Subject
Re: "Pale Fire" CHW to MR
From
Date
Body
In a message dated 02/11/2006 00:27:40 GMT Standard Time,
NABOKV-L@HOLYCROSS.EDU writes:
Dear Charles,
I found your post (see below) quite fascinating and self-assured.
I wish, however, that you could help me out by actually defining
how you separate verse from poetry. If, as you say, it is not a
question of quality (what is good or bad), there must be other
defining characteristics. It's simply not a distinction I've
encountered before.
Matthew Roth
Dear Matthew, and others,
I think Frost was striving to make this distinction in his essay The Figure
a Poem Makes, 1939. As I tried to say, it's the difference between craft and
art. But I fully agree that it's certainly not an easy thing to pin down.
There's always the Housman test, but that's very subjective of course. I
misquoted Johnson, I'm afraid. He likened poetry to light, saying it was easy to
recognize light when you saw it, but that it was very difficult to tell WHAT it
was.
Re good and bad poetry. Some of Dylan Thomas is fine poetry; some of it less
fine, but all of it is poetry. Much against my will I'm obliged to admit
that Pound wrote poetry, but I find large chunks of him appallingly bad: quite
horrible in fact. On this point I am in total agreement with Robert Graves, who
had many strong opinions on the nature of poetry. In my view William Empson
offers a wonderful analysis and introduction to poetry, per se. I've also
found Elizabeth Drew pretty helpful. Quiller-Couch has a few points, but he
reduces poetry to syntactical inversion, which has quite gone out of the window,
these days.
Re Pound: in his essay, it seems to me that Frost is distancing himself from
Pound, without explicitly naming his former comrade-in-arms. The reference
to sadly neglected Lola LaMotte Iddings as Lolita can be found in a memoir
written by her brother --- I think someone may already have mentioned that on
this list. Her brother was a noted geologist, I believe.
In answer to Stan Kelly-Bootle, I would say that I'd already addressed the
question of blotting lines, and so forth. It is little or nothing to to do with
whether Dylan Thomas thumbed his thesaurus, or whether Keats wrote and
re-wrote his lines. Keats transformed A thing of beauty is a constant joy into A
thing of beauty is a joy for ever. Perhaps that was what Frost was talking
about when he said a poem may be worked over. I think what he was getting at
was the essential initial spontaneity that a genuine poem requires. Shakespeare
was in a hurry, and had deadlines to meet. He wasn't writing for the printed
page, or setting his words in concrete. Others do have that interest in
their bids for immortality. Keats was terrified that his name would be writ in
water.
Housman's stature as both scholar and poet is a good point, although I would
contend that he looms far larger as a poet than as a scholar. There are
exceptions to every generalisation, as we all know. Besides which, he was always
somewhat ouside the box. I seem to remember that he came down with a
distinctly poor degree.
Peter Dale's comment that the fact that a few of Shakespeare's sonnets may
not be poetry of the highest "does not alter the general judgement of modern
taste that the sequence constitutes an extraordinary achievement of sustained
poetical intensities" is, in my view, absolutely right. I tried to make that
point in my reply to Brian Boyd.
I would certainly also agree with Evelyn Waugh that Pale Fire the poem is "a
jolly good composition in its own right." I'm a bit doubtful about agreeing
that it is "no parody or pastiche", and would say that the jury is still out
on that one. His references to Kinbote's wonderful footnotes, which for me
constitute the utter uniqueness and brilliance of this book, seem to me
understandable (given the sort of man Waugh was and recognizing the underlying
element of professional jealousy). "Too clever by half" is a typically English
judgemental put-down. It was used against Shaw and Empson, and English
disapproval of "cleverness" is enshrined in Kipling's If.
Many apologies for the note of "self-assurance" Matthew refers to. Already
at the tender age of 17 or 18 my headmaster was warning me that I might be
somewhat opinionated, and other masters were telling me I was in danger of
becoming a dilettante. I have been sufficiently chastised by life during the last
50 years to be ready to wash my mouth out, and preface every assertion with
imho. Please take this as read.
One point I would like to make about VN's writing. A fundamental reason that
his works are so intensely enjoyable and uplifting (imho) is that he has a
fundamental sense of humour that is quite lacking in other revered figures of
the C20th: Joyce, Mann, O'Neill, Arthur Miller --- I haven't read enough of
Faulkner. As an English poet remarked as early as the 1730s: Life's a jest and
all things show it. For the Americans, and I apologize for saying this to the
Americans on this list: Life is real, Life is earnest. European culture has
wearied of this youthful vigour (imho). Again, cf Yeats. It may be the
reason VN returned to Europe. There were no doubt also tax advantages.
One more thing. I was entertained to discover, courtesy of Google, that a
book entitled Differential Geometry, Calculus of Variations, and Their
Applications, 1985, by Themistocles M. Rassias, George M. Rassias, makes sustained
reference to Frost's essay (on Page 103) in discussing the relationship between
science and art. Unfortunately I'm barred from lifting the passage, and I'm
not about to buy the paperback, $96 at its cheapest. At least, not just at
present. Koestler's Act of Creation I have also found to be a good read.
Charles
Search the archive: http://listserv.ucsb.edu/archives/nabokv-l.html
Contact the Editors: mailto:nabokv-l@utk.edu,nabokv-l@holycross.edu
Visit Zembla: http://www.libraries.psu.edu/nabokov/zembla.htm
View Nabokv-L policies: http://web.utk.edu/~sblackwe/EDNote.htm