To be or Not to be... Poetically-challenged
Poetically-challenged.
Whether I just coined a recent addition to the dynamic vocabulary of political correctness or someone somewhere has invented this phraseology, that is not important. There is a more important issue concerning people -- some of them are even English professors who teach literature where I teach-- who are poetically challenged.
If you were a professor teaching at a Catholic university or college and you encounter a poem which contains words like nipples, ejaculation, "come," penetrate, and other "sexual" words, what would you do?
(a) Read the poem analytically, interpret it in its entirety and in the context of literary criticism (feminist, Marxist,etc.), and shut up.
(b) Read the poem, be scandalized by the sexually-loaded vocabulary, dismiss it as a pornographic poem, and burn the author at the stakes.
You could either be (a) or (b). You could either be educated or poetically-challenged.
A reading theory called Transactional Theory (proposed by Rosenblatt in the '70s) has this basic premise that MEANING IS IN THE READER. A poem is just a series of letters printed on paper until the reader processes it and shapes its meaning. As a simultaneous process, the reader is also being shaped by the text. Rosenblatt compares this process to the way a river shapes its banks; while the water shapes the banks, the banks define the river.
Now, this elaboration of a theory may sound too profound for the average-minded, poetically-challenged members of Group (b) in our categories of readers. Let me, then, simplify it for them:
A reader can choose whether or not to be scandalized by the poem s/he reads. Since the reader is the key figure in the reading process, s/he may read the poem maturely, i.e. within the context of literature, or superficially. The moment you view a poem as sleazy, merely erotic, or pornographic, you are, in effect, letting it influence you in an "erotic" way. A poem is said to be "pornographic" because the reader claims s/he got "aroused" by the words in it. Should a poem be defined by the reader's libido?
If you encountered the following excerpts, how would you react?
Ignore my inadequate bosom, my enormous hips.
Look at me and see in me the Woman who suckled you with her soggy breasts.
Mine are still firm and plump and erect.
Feel them, suck them like you sucked your mother's
Back in the days when your Universe was just
A Pair of Nipples Overflowing With Maternal Kindness...
I dare say that a reader who finds sexual arousal in these lines has got some issues. Either s/he is simply poetically-challenged, or s/he needs to see a psychoanalyst who specializes in repressed sexual urges.
What say you?
posted by H @ 1:16 AM
4 Comments:
Hahahaha!!! Oh poor thing... I say, Poetically challenged people should back out of the game when they obviously don't know anything about the rules. Nobody can survive in the deeps without first learning the basics of swimming. I say, when you don't know how to understand poetry, it's better for you to stop pretending that you do, and keep your embarassing ignorance to yourself.
Who said this poem is pornographic anyway???? They should take some literature units. I'm not an expert, but at least I know something about the "necessary ambiguity", "symbolism", and the "poetic license."
I say, the poem is simply NOBLE and very philosophical. It evokes new insights and gives SEX a holier cause.
It's funny how we easily accept poems that evoke sensual feelings when the poem itself doesn't mention sensual words. There are a lot of poems that make us think about sex without mentioning the word "sex" itself. You may see a brand new car and imagine you're having that orgasmic bliss.. or look at a pretty little flower and think of a vagina.
That sex is bliss is not the poetic thesis of this piece of art.This poem simply uses SEX as its main symbol. This poem should make us think of something else aside from its obvious meaning- or else, it will render the poem non-poetic.
It simply presents the reality in a very honest way, yet trying to blot out that malicious and sinful view about our common activity of love and procreation. (The problem with people is that we always want to be liked, so, we'd rather sacrifice honesty to euphemism.)
This poem sanctifies sex- the dirtiest topic known to the human race. SEX? It's mired all over! We think sex is dirty and bad; then, why do it? But we know that there is more to sex than merely orgasmic bliss. Sex is sacred. It means more! Come to think of it, you poor little things....
Why do I talk a lot about sex in here? THat poem is not even about sex at all. It's about us bumping on each other without really understanding what's in the other person's head. We frantically make acquaintances but we don't really pause and listen- think and realize. The poetic thesis of this poem as I understand it is happening right at this moment: When people Read a Poem by merely making their eyes glide through the words without really understanding its deep meaning. Who said this poem is erotic? Guess what you just did, whoever you are? You just had a sex with this poem without understanding the depth of the "womb". I won't wonder if you say you don't get what I mean.
As a man pushes his way into a woman's bossom, so do we all do when we mingle with people. A man pushes his way in, pulls his way out, but does he really understand what he's doing? Or, does he really understand where he's digging in, and where he's been? He's been to the womb. He's been nurtured by those soft walls and round nipples. But does he honor those things as he honors life itself? The body of a woman is life to both sexes. It is sacred and mysterious.
So to Mr. Prejudice and Mrs. Holier-than-thou, YOU ARE EXACTLY THE MEANING OF THIS POEM.
the Song of Songs even comes with a disclaimer that it is just a literary attempt at describing the relationship of GOd and his people.Hahahaha!
i like the sarcasm in the last few lines. from "Be just..." to "And know not yet." i can feel the persona acquiescing, helpless, with sarcasm as her only defense.
i know that this literary folio didn't publish this poem in vain. i believe that through this poem, and the support your students are showing you, it's taking many off the beaten track: shirking off naivete, understanding poetry better and not getting left behind, reading some more (hay!).
I remember Aldous huxley saying something to this effect, though not necessarily related to poetry: how charming and effective it is to call a spade by some other name!
poetry is a terribly misunderstood art form, that real poetry is becoming endangered. this is what we get from literary teachers who go gaga over danielle steele and never look beyond. erotica is always tied to a purpose, while porn is what you forcibly include for your art to have commercial value. try checking the collection of "literature" in these "literature" teachers' faculty room cubicles, the latter is what you'd most likely see.
Post a Comment
<< Home