Modesties:
Words as plain as hen-birds' wings
Do not lie.
Do not over-broider things -
Are too shy.
Thoughts that shuffle round like pence
Through each reign,
Wear down to their simplest sense,
Yet remain.
Weeds are not supposed to grow,
But by degrees
Some achieve a flower, although
No one sees.
So with this poem, I think its pretty clear that Phillip Larkin has a kind of tit for tat battle with himself. He builds it but then ohp - nevermind. He starts to go one w - nope. He tries to reach a kind of happy medium - but then says f*** it. Friggin A' man...seriously?
But with this poem, you can most definitely see the dualistic hell that Larkin imposes on himself and I really cannot say whether it is truly effective or simply annoying to no end, how Larkin of me.
He sets this poem up pretty good from the beginning with the first stanza being:
Words as plain as hen-birds' wings
Do not lie.
Do not over-broider things -
Are too shy.
Here, Larkin is saying that simple words are the source of truth. Simple words do not muddle or misconstrue their meaning...it would honestly be pretty hard to misread the statement, "Those jeans make your butt look big", but on the other hand, if you were to say it like this, it might be a little more inviting to interpretation: "Those fashionably crafted pair of pants you have donned truly do not compliment your figure, and in fact they rather work to the opposite effect especially concerning the region just below your spinal column" Cut down the language and you cut down the distance between two people. Why make bridges any longer than they have to be? Simple language does not attempt to be anything other than what it simply is...simple and true. And yet, here comes the Larkin train...they are too shy...*smacks head* Hu-wha?!?
Is he trying to say that by using simple language you hide behind a surface level giving of opinion? Is it that Larkin believes simple language to be a scape goat or mask to hide the real truth behind? Does simple language lack the manhood to go further than simplicity, because we are complex beings?
On the other hand, you could take that little spastic cliff-hanger to mean that indeed, yes, simple language lacks manhood, lacks confidence, lacks ego, or delusions of granduer. By using simple language, we admit our connection with the other person because we are so enthralled by them that we are almost floored by their presence or that when we meet with one person, we cannot help but feel overwhelmed with feelings for them, kind of a butterly-in-the-stomach effect...I dunno, freakin Larkin...
But onto the second stanza:
Thoughts that shuffle round like pence
Through each reign,
Wear down to their simplest sense,
Yet remain.
Thoughts that shuffle round like pence. Ok, so I know you cant see it, but I burst out laughing pretty loudly at this line. Larkin...what a brit lol. But he means to say thoughts that shuffle round like loose change I think and here he makes a connection to the thoughts and phrases which we muddle over our heads during the course of a conversation. Should I say this? Or maybe that? Should I lie about her pants? Should I simply avoid the question altogether? *insert question*, *insert question*, *insert question*. And through each reign is referential (is that a real word) to each individual encounter we have. He says eventually, after muddling and muddling, we are finally forced to give up and just speak simply. Almost exhaustive in nature, the individual will just say "I really cant think anymore, my brain hurts" and so in desperation and exhaustion the truth is simply what remains, simple and short.
And then the kicker, the clencher, the fourth quarter clutch or klutz:
Weeds are not supposed to grow,
But by degrees
Some achieve a flower, although
No one sees.
Seriously, Mr. Wishy-Washy needs to stop with the flip-floppery here. Weeds are not supposed to grow...To me, I understand this line to mean that sometimes when we widdle our thoughts down, they are not always the good truth, but rather the ugly truth. You go over it and over in your head and your left with the thought, "No, I truly do not love you" whereas before it was,"Well I know we havent had that good of relationship lately but x, x, and x, so maybe..."...but sometimes the simple truth is not the thing which wants or needs to be heard. And yet, some weeds grow a flower. When you are finally left with the ugly truth, you can move on from there and blossom into something bigger and better. And many times people do not see the ugly truth as something beautiful or beneficial, all they see is the loss of a relationship, "No, I no longer love you" and yet on the flip side, this relatioship has been stale for so long and finally reaching this realization breaks free that shackle of over-analysis that has kept you bound within the same rotting pile of manure which is your relationship...reaching the simple truth, stripped of overpowering thoughts that may mislead you, takes off the weight and silences the noise that is brought about by college-level word choicage and SAT Prep-thinking.
BUT ALAS! LARKIN STRIKES AGAIN! WHOOSH!
Weeds are pretty much there to pee in the wheaties that would otherwise be a welcome bowl of fresh fields and sunshine. They pretty much ruin the party and they are the vegetative equivalent of Nosferatu. So taking the negative connotation of weeds and sticking with it, the ugly truth will eventually just get uglier and uglier. A sprouting dandelion eventually turns into a full blown dandelion and you could equate the last stanza to a kind of Poe-ish approach to the sublime. Once you see the ugly truth, everything becomes that much more uglier, and at the end of it all, all you see and consider is that disgusting head of dandelion, and not the weeks before-hand that it took for the dandelion to grow and to blossom. You see the result and not the path taken to get there, so taking this kind of approach to the ending, reaching the ugly truth will hurt you in the long run because it will lead to other ugly truths and after a while you'll be so far down the ugly-truth road that you'll forget how you started on that road in the first place.
Larkin, you suck dandelions, I dont like your poetry. There is a reason why America did not vote for John Kerry and likewise, I dont think I can vote for you.
But you ran a good campaign, sir.
And yet...
I love your po-
No, just kidding.
No comments:
Post a Comment