Alora Young

Allen Ginsberg: Poetry vs. Poetic Statement

In ‘Notes for Howl and Other Poems’, Ginsberg summarises his style of poetry in terms of “breath”, “Hebraic-Melvillan bardic breath.” Ginsberg’s poetry was intended to be physical, spoken, a communal experience as was the rest of the Beat movement. He says, “Ideally each line of Howl is a single breath unit… one physical-mental inspiration of thought contained in the elastic of a breath”, and in reading part I of Howl, we can certainly see that this is true. Each “who” is not only “depended on” “to keep the beat”, but to start a new thought, to “return to and take off from again” the poem’s opening about “the best minds of [his] generation”.

He writes that his intention was not to “write a poem”, but to “just write what [he] wanted to without fear”, to “sum up [his] life”. Howl and the rest of his poetry is full of references, abstract of otherwise, to Ginsberg’s life, to his friends and fellow artists, to Whitman, to his opinions and frustrations. It is easy to see from this that, yes, Ginsberg “scribble[d] magic lines from [his] real mind”, and then left them that way. He writes, “Let it be raw, there is beauty”, and the two elements he discusses in ‘Notes on Howl and Other Poems’ – “breath” and the idea of his poetry being deeply personal and uncensored, allowing whatever comes out to land where it may on the page – are certainly defined by this statement. “I’m not in control”, he writes, and we can tell that this is true: he writes what he feels he needs to.

Even if I don't have any experiential knowledge of Ginsberg's experiences, and even if I don't share some of his beliefs, there's something in the rawness of his work that I find appealing. It also helps, I assume, that a little research into his life and historical context can illuminate the deeper meaning of many of his metaphors, making his poetry much more easily accessible than a lot of the poetry I've read - most of which I've struggled with. I didn't, however, struggle with Ginsberg. In fact, I like his work a lot. Both his poems and poetic statement are honest and straight forward, but written with a genius in language that most other writer’s in this world can only hope to achieve.

Response 7

Jenna Wilhelmi

Postmodern Poets

Just Breathe

Charles Olson’s poems looked scattered at first glance, but when you look closer you can find a method to his madness. There is an underlying structure to all his poems. It is just not the same in every poem.

In his essay on projective verse Olson says, “a poem is energy transferred from where the poet got it.” All poems inherently have their own energy and that energy takes different forms. Therefore, the structures of Olson’s poems are altered to suit the kinetic energy of the poem, to better convey its essential message. He then goes on to stress, no, exclaim the importance of breath in poetry.

Olson believes a poet can only truly put their voice into a poem when the poet fully understands the natural breath and cadence of their own voice. This being said, Olson’s poems make far more sense when they are read aloud. Olson’s poetry is meant to be read aloud so that you can hear his voice in the lines. He even inserts his breath into the poems by the spacing of the sentences and words. He explains, “if he suspends a word or syllable at the end or a line (this was most Cummings’ addition) he means that time to pass that it takes the eye – that hair of time suspended – to pick up the next line.” When you want the reader to pause, you make them do it naturally by putting a gap in it. This emphasis on the pauses in speech caused by breath, as well as Olson’s focus on the syllable, bring to mind music.

Olson himself makes the connection later on in his essay. He reasons that by using breathe in a written form that “for the first time the poet has the stave and bar the musician had.” Any music teacher worth his salt will tell you that in order to play any great musical piece you must play the pauses. The moments of silence are just as important as the high C and the same goes for poetry. Pauses create emphasis and emphasis creates meaning.

The breath also has its counterpart the syllable – another aspect of projective verse that Olson stresses. The human ear naturally picks up on what sounds resonate well together and Olson thinks poets should listen to this. Instead of following a set pentameter, poets should let the line shift where it sounds right, where they want to insert breath.

On paper Olson’s poetry looks slightly jumbled, but after reading his essay – and after reading him aloud – I was able to see and hear his careful choice of syllables and pauses. His work has a very lyrical quality that only becomes evident when it is heard. This adds many layers to his work, as well as the themes he discusses in his work. In Cold Hell, in Thicket alludes to Dante’s Divine Comedy, but is really about feelings the Cold War stirred in Olson. For me personally, it also invoked feelings of facing your demons and that your hell is of your own making in your soul rather than a location.

I could read any of Olson’s longer poems a hundred times and find new meaning each time. That is the allure of poetry of any kind, but in postmodern you must first learn the voice of the author before you can fully pull meaning from the text. There is an element of ambiguity to all poetry, but the personal voice of the postmodern style makes it even more so since one person can never fully understand the inner workings of any other’s mind.

This Is The Impossible

Or at least it is how this feels, because poetry is beautiful, but at times so difficult to understand. Though, in Charles Olson’s case, it’s not possible to understand any of his poems completely, because it seems as though he does not even understand them. Since the poems are the ones writing themselves. The writer is just a puppet being controlled by the poem. So of course it’s not completely possible to understand them, but there are parts in his poems that seem possible. Like, for example, this stanza:

“this

is the abstract, this

is the cold doing, this

is the impossible” (5).

This stanza alone is its own entity in a larger entity which is the poem In Cold Hell, in Thicket. It’s so strong on its own, and can have so many different meaning. So many that is has been haunting me. I have been writing this one stanza all over my walls, my papers, and even my arms. Questioning what is “this.” Is “this” life, hell, living in America at the time, love or an infinite amount of other things? This is probably why these three lines are so strong and haunting, because they have an INFINITE amount of meaning. But the thing is Olson did not write with a certain meaning in mind. Olson wrote it because the poem wanted it.

This little stanza follows all the rules he pointed out in his poetics. First,”the kinetics of the thing” (614). This stanza has a beat, a “breath.” The writer’s energy is being transferred to us because of the juxtaposing syllables of these lines. Second, “is the principle, the law which presides conspicuously over such composition, and, when obeyed, is the reason why a projective poem can come into being.” Which is still a confusing statement for me, but it is alluding to the poem’s control over everything. And how everything you add to a poem, like this stanza, is only a “an extension of content.” Thirdly, and lastly, “the process of the thing.” Which is saying that “one perception must immediately and directly lead to a further perception.” This is what that stanza is doing. It moves line from line in both a kinetic and musical way. Each line is a deeper perception into the line before. This stanza is the perfect example of all the stanza in In Cold Hell, in Thicket, because they all follow these three rules and they all feel somehow alive. Since just like a living being they have breath, heart, movement, and energy. All of these stanzas, lines, and poems by Olson remind me of a human. Always changing its mind, and filled of infinite of possibilities.