Well, actually Amit, I find little about the poem or the discussion that invites me to respond. The first thing in the thread that moved me to respond was you mention of "triggers" and "koans." I don't think what the poem has to offer -- which I think is well explicated by the essay and subsequent discussion -- is all that remarkable. Maybe it was remarkable in 1905, but I actually doubt that.
The fact is it is a gimmick, which I don't think is necessarily a condemnation, but I don't think it is all that effective even as a gimmick. I think it does indeed require some translation -- not all languages have a meaningful way to decode macrons and breves, the title is necessary to establish the fishness of the otherwise abstract image -- and the musical sense I make of the arrangement of the symbols doesn't communicate much to me. The explication communicates the ideas more interestingly than the poem. In any case, my reaction to the poem and the essay was, "O.K., got it, next?" But I am utterly aware that my reaction is mine, and I understand how others find it more interesting than I do.
David R.
Last edited by David Rosenthal; 10-22-2012 at 12:32 AM.
|