diprinzio,

Here is my take on more of the Justice. Please construct why the lines are poetry, so I can understand. I am not saying you are not supposed to like the poems, I want to understand why.

I am working on a write up on a poet to show what integrity means to a poem.

In Bertram's Garden
by Donald Justice
Jane looks down at her organdy skirt
As if it somehow were the thing disgraced,
For being there, on the floor, in the dirt,
And she catches it up about her waist,
smooths it out along one hip,
And pulls it over the crumpled slip.

On the porch, green-shuttered, cool,
Asleep is Bertram, that bronze boy,
Who, having wound her around a spool,
Sends her spinning like a toy
Out to the garden, all alone,
To sit and weep on a bench of stone.

Soon the purple dark must bruise
Lily and bleeding-heart and rose,
And the little Cupid lose
Eyes and ears and chin and nose,
And Jane lie down with others soon,
Naked to the naked moon.
“as if” to me is an abomination in poetry. Either make it happen or don’t make it happen, but to say, “as if” is illogical, redundant and language-archaic, like the double negative. Shakespeare, Frost, and recent poets have used ‘as if’, but they shouldn’t, and if they thought about it, they wouldn’t. And then comes ‘somehow’ and then ‘were’ The poet somehow offers ‘somehow’ as part of the poem. Could ‘sort of’ be used as well? Doesn’t ‘the dress is disgraced’ work? The entire sentence is filler for the word ‘disgraced’, and then to add insult to injury, ‘for being there.’ Then comes three sentences with ‘it, it, it,’ which is so obvious for the rhyme. I know this ‘style’ of writing can be called ‘plain’ style, but typically the writing matches the consciousness of the message. “naked to the naked moon’ is a chain-jerker, obtuse, guessed-at imagery. Well, gosh, it must mean something.

To the Unknown Lady Who Wrote the Letters Found in the Hatbox

What, was there never any news?
And were your weathers always fine,
Your colds all common, and your blues
Too minor to deserve one line?

Between the lines it must have hurt
To see the neighborhood go down,
Your neighbor in his undershirt
At dusk come out to mow the lawn.

But whom to turn to to complain,
Unless it might be your canaries,
And only in bird language then?
While slowly into mortuaries

The many-storied houses went
Or in deep, cataracted eyes
Displayed their signs of want: FOR RENT
And MADAM ROXIE WILL ADVISE.

In “To the Unkown Lady…” is the 2nd poem here containing the ubiquitous “all”.
Whatever, I don’t think the little bug will go away. Let’s take a look at the line;
“Between the lines it must have hurt.”
I want to point out the “it” What is it? Read with awareness, I feel I am being set up for either a rhyme or a very weak argument. Why would ‘it’ hurt to see a neighbor in an undershirt who mows their lawn at dusk? Is the noise a nuisance? Class objections? You see what I mean? The ‘it’ is more a grunt than poetry, or an abstract linkage in faulty sentencing. More ‘its’

it must have hurt
it might be your canaries
it somehow were the thing
it along one hip
it over the crumpled slip
it seems the death

These are set-ups and I for one tire of being lead nowhere repeatedly.

As for the last poem, does death look naked out from dead people’s eyes? “Almost it seems…” “it” does.

TJ

Tom, I get the distinct impression you're trying a bit too hard with your critiques. Really, the use of the word "it"? Did you notice how many times (in quick succession) Stallings used the word "it"? And what's so terrible about "as if"? Sure sounds better than "like".

Don't get me wrong: sometimes I agree with what you're saying--the last line of Bertram is a bit too conscious of itself for my taste... but it's still a good poem with some nice lines that even I, with my concrete ear, can hear. Is there anything about these poems that you enjoy?

-eaf

eaf,

No, there isn't anything these poems I enjoy.

Stallings is using the word 'it' while Justice is using 'it' as filler. Study the sentences and not the thought in the sentence. (I need to express my views on subject soon. Stallings usually has a poetical thought, while Justice usually has dumb irony, which is a product of his time, pre-self-actualization, a time when abstract art was embraced by art sales people to fool the public and Wallace Stevens penned bric-a-brac to fool professors.

"As if" is an archaic verbal concoction.

Jane looks down at her skirt
<strike>As if it somehow were the thing</strike> disgraced,
<strike>For being there,</strike> on the floor, in the dirt,

Jane looks down at her skirt on the floor, in the dirt, disgraced...

"As if" = what? I made this mistake many times in the past in early poems. Now, I suppose it is possible to get away with 'as if' but not very easily. And, eaf, I might add to try to avoid 'like'. Write for the future, not the archaic past.

TJ

I think we're comparing apples & oranges here... With due respect, I'd prefer if my poems were kept out of mastery discussions. Generally, I don't think it wise to introduce members' poems here, unless they are being shared as on a particular topic rather than representative of particular qualities (or not).

Alicia, Sorry! I didn't really want a comparison and should have left out what I said...my point was that the critique of Justice seems unfair and was not intended as a comparison.

Tom, there is no 100% alternative to "as if"...I said like, considering uses something along the lines of:

seems like this guacamole's been eaten once already

seems as if this guacamole's been eaten once already

(I think this guacamole smells like shit!)

Anyhow, not the best logic, but it's all I could come up with. I agree that we probably shouldn't overuse the word "like" but I'm not crossing it off my list...

-eaf

I understand.

eaf,

There is no need to strike any word completely.

My subject is form. When form is used fully, like, as if, and a few other repeated structures won't be necessary. your third version is the best,

I think this guacamole smells like shit! but, get to it,

Guacamole smells! Throw it away!

You see, there is always a way to get around a thousand 'as if's and like like like.

TJ

“as if” to me is an abomination in poetry.

That's not my problem.

Either make it happen or don’t make it happen,

He does make it happen, for me.

but to say, “as if” is illogical, redundant and language-archaic, like the double negative.

Your arbitrary and irrational pet peeves do not count as flaws in masterful poetry.

Shakespeare, Frost, and recent poets

And all poets writing in the English language

have used ‘as if’,

Yes... think about that.

but they shouldn’t, and if they thought about it, they wouldn’t.

Uh-huh.

And then comes ‘somehow’ and then ‘were’ The poet somehow offers ‘somehow’ as part of the poem. Could ‘sort of’ be used as well?

No, it could not. Jane is not looking at the skirt as if it is "sort of" disgraced, but as if it and not herself were the thing disgraced, as if it could somehow be disgraced, as if an inanimate object could possess moral character or volition.

Doesn’t ‘the dress is disgraced’ work?

No, it does not. The dress is not disgraced, Jane is disgraced, in her mind.

The entire sentence is filler for the word ‘disgraced’,

No, it is not. Here is how you want DJ to have written his poem.

Jane looks down at her organdy skirt,
the dress is disgraced
on the floor, in the dirt


Justice doesn't want to say that the dress is disgraced but that she thinks it's disgraced and can be disgraced. Doing it your way he comes off as if he, the author, actually believes this (that the dress is disgraced) ---unless you want to give DJ a lesson on how to write irony.

and then to add insult to injury, ‘for being there.’

Insult to injury? Fine way to show appreciation for a work of art; even this early apprentice work deserves better.

Now look:

Jane looks down at her organdy skirt

Why "organdy"? Because organdy is transparent, honest, if you will, about what it "hides". Justice is about to make a character sketch. What do we know about Jane? She wears an organdy skirt. Her skirt is transparent. She thinks pulling down her skirt is disgraceful.

as if it somehow were the thing disgraced
for being there,

This is part of what we need to know about Jane's attitude; she thinks it is a disgrace to be there in the first place, to have gone to Bertram and the garden.

on the floor,

She thinks it is a disgrace for her dress to be on the floor, rather than, say, hanging over the back of a chair or on a hanger.

in the dirt,

Not only did she go to Bertram, not only was she so excited that her dress wound up on the floor, but she didn't even possess enough self-control to find a grassy place to strip and offer herself---it's in the dirt. Pure, unbridled animal lust, regarding which she doesn't understand that it isn't disgraceful, but perfectly natural, normal. It's no wonder Bertram is asleep and cool, rather than wide-awake and hot. No wonder he toyed with her. Bertram is as self-concealing as a bronze statue, in other words, not.

Instead of admitting to herself what normal lusts she has, she sets about putting her attire back in order, remaking, rebuilding her exterior show of propriety.


Then comes three sentences with ‘it, it, it,’ which is so obvious for the rhyme.

What? Do you want him to say "the dress" three times, as if you wouldn't complain about that? That's what writers do when they don't want to repeat the thing they're referring to.

I know this ‘style’ of writing can be called ‘plain’ style, but typically the writing matches the consciousness of the message. “naked to the naked moon’ is a chain-jerker, obtuse, guessed-at imagery. Well, gosh, it must mean something.


This is baffling. What do you mean, "it must mean something"? It does mean something. After my explication of the first stanza, does it still remain obtuse that at the end of the poem Justice is talking about Jane finally being naked? He spends the whole first stanza talking about how once she was only naked on the exterior, and how she felt about that, dirty (in the D. H. Lawrence sense)---is the ending so strange? Even if I'm mistaken in my explication, to end with "naked" after what the poem deals with, doesn't seem so unexpected.

Soon the twilight of life and love will bring the same effect to the lily, the bleeding-heart and the rose--- whichever you are (in a Joycian language of flowers sense). The god of Love won't see you or hear you or your prospective loves. Love itself will be defaced in the mind like a statue of Cupid with the nose broken off.

Naked to---not under---the naked moon. She will be seen naked by something that is naked. "Naked moon"--- The moon is not obscured by clouds but the full force of the moon's power is in effect, in regard to romance and more-than-mortal honest being. Justice refers to both death and sex in the lying down with others.

How I long for the simple responses that musicians have for music. They are open and receptive. That doesn't mean they can't tell good from bad but they eagerly respond to any good they encounter as they explore a score. I think that's the only way to respond to anything. Poets on forums are so full of effort and so straining to prove themselves that simple empathy and delight shrivel.

To exhibit a talent for spotting blemishes is vaguely interesting but it is far more interesting to have a talent for entering the spirit of something and discovering its rewarding qualities.

I'm not advocating an abrogation of critical faculties but rather a sharpening of appreciative faculties.
Janet

[This message has been edited by Janet Kenny (edited May 21, 2004).]

You're quite right, Janet, about all the mindless and
unnecessary carping. Especially in this instance.
But I didn't see any blemishes spotted. The only
blemishes were the mostly incomprehensible comments
and nitpickings.

I'm tempted to (and may) close this thread so we can move on-- it has wandered so far afield of an appreciation of Donald Justice. As with many cases, this boils down to de gustibus n.e.d. TomJ doesn't like him--fair enough--and will not be convinced; so there seems little point in continuing to argue the matter. Discussions of things such as as if/versus like perhaps belong on General Talk, or at least on a separate thread. "As if" is not archaic, and like does not always suffice (grammatically there are cases where "as though" or "as if" is required)--nor do I buy that similes are automatically inferior to metaphors, although that can be a good general rule for beginners with their writing. (I am a great fan of the elegance of the extended simile.) But be that as it may--let's move on.