Merwin makes a brilliant point there, and in many poems, suggesting that in order to name something, it must be finished, and by then, it is gone and so only memory remains.
"Raiment" is an example of Merwin's thoughts on language; in it he describes the way in which a word is not a thing but a kind of covering which we use to describe a thing. He says of this, "apparently we believe/in the words/and through them/but we long beyond them/for what is unseen/what remains out of reach." Merwin approaches the topic similarly in "Day without a Name" in which he writes about the nature of time, our perception of it, and therefore the language we use for it. Merwin says simply, "today nothing is missing/except the word for it."
I think that part of the beauty of "The Shadow of Sirius" is that while Merwin moves through memories of his life and speaks of the nature of nostalgia (mentioning the ability to long for the past even in inanimate things, as mentioned in, "Lights Out" and "Recognitions") the poems become aware of their own limitations. Merwin makes it clear that the poem is not the moment, not the thing...though he strives to capture both feelings and the past. The beauty in this is that there is less a sense of futility and more of a sense of poetry being enough.
When Merwin approaches a topic of nostalgia, longing, or grief, it does not hold as much of a dark quality as it does great reflection.
RICHARD'S RESPONSE:
ReplyDeleteI agree with you on most points about this, but I'm not so sure that I agree about the idea that Merwin stated that language had limitations. Yes, I do agree that he acknowledged his own fallacies as a writer, and indeed all writers could learn from such humility, but I don't believe that language as a whole has limitations.
Limitations on language can differ from person to person, but language itself doesn't have a limit as it is as expansive as the universe itself. I think that a majority of Merwin's poems are acknowledging the fact that he does have shortcomings and as expansive as language is, he cannot utilize it as he wishes to capture the full extent of meaning and emotion that he wants to include in his poetry.
Merwin is firmly in the realm of 'write what you know' and it does show. You gave some great examples of poetry that helped outline his experiences in life, but consider something like Williams' Spring and All, meant to be extremely experimental and put a lot of emphasis of going beyond what one knows and instead attempting to write something that utilized more of language than someone was used to. Even 'Descent of Alette' as horrifically confusing as it can be, is another example of how one can push language beyond normal boundaries.
I'm not saying that Merwin is a bad poet, far from it, but he remains in a realm that is safe for him. He doesn't try to push language, and instead writes what he knows will work.
I definitely appreciated that Merwin only wrote about things he had experienced. It annoys me when authors wrote about deep incomprehendable things that they have no idea about. Also, often times authors try to place words upon things that can't be explained through any way shape or form of langauge such as death.
ReplyDeleteWith things such as death, no one has experienced it then lived to tell about it. Because of the uncertainty and indescribable elements of it, people try to reach for some type of language description.
I also like that he keeps his writings based on things he understands and has experienced such as longing and grief. He knows what they are like & has found the words to explain.
I disagree about the previous comment because i definitely think there is a limit to language and the descriptions that go along with it. Obviously there are a copious amount of words, and combinations of words to create a description and meaning but there is a limit. There has to be.
Although I don't necessarily want to, I do agree that language has limitations. Personally, I am obsessed with words. If the general concept of words were a person, I'd stalk him (?) down and marry him. However, I can't help but accept the fact that while we can pick and choose numerous words to describe an event or the feelings felt as a result of an event, there really is no way of completely conveying the individual experience. I think Merwin does address this in his writings. "Raiment" is a good example of this and I really loved how he played with the idea of humans and language having both tangible and intangible coverings. What are the purposes behind these coverings? What are they covering up? Is it a big fantastical secret? Beats me.
ReplyDeleteI liked the point made in class about the word "know." People say they "know" everything. It's used in casual conversation as well as formal. But how can we "know" something if that action itself is called "to know" but expressed and defined by language. I'm pretty sure I just went on a complete rant but I hope some of it makes sense. Basically, I think Merwin at times may "play it safe" but there is definitely brilliance behind it.