectivity of objects and the objectivity of subjective emotion becomes uniquely possible. It is here that we begin to discern the reshaped and recreated meanings of poetry.

 

 

Martha Kapos, Assistant Poetry Editor

 

<< back  |   top ^