On First Reading Larkin
It seems my promised first piece on other poets is rather resistant to the idea of being published here on my poetry blog. So until I sort out the technical problems, you can read it here instead.
posted by Tom Chivers at 2:33 PM
9 Comments:
"Here" did not "tingle" me but "An Arundel Tomb" certainly did. I can actually understand why "Here" might be viewed as the description of a train journey.."the surprise of a town" the changing scenery etc.
it feels like a train journey to me, but more importantly a personal journey being compared to the changing scenery as viewed from a train window. i've noticed my own changing moods and the memories they trigger as i travel from the city to the end of the line (at a beach here in Cape Town). for me it seemed a *description* of INNER sensations being experienced as being like that of a train journey.
i.e. now i'm here, now here, then it changes again etc. for me the word "here" spoke of a place inside the author. here!...within! a changing inner, human, landscape or something like that...
feeling something like a train journey.
or he is, perhaps, escaping..but to escape he must journey, whether literally or figuratively he has to travel to reach the inner space, peace he is craving. he must leave all the rest behind, the clutter of industry and city life. of overwork and sensory overload mixed with deprivation.
as another theory i felt he might have been describing the journey from birth to death. the growth phase, the planting phase, the reaping of seeds sown and then of increasing isolation as age sets in. and death...unfenced, no shackles.....facing the sun (from the grave looking upward) silent.
i was intrigued by this verse:
Here domes and statues, spires and cranes cluster
Beside grain-scattered streets, barge-crowded water,
And residents from raw estates, brought down
The dead straight miles by stealing flat-faced trolleys,
Push through plate-glass swing doors to their desires—
Cheap suits, red kitchen-ware, sharp shoes, iced lollies,
Electric mixers, toasters, washers, driers—
obviously he is referrring to a modern city: toasters, washers, driers..etc. and yet he talks about "grain-scattered streets"? *i've not seen any grain in the streets lately* any ideas?
i know this is a bit rambly and i have no real experience analysing poetry. i thought i'd do something new today-comfort zones can be killing ;)
The poem was written in the 50s, or possibly 60s, so who knows about the streets. Whether the grain thing is literal or not, it helps the contrast between grotty modernisation and a perhaps warmer past.
The poem is not a journey from birth to death either, no. Larkin took death as a literal fact and was terrified by it. I don't think he saw anything beyond life; certainly not transcendence, expanse.
A good poem to compare Here with is High Windows, btw.
rbdid he ever clarify what his poems were about somewhere? if not i guess whatever REALLY happened in Larkins head stayed in Larkins head and we can only guess.
The majority of his poems don't need any explanation. Read his poem 'Aubade' for instance, and see if you think there is any debate to be had over Larkin's view of death. There are a few enigmatic images and slightly-odd sentences here and there, though, and a few subtle references. But since I think it's fair to say Larkin was very definitely 'anti-modernist', and given the numerous and convincing connections between his poetry and the man Andrew Motion makes in his biography - I'm not sure there remains much hidden and mysterious when it comes to Larkin.
But to your answer your question, yes, he did explain some of his poems in certain contexts. There was one interview in particular he gave to some Paris magazine where they asked him more or less explicit questions about his poetry, and he gave considered answers. I think you can find it in his book 'Required Writing' - unfortunately I don't own a copy though and am not 100% sure - I read it on a library loan.
i wasn't really making a point about whether his poems were straightforward or mysterious actually!
i'm pretty sure that 20 people could read that poem and take 20 different impressions from it. would one be wrong and another right? definitively?
i suppose i was just trying to express that IMHO when it comes to creative work we can't really view impressions of work or opinions about it as facts-since we can't ever know for sure what somebody was thinking or trying to convey- unless it is clearly expressed by the poet himself in other writings.
No: when you have read someone's complete writings, including their letters and newspaper reviews, and also read their biography, and numerous essays and the like, as I have with Larkin - then you can be more or less definitive.
sexual intercourse began
in nineteen sixty-three
(which was rather late for me)--
between the end of the chatterly ban
and the beatle's firs lp.
ha.
I always find it strange that people can not just enjoy these poems they have to over analize them and find hidden depths and meanings, maybe just maybe he felt like writing poetry, not about a lifes journey or the existance and struggle of life, maybe he just wanted people to enjoy them as poems.
on first reading Larkin
i thought
of James Writght.
Post a Comment
<< Home