• Monday, May 28, 2012

Previous

Next

Monday’s Poems: ‘Vanished Harvest’ and ‘Bludgeon-Man,’ by Larissa Szporluk

September 18, 2011, 10:10 am

 

Vanished Harvest

They call it a lazy breeze.
Under its slow grope,
trees drop their favorite work.

And pigeons, their pigeon
droppings, and the bleach
that I drop on the porch

because my son might lick one
and die. Because autumn
is sweet on war

and winter is bitter peace,
because the river chased Achilles
for butchering too much—

breeze like a laid-back doctor,
the soul is dense
when you come so late.

 

 

Bludgeon-Man

Would that he caressed us
On the road made of feathers
of our loved ones.

Would that we could lose
all semblance of pheasant,
become Mecca in his palms

and overwhelm his senses.
Would that this were dreamy
instead of dull,

this inevitable severing
of daylight into insects
who pad the coming night

with excrement and wings—
would that it were not our life
to augur sleeveless errands.

 

© by Larissa Szporluk.  Printed by permission of the author.

 

Larissa Szporluk is the author of five poetry collections, including Traffic with Macbeth, due out later this month from Tupelo Press. The recipient of awards from the National Endowment for the Arts, the Guggenheim Foundation, and the Ohio Arts Council, she is a professor of literature and creative writing at Bowling Green State University.

Arts & Academe‘s poetry editor, Lisa Russ Spaar, notes:  The poems of Larissa Szporluk possess a mind of Autumn—and not the autumn of mists and mellow fruitfulness, but of the strangely beautiful, brutal season of fall, the Fall, of drop, of harrow, haunt, and grim reaping.  They are whetted with the scythe’s edge ordure of lopped, shorn, razed things.  Bespeaking a ruthless, anarchic, fiercely intuitive somatic ethos, the menace in Szporluk’s work is all the more arresting and disturbing for its conjuring of an eerie, almost cinematic, domestic heartland noir.

“Vanished Harvest” and “Bludgeon-Man” are previously unpublished lyrics from Szporluk’s imminent fifth book of poems, Traffic with Macbeth.  Visually—each is a columnar quintet of tercets—the pair of poems mirror one another, like twin hay-ricks, silos, or scarecrows.  They trope one another thematically as well.  Brought together here, the poems present, in distinct Szporlukian ways, the economies of “lost and won,” of “come what may,” that stalk Shakespeare’s Scottish play.  In both poems, any mythic notion of “home” or safety, as autumn and evening and death come on, is fearlessly denied.

A reviewer once wrote that Szporluk’s work is “more personal than poems that proclaim themselves so,” and also more public than its rich, solipsistic language might suggest.  “Vanished Harvest,” for instance, at first seems relayed in a kind of generic voice-over (think Mariel Hemingway narrating the opening scene of a David Lynch film) that borrows the shape of definition (“they call it”) and the architecture of cause and effect (“because”) but which, in the case of both pronominal shape-shifting and vexed dialectic, slips the noose of reason at every turn in a syntax of mimetic dropped and vanishing clauses:

 

They call it a lazy breeze.
Under its slow grope,
trees drop their favorite work.

And pigeons, their pigeon
droppings, and the bleach
that I drop on the porch

because my son might lick one
and die.

 

If the reader misses the threat in that slow grope of the seemingly innocuous “lazy breeze,” that dropping of leaves and avian excrement, we confront it in the image that the narrator, finally entering the poem in the first-person, puts before us of her child on his hands and knees lapping at toxic stone and dying.  She lets the possibility of this hang a moment before seemingly extending her argument for vanishing, veering into more political and even cosmic territory:  “Because autumn / is sweet on war // and winter is bitter peace, / because the river chased Achilles / for butchering too much …”  Again, Szporluk lets that allusion to the waters of the river god Scamander choked with bodies in the carnage wreaked by Achilles after the death of Patroclus linger before eerily returning us to the breeze that is “like a laid-back doctor,” a doctor blind to our terminal condition, the doctor ignoring or oblivious to boundaries, the autumn wind suddenly transformed into the bodiless rush of the soul, all the more “dense” for being abandoned with such langorous, deceptive ease. This is not the leisure of a grape crushed against a palate fine—of the body lingering over its last oozings, hour by hour. This is negative Keats, dark Keats, Keats trafficking in the realm of Macbeth and the dark imagination of Shakespeare, the playwright he so loved. This is Szporluk.

“Bludgeon-Man” also walks the via negativa, and its collective narrators are the victims of the bludgeon-wielding harvester/executioner.  The speakers never question that they must travel “the road made of feathers / of our loved ones” who have gone before them to the chopping block.   Their plea is rather a wish to be “caressed” by their killer, even to be cherished by him (“Would that we could lose / all semblance of pheasant, become Mecca in his palms // and overwhelm his sense”) as they go.  The lament, too, is that the destined way is in no way redeemed for the speakers by thrill or even fear:

 

Would that this were dreamy
instead of dull,

this inevitable severing
of daylight into insects
who pad the coming night

with excrement and wings –
would that it were not our life
to augur sleeveless errands.

 

Although the chorus of narrators may not feel it, the reader must thrill to the ironic, gorgeous lyricism and pathos of the last two stanzas.  Though their tone is more raucously punk, the Scottish trash band Nyah Fearties, underground in the 80s and 90s and known for making a wild, thrashing music by mixing traditional elements with a raving percussive use of dustbins and other machinery, comes to mind when I read these two Macbeth-ghosted poems (interestingly, the band has a song called “Bludgeon Man,” which appeared on an early album).  Heaving into light the heavy, fated resignation, the “dense” soul of the harvested, the about to be vanished, is Szporluk’s “errand,” and it is a perspective not often risked, and risked with such darkly erotic and undeniable poetic power.

 

(Illustration derived from a Flickr Creative Commons photo by Maggie Stephens)

 

 

 

 

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

  • Print
  • Comment
  • wrappedupinbooks

    Apparently, this choice is dictated by the Chronicle’s style guide.

  • 609zr

    $5,000 per year seems extremely reasonable to me.  SK students do not show up for class, do not average above 48 on exams (100 point scale) and receive a mandatory 70% A’s and B’s. I doubt the students will get out of bed to show up for the Friday “walk out.”

  • whitakal

    It’s good to see thoughtful questioning of “College for All” here at the Chronicle and at the AFT. The character of the public debate that most strikes me is its insistent focus on the means rather than the ends. As the Rosenbaum et al. article points out, the closest most commentators come to speaking about the end is to dangle the promise of a million-dollar salary differential if you complete a B.A. Such a goal is so abstract–and as Rosenbaum et al. point out, so misleading–that it’s not surprising that the debate returns immediately to focusing on the steps of the ladder: B.A. versus A.A., college versus technical school, for-profit versus non-profit, etc. In short, a major characteristics of this discussion seems to be an inability to talk substantially and in a sustained fashion about such things as the nature of work, the nature of profession versus career, the different forms of satisfaction found in manual versus intellectual “labor,” the unexpected challenges posed to most people by the abstractions and the “team-based” approach of most office environments, and the rootlessness felt by many so-called “knowledge workers.” (Matt Crawford’s thoughtful book “Shop Class as Soulcraft” is a good place to begin revisiting these topics.) Aren’t these issues about which college faculty would have something important to say? If so, where are those voices in the public debate?

    Keith Whitaker, http://www.wisecounselresearch.org
     

  • pbgough

    I heartily endorse Keith Whitaker’s recommendation of Crawford’s book (or easily Googleable [?] article-length condensation) and would like to add many publications by Mike Rose, most specifically his 2004 (?) book “The Mind at Work.”

    As Rose’s work demonstrates, we too often fall into the trap of trying to make everyone follow the paths deemed “most likely to lead to success” as defined by those with a pocketful of degrees and an interest in creating more degree holders. The flip side is that we correspondingly disrespect those who work with their hands and underestimate the intellectual challenges of such work. I say this after having just said goodbye to highly articulate young electrician who came to do work at my home that I’m unqualified to do. Neither Rose nor Crawford would deny opportunity to any young person of any background, but neither would try to squeeze everyone into the same pre-Ivy League Procrustean bed.

    Some years back Elliot Eisner of Stanford said (I’m paraphrasing from memory) that the goal of K-12 schools with regard to student achievement ought to be to “elevate the mean and increase the variance” over the course of 13 years. That’s professorial talk for “everyone ought to learn more and become more different over the time in school.” That seems to me to be a sensible aim and one that would do society and citizens more good than clinging to the false hope that somehow we can squeeze all our children into  a name “brand” school in Cambridge, Mass.
    Bruce Smith

  • R117532

    I’m with you Softshell. I feel the same way about the Internet. Cars are OK but, airplanes! More crap. 

  • rwinston87

    After reading the article, I found myself considering the issues brought up about online learning. I agree with Mr. Donaghue on his feelings of the first three points that he brought up. 
    I am currently working towards my Master’s in Education using an online learning course. Having taken a traditional route for my bachelor’s, I can say that the differences between “on-ground” and online learning are quickly becoming irrelevant as schools continue to refine the process. 

    Not all online learning services are created equal; some are fit for participating in the future of our nation, others are destined to be relegated to the history books. What separates these two categories is the economic vote of John Q. Public. If a school is providing the opportunity to earn, say, a Master’s Degree and the graduates that attended that school felt like their money was well spent, then they will undoubtedly encourage others with similar interests to spend their money at such an institution. Conversely, if a school takes the money of students and does not provide a degree of satisfying quality, that too will become news. What I’m trying to say is that the for-profit institutions that are clearly not living up to the standards of online learning will not live long in our fast-paced economy. 

    For those interested in learning more, I have found this article to be helpful in addressing these issues, and more.

  • bobshelby

    I’m sorry. At age-80 after a lifetime of writing & reading, I don’t ‘thrill’ to these clipped, little lines, and certainly not because she teaches something somewhere. I’m evidently “aged-out” of appreciating this maybe-middle-aged academic. “Gorgeous lyricism and pathos” is inflated description.