{Journal #4} The thing with image

Today's class was all about imagery.

Twas awesome!

To me, imagery is the point of poetry. It's what I get out of every good poem even if I don't fully understand the ideas or metaphors behind them. It's what invites me to parse through the poem to get to the possible meanings. 

If I enjoy the imagery and the rhythm, I'm pretty much on board with it.

[Editing this entry later on, an essay we read on free verse really nailed it regarding why I love imagery and consider it so essential: "The poem is not a discussion, not a lecture, but an instance- an instance of attention, of noticing something in the world" (from A Poetry Handbook by Mary Oliver). This was in reference to William Carlos William's "Red Wheelbarrow": 

Which is really, a perfect example of what I mean by image as a central element.]

I would go as far as to propose that poetry = rhythm + imagery. This focus might be a bit of a reductionist view of poetry. It might even negate its epic origins. I don't care. I genuinely think that if people could learn to revel in the sensations and sounds and flashes of meaning, from their early encounters with the genre, poetry would be more widely enjoyed by all.

A caveat on "image". By image I don't only mean concrete objects, like William's wheelbarrow. In this idea, I include all tangible sensations and feelings evoked, as well as metaphors that conjure up images, even if the whole poem is an extended metaphor (see e.e. cummings she being brand). After all, according to cognitive linguistics (my current favorite branch of linguistics), our linguistic ability is rooted in our physical experience of the world. In other words, the way in which we conceptualize complex concepts with language is through more concrete events/experiences/objects. Since natural language would be metaphoric and imagistic to a large extent, why not allow this effect to wash over us when reading/listening to poetry? 

A second caveat, I don't mean it i's not enjoyable to analyze poetry. It is. Basking in the language, hunting for references, trying to decode it, it's all part of the fun of literary analysis. All those layers are partly what make poetry (and literature) interesting.

I just mean that poetry as rhythm + imagery is a good approach. Now let's get to some poems:

 

Okay, okay, I'm using William Carlos William again. I just find such simple musicality in his poetry I cannot help myself. Can't you just see the note on top of a plate, the roommate fuming, the content speaker? I know I can. I invite you to read it aloud and rejoice.

A more obscure but great example is Wallace Steven's Thirteen Ways of Looking at a Blackbird. The blackbird can mean so much or so little; it allows for multiple interpretations. This is a poem that demands effort, that can take up your time and become infuriatingly obscure... And yet, aren't these images beautiful on their own? Isn't the rhythm and imagery precise and evocative?

IV

A man and a woman   

Are one.   

A man and a woman and a blackbird   

Are one.   

V

I do not know which to prefer,   

The beauty of inflections   

Or the beauty of innuendoes,   

The blackbird whistling   

Or just after.   

I can just picture the man and woman in a balcony and the bird flying by, muted colors, artful silhouettes. And then the next stanza which is all about that /b/ sound and the blackbird whistling... Magic.

One final poem by one of my all-time faves, Funeral Blues by W.H. Auden. Written for a very dear person who died, the poem uses a lot of auditory imagery (clocks, telephones, dog, piano, drum) as well as a contrasting grandiose imagery (airplanes, moon, sun, ocean) mixed with mundane details (coffin, doves, policemen). 

So go ahead! Feel free to judge poetry on how its rhythm and words prompt your mind to imagine and let go~