[A. E. Stallings]

Well, Nelson doesn't make any claims to be particularly oppressed in any way, rather the opposite, so we need make none for her here--she has talked about growing up as an "army brat", and the privileged child, I think, of an officer, in a very desegregated army. (She wrote an interesting essay about this and her teaching stint at West Point somewheres... Poets & Writers maybe? Or Hudson?)

Uneven as a poet? Yes. I think she is far stronger in form than free verse (as are many of us, no?). I also think she is one of the stronger "new" formalist poets of her generation. That there may be poets who have not achieved sufficient recognition does not mean that we need tear down those who have received some. New Formalism is very sensitive to charges that it is an old boys club (perhaps for a reason), and am sure they are thrilled to be able to claim Nelson. But again, that doesn't mean she wouldn't be worth claiming without the extra atributes (black, female).

Regarding the poems, these sonnets are part of a narrative sequence, and as such it is perhaps somewhat unfair to them to take them so far out of their context. Nonetheless, I do think "Balance" particularly stands very well alone. As I mentioned, I like the mix of high (not just Latinate but Greek--diadem, metamorphosis) and demotic diction, which I find effective--Diverne teeters between two worlds, the master's house and the field. I can see that the colloquial might make some people wary as being stereotyping or condescending in some way. We are used to being suspicious of it, particularly in "white" hands. But it isn't just the dialect--it is the harsh Anglo-saxon words as well--"stuck-up" "bitch" "hoe", etc. The italicized dialect phrases represent another voice in the poem--a chorus, perhaps, of other slaves who resent Diverne's "good fortune" (dubious) in attracting the "attentions" of the master. It is an uncomfortable poem in many aspects, and is meant to be.

"Chopin" is another favorite, Bob, thanks for posting.

[Tim Murphy]

Hey folks, don't get me wrong. I like Marilyn's poems, and I really like the person. Let's see if I can get her to do a stint as guest lariat.

[A. E. Stallings]

That would be great!

[Alan Sullivan]

NYCTom has made a good point. I don't want to play oneupmanship in the victimization game, and I wish that Tim hadn't done so. Tim speaks for himself, not for me. He, Marilyn and I have all enjoyed lives of privilege, compared with most in this world. It ill becomes any of us to dwell on supposed victim status.

The reason why Nelson's poems seem ultimately bloodless, despite their sometimes bloody subjects, is that they derive from a fashionable stance more than personally- felt experience.

While it is possible to write passionately of other lives and other times without experiencing them, a writer is more likely to get a striking result by going against the grain. Perhaps Marilyn ought to try writing in the voice of William the Conqueror or Lucretia Borgia.

A.S.

[Robert J. Clawson]

Yes, Tim, rope her. Good idea.

HOMEPLACE is about Nelson's family, her forebears. I don't find that excursion "bloodless," Alan. You and Tim are playing ad hominem games: go for the juggler, the poetry. I think Alicia defended Nelson's diction quite accurately. I like the turns in Chopin. Why not run up a formal poem where you think she's clanging.

Bob

[Robert J. Clawson]

Here's another Nelson.

Sisters

The school bus drove us home from high school, where
we go off in the Negro neighborhood
and several times a week there was a fight:
one sister called another sister "hoe,"
pulled out black handfuls of her straightened hair,
clawed at her face and hands, and ripped her shirt.
I walked home. I believed in sisterhood.
I still do, after thirty years, although
I'll never understand why several white
sisters walked on me as if I was dirt.
We were all sisters, feminists, I thought,
forgetting what those catfights should have taught.
I was too well brought-up, too middle class
to call a heifer out, and whup her ass.


[This message has been edited by Robert J. Clawson (edited October 22, 2001).]

[nyctom]

I guess I feel like the Devil's Advocate on this thread.

The problem I have with the diction of the "Balance" is it feels so imposed. For me, that narrator's POV throws the whole poem out of balance. These Greek and Latinate words, because they are in such stark contrast to the Black English of the characters, just creates a kind of cognitive dissonance for me that renders me unable to get past the diction: diadem, for instance, stopped the entire poem for me in its tracks. But I think that raises an interesting issue: how far apart in diction and education can a narrator be from the characters in a piece of narrative poetry?

[Robert J. Clawson]

Originally posted by nyctom:
I guess I feel like the Devil's Advocate on this thread.

The problem I have with the diction of the "Balance" is it feels so imposed. For me, that narrator's POV throws the whole poem out of balance. These Greek and Latinate words, because they are in such stark contrast to the Black English of the characters, just creates a kind of cognitive dissonance for me that renders me unable to get past the diction: diadem, for instance, stopped the entire poem for me in its tracks. But I think that raises an interesting issue: how far apart in diction and education can a narrator be from the characters in a piece of narrative poetry?

Good lord, Tom, ask yourself about the same "problem" in Faulkner.

Bob

[nyctom]

Maybe that's why. I can't stand Faulkner. Or any of the other Southern/gothic writers.

Think of it this way Bob. You have defended Anne Sexton on here when others have essentially called her a hack. I have not commented on Marilyn Nelson except to say that her work doesn't interest me and I find this mixing of diction strange.

I have an enormous respect for MacArthur because he stood up and said, I don't like Frost; I think he is enormously overvalued as a writer. Well, I feel somewhat similar about the Southern writers I have read--Welty, Faulkner, Capote, O'Connor, James Dickey, Richard Wright. I could go on and on. I have read a good deal of their work and NONE of it has touched me or interested me in the least. I am not saying they are bad writers. They just don't interest me. Ok, well that leaves about 93497493274973249797493274937497343 other books in the library. I guess I am just a damn Yankee.

Look, if you enjoy Nelson, read her and sing her praises. But based on the few poems I have read on here, her work is not something I would go looking for. I would rather read ntozake shange or Judy Grahn or Adrienne Rich. You can't like everything. I am sure EVERYONE on here has writers they know they "should" like--and don't. A post proposing a discussion on that very topic was suggested on Mac's Frost thread--but unfortunately no one followed up on it. I still think it would be very interesting.

[A. E. Stallings]

Shoot. I was hoping "Balance" would be more of a hit. But what can I say. If a poem doesn't grab you, it doesn't grab you. What I find interesting, though, is that the reasons people have been giving for not liking it tend to be the reasons I like it. For instance, I tend to like the sort of mixed diction effects that stop nyctom in his tracks--I have to smile at a sonnet ending "whup her ass" (and I like the unobtrusive nonce rime scheme too).

I agree that third-person narrative does run a risk of not seeming "personally felt" in the way that lyric or persona poems do, and many such narratives (which are popular these days), do indeed fail to catch my interest. Even in "Homeplace" I tend to skip around. But for me, again, part of the reason "Balance" works is exactly the distance (and the appearance of the vernacular in iambic pentameter). Hmmm. Well, no need to belabor the point... De gustibus, as they say.

nyctom--you're welcome to revive the "bashing the greats" thread if you like. I know we all have poets we ought to admire but just can't get any purchase on.