Saturday, November 3. 2007
Umberto Saba's Bleat
Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
I think the use of I, or explicitly revelatory information in the poem, has been an issue extending farther into the past than just contemporary poetry. The arguement seems to be: how much can be said without ambiguity, decoration, metaphor, etc. I always think of this Emily Dickinson poem when I debate with myself of the issue:
"Tell all the Truth but tell it slant—-
Success in Cirrcuit lies
Too bright for our infirm Delight
The Truth’s superb surprise
As Lightening to the Children eased
With explanation kind
The Truth must dazzle gradually
Or every man be blind—-"
Saba’s poem crosses the line of "too much explicit information" for me. If I was writing the poem, I think the use of "Semitic" alone should have been grounds to remove the I. But that’s just me, the poem is still great.
"Tell all the Truth but tell it slant—-
Success in Cirrcuit lies
Too bright for our infirm Delight
The Truth’s superb surprise
As Lightening to the Children eased
With explanation kind
The Truth must dazzle gradually
Or every man be blind—-"
Saba’s poem crosses the line of "too much explicit information" for me. If I was writing the poem, I think the use of "Semitic" alone should have been grounds to remove the I. But that’s just me, the poem is still great.
Thanks for your thoughts, Ivan. I agree the "I" has been troublesome all along. For example, in the European renaissance, the question of "I" being connected to a celebration of the poet’s cleverness and sensitivity was paramount. Sonnets were, besides art, also a political agent in the court. Yet cleverness is necessarily covert and convoluted, so the question of "I" centered around these considerations.
Flash forward to the time of free verse, and we have reams of personal anecdote, essentially floralizations of prose. A sidestep attempt to reconcile all this was the "confessional" poetry of the last few decades, which attempts to reveal the socially-less-acceptable aspects of the "I." But still, couched within the plays at self-deprecation, we find self-aggrandizement once removed. So, to me, the question of "I" this late in the development of poetry has become more central, more curious, and more complex than ever before.
Interestingly enough, I saw a translation of Saba’s poem that used the second person (i.e. "you") instead of the "I." A strange move, and possibly an attempt to mitigate what you call "too much explicit information." Ultimately, I think the poem works a bit better in Italian. But I agree, it does come up to that line. For me, the concept is so strong, I am willing to forgive him any slight excess.
Flash forward to the time of free verse, and we have reams of personal anecdote, essentially floralizations of prose. A sidestep attempt to reconcile all this was the "confessional" poetry of the last few decades, which attempts to reveal the socially-less-acceptable aspects of the "I." But still, couched within the plays at self-deprecation, we find self-aggrandizement once removed. So, to me, the question of "I" this late in the development of poetry has become more central, more curious, and more complex than ever before.
Interestingly enough, I saw a translation of Saba’s poem that used the second person (i.e. "you") instead of the "I." A strange move, and possibly an attempt to mitigate what you call "too much explicit information." Ultimately, I think the poem works a bit better in Italian. But I agree, it does come up to that line. For me, the concept is so strong, I am willing to forgive him any slight excess.
Interesting poem. You cover interesting life experience in what you read.
Thanks, Pearl. I’ve covered some interesting life experience in my life as well. Sometimes I find useful principles for interpretation and integration of my life in art.
