On writing poetry...

“It’s silly to suggest the writing of poetry as something ethereal, a sort of soul-crashing emotional experience that wrings you. I have no fancy ideas about poetry. It doesn’t come to you on the wings of a dove. It’s something you work hard at.”

---Louise Bogan

In the last post on What is Poetry?, I included Burton Raffel's definition for poetry as a "disciplined, compact verbal utterance, in some more or less musical mode, dealing with aspects of internal or external reality in some meaningful way." I think modern readers and writers of poetry have a hard time with the word "disciplined." Horace, the great Roman poet, writes, "Not gods, nor men, nor even booksellers have put up with poets being second-rate." Excellence doesn't simply occur; it is achieved. A poet must account for every jot and tittle in his poem. In poetry, there is no room for excess and overindulgence. Being concise takes discipline and hard work.

What is poetry?

What is poetry?

What is poetry? What is the difference between poetry and prose? What is prose, for that matter.

The first question to answer is the easiest: what is prose? Prose is “ordinary” and “straightforward” writing. The Oxford English Dictionary defines prose as “language in the form in which it is typically written (or spoken), usually characterized as having no deliberate metrical structure (in contrast with verse or poetry)” The word "prose" originates from the Latin “provertere” which means to turn forwards. In otherwords, prose is straightforward and clear. Examples of prose are novels, short stories, essays, plays, articles, speeches, dialogues, etc.. Unless you are reading a James Joyce novel, the language of the novel is clear and straightforward. One of the primary goals of a writer of prose is to clearly communicate ideas and events to the reader. If an essay is not clear, straightforward and direct, then it will receive a failing grade.

So what is poetry then? Poetry is “extraordinary” and “complex” writing. W. Somerset Maugham calls poetry “the crown of literature… It is the end and aim. It is the sublimest activity of the human mind. It is the achievement of beauty and delicacy. The writer of prose can only step aside when the poet passes.”

There is poetry in prose and prose in poetry. However, poetry stands distinct from all other forms of writing. Poetry is distinct historically. Poetry is the oldest form of human writing. For thousands of years, poetry was the means of human expression. Ancient epics like the Odyssey and the Iliad, both written in dactylic hexameter. Most of the pre-Socratic philosophers wrote in poetic form. Poetry remained paramount in the world of literature well into the 20th century.

However, the historical importance of poetry doesn't answer the question "What is poetry?" What is it about poetry that makes it so important and so distinct? Why is it “the sublimest activity of the human mind”? What is poetry?

The challenge in defining poetry is that poetry by its very nature defies “defining”—to define something means that you determine the boundary or limits of something. The OED uses the words “limit, restrict, confine.” If your defintion of poetry is too specific, too limiting, then it fails to capture the expansive nature of poetry. In order to “work” as a poem, poetry needs to defy the boundaries of ordinary language. I tell my students that poetry conveys more than words can tell. Where prose is limited to the literal and abstract meaning of words, poetry is able to pack incredible meaning and depth into the words, going beyond lexical meaning to higher levels of connotation and implication. In essence, poetry is compressed language. So much is packed into so little words. Delving into a good poem is like splitting an atom; the reader unleashes the power bundled up inside the words, commas and metaphors.

To try to define poetry is like trying to capture the wind. Once you “bag” the wind, it ceases to be “wind”. The answer to “What is Poetry?” must be broad enough to permit the creative and boundary-breaking aspects of great poetry. In his book, How to Read a Poem, Buron Raffel answers the question by defining poetry in the following way: “Poetry is a disciplined, compact verbal utterance, in some more or less musical mode, dealing with aspects of internal or external reality in some meaningful way.”

What is poetry? Raffel’s definition is the best I have ever come across. Many definitions are either too narrow (e.g., poems must rhyme) or the definitions use poetry to define poetry: take Emily Dickinson’s definition of poetry: “If I feel physically as if the top of my head were taken off, I know that is poetry.” Perhaps more obscure is e.e. cummings’ definition of poetry; poetry is “the algebra of the heart”.

Even though Raffel’s definition is far more useful because it is written in prose, the poetic definitions seem to capture the essence more powerfully. Thomas Gray’s defines poetry as “thoughts that breathe, and words that burn.”

Poetry: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

Yesterday morning I began teaching poetry to my English students. I argue that poetry is the most powerful means of communicating the “human experience” to other human beings. Where prose “tells” and art “shows” and music “impresses” (i.e., gives an impression to the listener), poetry causes the reader to “experience”. Poetry is the “sublimest activity of the human mind” (W. Somerset Maugham). It shows, tells and impresses. Prose is enhanced when poetry is added. Art is deepened when poems are written about it. Music becomes powerfully meaningful when “put to words”.

This is a tough sell for many students. They have either read a lot of lousy poems or they didn’t understand the poems they have read. Also, students don’t associate the lyrics in a song with poetry nor do they recognize poetic elements in prose.

Yesterday, I tackled the first of the problems. I set out to prove that good poetry and bad poetry exist. This is a tough sell too. We live in a relativistic age; standards for beauty and goodness are set by the “eye of the beholder”, not a perfect, beautiful God of all creation. I begin with a comparison between two poems. I owe this comparison to author Patricia Westerhof.

The first poem is called, “Keep Believing in yourself” by Deanna Beisser. I have provided the opening three stanzas.

There may be days
when you get up in the morning
and things aren't the way
you had hoped they would be.

That's when you have to
tell yourself that things will get better.
There are times when people
disappoint you and let you down,

but those are the times
when you must remind yourself
to trust your own judgments and opinions,
to keep your life focused on believing in yourself
and all that you are capable of…

You get the gist. There are four more stanzas... It is a good message, but it comes across less like a poem and more like a speech by a motivational speaker.

The next poem I show them is a poem by Langston Hughes.

Mother to Son—Langston Hughes

Well, son, I'll tell you:
Life for me ain't been no crystal stair.
It's had tacks in it,
And splinters,
And boards all torn up,
And places with no carpet on the floor-
Bare.
But all the time
I'se been a climbin' on,
And reachin' landin's
And turnin' corners,
And sometimes going in the dark
Where there ain't been no light.
So boy, don't you turn back.
Don't you set down on the steps
'Cause you finds it kinder hard
Don't you fall now-
For I'se still goin', honey,
I'se still climbin',
And life for me ain't been no crystal stair.

Without question, Hughes poem impacts the reader in a far deeper and more profound way. It presents the same message as Beisser’s poem, but it seems to “work”. I explain to my students that Hughes uses the devices of a poet to impact the reader. Here are some of the devices he uses: persona, vernacular, punctuation, rhythm, diction, apostrophes, line length, extended metaphor… Hughes poem is significantly shorter than Beisser’s poem. However, it communicates much more. Hughes poem is sincere. Beisser’s poem is sentimental. Hughes’ poem is influential, powerful and beautiful.

After yesterday’s lesson, I think the students understood that there are certain poems that are not sublime at all. They also learned that perhaps there are poems out there that just might be sublime... or at least, might be pretty good. I think I am making progress.

The Elizabeth Code...

I recently watched the film, Elizabeth: The Golden Age. It was a dazzling film, filled with remarkable costumes, breath-taking sets, great performances and inspiring music—in other words, not a bad film. However, I couldn’t help but be disturbed by the underlying message of the film-makers. The movie was used as a political soapbox and historical allegory to attack recent British and American foreign policy. Am I reading into things too much? Am I cursed with an over-analytical “English major” mind? Let me tell you what I saw and you can be the judge…

All of the points below are “sort of” true… a dash of historical truth mixed a great deal of “updating”…

1) Elizabeth was presented as a promoter of 21st century tolerance. She accepts everyone, even the dread pirate Raleigh. She was also portrayed as a “modern”—i.e., subtlety cynical about traditions and religion.
2) Mary, Queen of Scots, on the other hand, was intolerant, power hungry and manipulative… and a devote Catholic.
3) Philip of Spain was also intolerant and portrayed as a religious nut who declares Roman Catholic “jihad” on England.
4) If Elizabeth had only been tolerant of those who differed with her, then there would be peace. Unfortunately, she executed Mary, Queen of Scots, for attempting to assassinate her… which ultimately precipitated the Spanish invasion.

The only glitch to this tidy recreation of events is the fact that Elizabeth wasn’t tolerant of the invading Spanish Armada. They had to include that part, though, because of the cool special effects. The role of God in the defeat of the Spanish Armada is also downplayed.

To sum up the hidden meaning... Christians a few centuries ago are just like Muslims terrorists today. Therefore, the US should abandon religious squabbles and be tolerant of different perspectives. Also, if the US would stop declaring revenge war on the Islamic extremists/fanatics, then maybe we could all get along… Lastly, the Spanish Armada can be seen as a metaphor for US military excess, especially in Iraq. They should stop that too.

The moral of the story is that "history repeats itself"---especially when a film-maker re-writes history to prove his point...

Historical Ignorance

"History will be kind to me for I intend to write it." Winston Churchill

That may be true, but what if no one studies history...? Or worse, what if no one believes in history at all? I recently came across this article below (refered on Dr. Haykin's blog). Apparently one in four Britons do not believe Winston Churchill ever existed! Here is the article published on FOXNews.

..................................

One in four Britons don't believe wartime Prime Minister Winston Churchill existed, according to a recent survey. Churchill is compared to Florence Nightingale and Sir Walter Raleigh, seen by many survey respondents as a mythical person, the London Daily Mail reported Monday. The survey, conducted with 3,000 respondents to test their general knowledge, reported other historical figures such as Indian leader Mahatma Gandhi, Cleopatra and the Duke of Wellington were made up for books and films, the Mail reported. The survey, by UKTV Gold, also found that Sherlock Holmes was a real person. Young Britons under 20 lack a basic historical education according to the survey results, historian Correlli Barnett told the Daily Mail. "This suggests a complete lack of common sense and respect for our greatest heroes of the past," Barnett said.

...................................

This survey adds irony to Churchill's famous double imperative, "Study history! Study history!"

Renovated Blog

It's a whole new me. I finally figured out how to add "labels". I also added a MapLoco, which shows the places of visitors. (Thanks to bestsister)

Will I be posting more often...? Hard to say. The big question of the moment... Is the new earth tone colour scheme hard to read?

Reliving the Past

I have been slack on postings lately, and I was inspired by TV reruns. Check out these postings from bygone days (i.e., the last couple of years). I have been blogging since 2005 but I have yet to figure out how I can put posts into catergories... Anyway, take a look...

About Shakespeare:

Shakespeare the Pirate and pirating Shakespeare

Why Study Shakespeare

Shakespeare in the 21st century


About Literature:

Classics and the "Weak" student

Why teach kids about literature

On teaching English literature...

A comment about Fantasy and English classrooms


About writing:

Bacon, Chickens and the Art of Teaching Writing

The Art of Teaching Writing

Bad parenting in Hamlet

Reason #2 why I like Hamlet: the plethora of bad parenting role models

1) Disinterested parenting: mom & dad preoccupied with careers and social status

Hamlet is the crown prince and his parents should have been prompting him and encouraging him toward his royal fulfillment. But, they were not. Instead, Hamlet’s father was engaged in expansion projects and cementing his own legacy as king of Denmark, a legacy that is forgotten soon after his untimely death. Gertrude seems equally disconnected from her son. It seems she is all but unaware of Hamlet’s relationship with Ophelia, even though the relationship was known to others (cp. Polonius and Laertes). She also fails to understand the true source of Hamlet’s malcontent at the outset of the play. Hamlet, we discover in his first soliloquy in Act I, is distraught not merely by the death of his father, but by the hasty remarriage of his mother to his uncle. Indeed, Gertrude’s hasty remarriage to the king’s brother indicates that she was preoccupied with maintaining her own political situation. Parenting lesson #1: stay connected with your kids and encourage them to fulfill their calling in life.

2) Reliving your youth (or life, if you are a ghost) through your kids

The ghost of Hamlet’s father manipulates his son in order to carry out revenge on Claudius, his murderer. However, the ghost’s promptings toward vengeance are not substantiated with evidence. Had Hamlet actually carried out a revenge killing as his vaporous father demands, he would have been arrested and executed for treason and regicide. Hamlet had no evidence of Claudius’s guilt other than the “word” of an apparition. Even OJ couldn’t get away with murder using that excuse. Parenting lesson # 2: don’t try to live your dreams and do all the stuff you didn’t do in your life through your kids.

3) Spying on the children

The motif of spying is another aspect in this play which underscores the failure of parents. Polonius engages a spy to observe his son’s behaviour in Paris; he also uses his own daughter to spy on Hamlet. Gertrude and Claudius persuade Hamlet’s friends, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, to spy on their friend. In contrast, I am reminded of the Apostle Paul’s phrase in 1 Corinthians: “Love always trusts.” It is one thing to “check on the kids”; it is another thing to set up surveillance cameras. Parenting lesson # 3: love your kids by trusting your kids.

4) Giving corny advice and not practicing what you preach

Polonius, who is perhaps the worst father in literature, is a wind bag. Being a wind bag does not necessarily make someone a bad parent. However, before he sends his son off to university, Polonius accosts Laertes with a litany of aphorisms---pithy pre-fab quotes and cliches. Out of context, he disjointedly rattles off no less than twelve “tips for life”---things like, “Give thy thoughts no tongue, Nor any unproportioned thought his act” or “Be thou familiar, but by no means vulgar” or “Neither a borrower nor a lender be” or “to thine ownself be true”. All these quotes are good advice. However, the absence of sincerity along with the lack of personalized advice earns Polonius the worst father in literature. He doesn't really know his son. Laertes is wise and insightful, and is no doubt living this advice already. Polonius, however, often gives his thoughts to his tongue and many unproportioned thoughts to action. Parenting lesson #4: give advice that actually applies to your kid’s life, and, the best advice to give is the advice that is already lived out in the giver.

Parenting, Hamlet and the Real World

Parents often limit their child’s perception of the world; they shelter their kids from the evils and disappointments of the real world. By degree, as the children age, parents introduce the children to the real world. I agree with this. My wife and I limit the stream of media to our home; we have no cable or TV channels. We moderate radio news and I usually leave the newspaper at work.

Don’t get me wrong; my kids are not living in isolation bubbles. My oldest son understands that the world can be an evil place, and there are people who do evil things. However, I make every attempt to immerse my children in goodness. We celebrate the good deeds of fellow mankind---the achievements, the sacrifices and heroism. We enjoy the good things in the world.

The point we are trying to make is that the real world is not as it should be; it is a place full of darkness and sadness and unimaginable evil. In truth, the world ought to be a place full of light, joy and goodness unending. Someday, when Christ returns, it will be.

Nevertheless, we do not live in such a renewed and perfect world yet. Consequently, children need to “grow up” and see the world as it is. When children, or anyone for that matter, move from the world of idealistic innocence to real knowledge, it is a difficult shift. This often occurs in early adolescence. This shift is difficult not because parents have sheltered their kids too much; it is difficult because human beings were created for a good world. We all long for Eden. We are uncomfortable with change because we long for the Unchangeable One. We never fully understand death because we were not meant to die.

These are the issues that face the protagonist in William Shakespeare’s great tragedy, Hamlet. Before the play begins, Hamlet is portrayed as a “young” man (there is some discrepancy in the text as to how young he really is…), who has been living the life of a carefree hedonist. In many ways, he was sheltered from reality by blissful ignorance. As the crown prince, he should have been preparing to take over the state of Denmark. Instead, he was a playboy: he was partying with his friends at university, dating a girl he was not supposed to be dating, and behaving with complete disinterest in state affairs.

As an idealist, Hamlet believed in friendship, he believed in love, both erotic and filial, and he believed in the unending, unchanging pleasures of youth and the happiness of this world. As the play unfolds, each of his relationships falls apart, beginning with the untimely death of his father. Hamlet’s idealism comes crashing down along with all the relationships he held dear.

Throughout the play, Hamlet describes his father as a lion of a man who would, it seems, always be with him. The impression one gets is that Hamlet had not even considered assuming the role as king. Like most youth who lose a parent, the death of his father had not occurred to him as an immediate possibility. Abandoned by his father, Hamlet then discovers that the matrimonial bliss of his parents was not as enduring as he perceived. His mother must not have truly loved his father because she remarried shortly after her husband’s death. In addition to abandoning her husband’s memory, she abandons Hamlet, by her attempt to gloss over the death of his father and downplay the revulsion of her hasty marriage. Notice also how the people of Denmark accept the new king and the hasty marriage. So much for loyalty. Once the old king dies, the people move on to the next regent without hesitation or discretion. This fickle sense of loyalty is demonstrated again when an angry mob, rallied by Laertes, turns on Claudius and declares Laertes as king.

Hamlet’s uncle also usurps the crown from him and, as Hamlet discovers, Claudius murdered his father to get the throne. What about love between brothers, between family? So much for family love. His friends, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, turn out to be spies for the kings; they choose a financial reward over duty to their friend. Hamlet is betrayed in friendship. Hamlet’s love for Ophelia is also shaken; she too is used as a spy for the king. For Hamlet, all that he thought was good and true was in fact, all false. He even doubts himself.

What then does it mean to be a human being? Devotion to family? Friends? Love? One’s country? One’s self? Hamlet is betrayed by it all.

The truth that Hamlet discovers is that the world is not perfect. What he fails to see is the remnant of good still in the world. What about Horatio? Was he not a true friend? What about Laertes’s unwavering love for his father and his sister? What about Gertrude’s “repentance” during Hamlet’s curt and forceful chastisement in Act III? What about Ophelia’s heart rendering regret for betraying her true love? What about Fortinbras’s devotion to his country? What about Laertes’s deathbed repentance for being used by the king? There is still light in the world.

As parents, we need to ensure our children yearn for what is good while learning that the world is inhabited by sin. We need to help our children to remain idealistic without becoming disillusioned by the harsh realities of the world. As the old saying goes, “We need to prepare the child for the road, not the road for the child.” We do this not by throwing our kids out onto the road and bidding them fare well. Instead, we teach them to love the goal of life’s journey at the end of the road, while gently and gradually revealing the challenges (and rewards) of the road itself.

Ultimately, the only true antidote to the unpleasant and disappointing transition from innocence to reality is the hope of the gospel.

To Post or Not to Post...

That is the question...

I am currently teaching Hamlet right now to my Grade 12 English students (hence the "to be or not to be" motif here...).

Hamlet's chief tragic flaw is his inability to "act"... Similarly, I am unable to blog. To blog or not to blog... However, I was sufficiently prodded by Barb (and perhaps, The Bard).

Hamlet is, by far, the greatest Shakespearean play. The line, "To be or not to be" is the most quoted phrase in English language. The play has been performed more than any other play in the world. It has been translated more than any other play and "it has inspired twenty-six ballets, six operas, and dozens of musical works" ("Hamletology" by Norrie Epstein).

In this most remarkable play, Hamlet ponders the quintessential question for humanity: "What is man?" or, "What is the meaning of life?" In the next blog post, I will share Hamlet's musings on the subject.

To preach or not to preach...

When someone comes to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ, he is compelled by a desire to serve his new-found God and Saviour. Like many Christians, he will pray and seek the Lord’s leading. However, God’s leading is not always clear. Sometimes the compulsion to serve becomes a question of deciding between Christian vocation and a secular vocation. Does God want me to be a missionary or a carpenter? A pastor or a teacher? The decision becomes muddled when we have gifts that suit Christian ministry. “Teaching” is one of those muddling factors. Like a pastor, teachers spend their time learning and communicating knowledge to students. The teacher’s role is also “pastoral” in that he often counsels students and encourages them in character building and citizenship. Teachers are also generally “people-orientated” and they can be effective administrators.

This has been my struggle. Although I serve in the church doing “lay ministry,” I am a teacher and I wonder if I should be using the gifts God has given me as a pastor.

I have wrestled with this for many years. While a Bible College in Alberta, I was counselled by many profs and students to pursue a ministerial vocation. Yet I was not convinced that is what God would have me do.

Recently, I was encouraged by reading the biography of William Wilberforce (Amazing Grace in the Life of William Wilberforce by John Piper). Wilberforce struggled with this same question after his conversion in his 20s. He asked, “Should I leave politics and take up a pastoral ministry?” Amazingly, John Newton, the famous hymn writer, pastor and acquaintance of Wilberforce answered his question with a resounding “No!” Newton encouraged Wilberforce to remain in his secular vocation, noting that God would use him in that capacity. God certainly did, by working through Wilberforce to end the slave trade and abolish slavery in the British Empire. Wilberforce also laboured for many other social and evangelical causes in his lifetime. Most significantly was his successful petition to end the British East India Company’s opposition to evangelizing India, which up to that point had been outlawed. For many years, the famous English missionary, William Carey, had been limited by the Company to minister in India only at a Danish colony near Calcutta, which was outside of the Company’s jurisdiction. Clearly, God had a use for Wilberforce in his secular vocation that had a profound impact on the world.

I was also encouraged by John the Baptist, who, instead of telling Tax Collectors and soldiers to change jobs, told them to do their secular jobs honestly and well (Luke 3:10-14).

A Call for Christian Teachers in Secular Schools

Although I am no Wilberforce, I am a teacher in a secular school. I meet daily with students and colleagues who are lost souls. Like other Christians in a secular environment, I strive to bear witness of Christ by my conduct and my example of integrity. Although I cannot overtly abuse my role as a teacher to proselytize, I am to teach my students to think “rightly” about the world. I actively fight against relativism and "scientism", teaching my students to seek “truth” and understand reality. Christian teachers ought to help their students discern a Christian worldview without necessarily calling it a Christian worldview. C.S. Lewis explains this need when he writes,

“If the intellectual climate is such that, when a man comes to the crisis at which he must either accept or reject Christ, [and if] his reason and imagination are not on the wrong side, then his conflict will be fought out under favourable conditions. Those who help to produce and spread such a climate are therefore doing useful work: and yet no such great matter after all. Their share is a modest one; and it is always possible that nothing---nothing whatever---may come of it. That does not mean we should put down the tools.”

Although I am not another William Carey or Charles Spurgeon, I labour for the kingdom, laying the foundation for Christian thinking, hoping that one day some of my students, when faced with a “crisis at which [they] must either accept or reject Christ,” will come to the right conclusions. If God calls me to another task, then to another task I will go. Until then, I am off to start another school year.

Canoeing Algonquin, again...

My son and I returned "up north" this summer to canoe the wilderness of Algonquin Provincial Park. This was our second canoe trip. Besides enjoying nature, seeing a beaver (!) and canoeing peaceful lake waters, I had a chance to be with my son. As he gets older (9 yrs!), I feel that my time to connect with him is rapidly fleeting. He is nearly a decade old and the years have flown by. In ten more years he may be moving out of the house, going to college or university, getting married, having babies...

Three days we were together, alone, camping and canoeing, breaking bread together, swimming, talking, reading. My prayer is that he will cherish these times. I know I will.