How much money does your integrity cost?
You’ve been nickel’d and dime’d
Two cents’d and
half witted
willingly?
Are you awake when you wake up?
Or do you justwalk around,
eyelids shut,
senses shot
hollowed out
Do you understand satisfaction?
I can’t relate
Comprehend
Feel
That which is a lie
What does it feel like to stare at the sun?
Are you pretending?
Closing your eyes?
Truly blind?
How do you sit?
Indian-style?
Cowboy style?
(What’s your pose?) [What’s your stance?]
Why not protest?
The new Vietnam war
Here
Because all wars are the same
Regardless of their name
This is an untitled poem I wrote in response to researching Russian Futurism and reading poems by Vladimir Mayakovsky. I tried to incorporate a few aspects that are characteristic of the Russian Futurist art movement. The most obvious would be the structure of the poem, that is, the placement of words. Taking into consideration the fact that the Futurists believed words deserved the same kind of care as visual art, like sculpture, I placed the words in a fashion that I found aesthetically pleasing, particularly because of the disjointedness of the beat. Another aspect I worked with was the political theme. I wrote about certain aspects of American society that concern me, like Mayakovsky did in Bolshevik Russia. For a third aspect, I tried to address the reader often, and demand their attention with an unrelenting, interrogatory progression. This is not a particularly great poem, but I think it captures the essence of the movement.
Edit 5/29: I've realized after looking over this again that Blogger formatted my poem to be a straight list downward. That sucks and ruins the effect a bit, but if you click your heels, squint your eyes and sprinkle a little bit of fairy dust, you can understand what I mean in my above post. Or, you can ask me for it. Whatever's cool with me, man.
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
PART IV: explication of natalia gontcharova's painting "the cyclist"
Natalia Gontcharova: The Cyclist (1913)
Russian Futurism influenced Natalia Gontcharova and it is exemplified in her later work. As I mentioned earlier, Russian Futurists were characterized by their desire for speed, dynamism and the restlessness of urban life. Gontcharova’s “The Cyclist” is a perfect example for all of these aspects. The most obvious part of the painting to note is the cubist style in which it was painted. The cubist style enabled the cyclist to appear as if he is in motion, dirt clouds kicking up as the man’s legs work furiously. The cyclist’s body, along with the front wheel and handlebars are painted in a cartoon-ish style, with certain parts of the body drawn multiple times next to each other, to create the idea that the bicycle is speeding along, with the cyclist working his legs furiously to perpetuate the motion. There is no emphasis on the face. The man’s eyes are slits and his mouth is a simple line. In the background there are Russian words, written with Cyrillic symbols, which one can only be lead to believe refer to (perpetual) motion. He is riding away from a top hat, which may symbolize regality, like the upper class, which the Futurists despised for their comfort and satisfaction. He is cycling in the direction of a hand, which is pointing at him, and a cup from which steam is rolling out. Perhaps the hand is telling him to go back from where he came, but at the same time, there is a hot drink waiting for him at the end of his ride. Will his ride end? We do not know. There is also what appears to be a drainage grate, which may symbolize industrialism and modern culture, which the Futurists were always striding toward. Oddly enough, Gontcharova chose a bicycle rather than a car. Perhaps Gontcharova herself was ambivalent about the ideals of the Futurists and this was just her way of paying homage to a cause she felt sympathy toward. Either way, this is an essential work of Futurist art and is even a nice picture to just look at for a casual art viewer.
PART III: exercising my understanding of the movement/how i feel about this movement
Russian Futurism was a movement that was based around reclaiming Russia and thrusting it into the industrial age. The futurists were most artists and poets whose work focused around a desire for speed and dynamism. The general public scrutinized their passion and intensity, mostly the Bolsheviks, with whom the Futurists were greatly unsatisfied. Unlike the Italian Futurist movement, which was plastic and gave rise to Fascism, the Russian Futurists were a network of artists and poets who collaborated on big works like the opera Victory Over the Sun.
Since the Futurist movement was so strongly tied to politics, the poetry of Vladimir Mayakovsky epitomizes the ideal Futurist’s mentality. Mayakovsky’s poems exemplify the speed, restlessness and urgency for a modernized culture that was desired by the Futurist movement. They do this through their discursive length, relentless action and explicit violence. The structure of the poems is also representative of the Futurist movement. The Futurists believed that there was no difference between words and material things, and they expressed that by placing words in different patterns on a page, like a sculptor would sculpt a work of art. Mayakovsky creates long lists and they are emphasized by his placement of words just below the end of the preceding line. An example of what I said looks like this:
“Proletarians
arrive at communism
from below -
by the low way of mines,
sickles,
and pitchforks -
But I,
from poetry’s skies,
plunge into communism,”
Personally, I was very much enjoyed reading about concepts in Russian Futurism. I found Mayakovsky’s discourse to be refreshing and impressive. I believe that America could use more people with the motivation and passion to commit to a cause that works so intensely on social change. I do not necessarily agree with everything Mayakovsky said, though. I feel that his heart was in the right place, but Mayakovsky was a tortured man with a lot of rage and other deep emotional problems that served as an impediment on clear thought. I do not mean to say that I want to see more people who are willing to die for our country; I did not mean that at all. Our country is taking a horrible dive and I fear for now. I want a revolution, but I am not the best candidate to begin it. We need a powerful and compassionate leader, one who commands the attention of his or her people. I do not want to wake up and feel this helpless. I want a reformation of society. It needs to begin soon and if it does, I would be behind it one hundred percent.
Since the Futurist movement was so strongly tied to politics, the poetry of Vladimir Mayakovsky epitomizes the ideal Futurist’s mentality. Mayakovsky’s poems exemplify the speed, restlessness and urgency for a modernized culture that was desired by the Futurist movement. They do this through their discursive length, relentless action and explicit violence. The structure of the poems is also representative of the Futurist movement. The Futurists believed that there was no difference between words and material things, and they expressed that by placing words in different patterns on a page, like a sculptor would sculpt a work of art. Mayakovsky creates long lists and they are emphasized by his placement of words just below the end of the preceding line. An example of what I said looks like this:
“Proletarians
arrive at communism
from below -
by the low way of mines,
sickles,
and pitchforks -
But I,
from poetry’s skies,
plunge into communism,”
Personally, I was very much enjoyed reading about concepts in Russian Futurism. I found Mayakovsky’s discourse to be refreshing and impressive. I believe that America could use more people with the motivation and passion to commit to a cause that works so intensely on social change. I do not necessarily agree with everything Mayakovsky said, though. I feel that his heart was in the right place, but Mayakovsky was a tortured man with a lot of rage and other deep emotional problems that served as an impediment on clear thought. I do not mean to say that I want to see more people who are willing to die for our country; I did not mean that at all. Our country is taking a horrible dive and I fear for now. I want a revolution, but I am not the best candidate to begin it. We need a powerful and compassionate leader, one who commands the attention of his or her people. I do not want to wake up and feel this helpless. I want a reformation of society. It needs to begin soon and if it does, I would be behind it one hundred percent.
PART II: explication of mayakovsky's "past one o'clock..."
Past One O’Clock by Vladimir Mayakovsky
Past one o’clock. You must have gone to bed.
The Milky Way streams silver through the night.
I’m in no hurry; with lightning telegrams
I have no cause to wake or trouble you.
And, as they say, the incident is closed.
Love’s boat has smashed against the daily grind.
Now you and I are quits. Why bother then
To balance mutual sorrows, pains, and hurts.
Behold what quiet settles on the world.
Night wraps the sky in tribute from the stars.
In hours like these, one rises to address
The ages, history, and all creation.
I mentioned Mayakovsky’s final poem in my last post and after rereading it I can’t seem to escape it; it’s haunting me. Setting aside my personal appreciation for the poem, I’ve attempted to adequately and, most importantly, objectively explicate it.
The poem begins with a note on the time. This creates a sensation of drowsiness, preparing the reader for the lethargy in Mayakovsky’s tone. He continues with “You must have gone to bed.” In his other poems, Mayakovsky addresses the reader and demands his or her attention. His verse serves as a call to action. Instead, Mayakovsky has given us a wishy-washy sentiment, continuing with “I’m in no hurry.”
All of this greatly contrasts Mayakovsky’s usual discourse of nonstop action coupled with passion and intensity. He appears defeated, claiming that he has no reason to wake “you”, which one can presume is the reader, whom he usually addresses with great fervor. The word “love” is crucial in the poem’s sixth line because I believe that a translator could interpret the Russian word to mean either “love” or “passion.” So, taking that into consideration, when Mayakovsky says, “Love’s boat has smashed against the daily grind.” he means that his passion has died because of the routines of the present, the “daily grind.”
He asserts that we have all failed. “You and I are quits. Why bother then/To balance mutual sorrows, pains, and hurts.” This statement is greatly contrary to his message that it is up to the people to support each other as comrades in order to revolt. He is suggesting that mutual empathy and sympathy for a cause is an exercise of futility.
All of Mayakovsky’s war cries are lost in this quiet of his final speech. Nature has consumed his battlefield: “Night wraps the sky in tribute from the stars.” In the last two lines, Mayakovsky reflects on the time again, the late night, which may have been the hour at which he wrote most of his works. His final words are ominous and powerful: “In hours like these, one rises, to address/The ages, history, and all creation.”
Past one o’clock. You must have gone to bed.
The Milky Way streams silver through the night.
I’m in no hurry; with lightning telegrams
I have no cause to wake or trouble you.
And, as they say, the incident is closed.
Love’s boat has smashed against the daily grind.
Now you and I are quits. Why bother then
To balance mutual sorrows, pains, and hurts.
Behold what quiet settles on the world.
Night wraps the sky in tribute from the stars.
In hours like these, one rises to address
The ages, history, and all creation.
I mentioned Mayakovsky’s final poem in my last post and after rereading it I can’t seem to escape it; it’s haunting me. Setting aside my personal appreciation for the poem, I’ve attempted to adequately and, most importantly, objectively explicate it.
The poem begins with a note on the time. This creates a sensation of drowsiness, preparing the reader for the lethargy in Mayakovsky’s tone. He continues with “You must have gone to bed.” In his other poems, Mayakovsky addresses the reader and demands his or her attention. His verse serves as a call to action. Instead, Mayakovsky has given us a wishy-washy sentiment, continuing with “I’m in no hurry.”
All of this greatly contrasts Mayakovsky’s usual discourse of nonstop action coupled with passion and intensity. He appears defeated, claiming that he has no reason to wake “you”, which one can presume is the reader, whom he usually addresses with great fervor. The word “love” is crucial in the poem’s sixth line because I believe that a translator could interpret the Russian word to mean either “love” or “passion.” So, taking that into consideration, when Mayakovsky says, “Love’s boat has smashed against the daily grind.” he means that his passion has died because of the routines of the present, the “daily grind.”
He asserts that we have all failed. “You and I are quits. Why bother then/To balance mutual sorrows, pains, and hurts.” This statement is greatly contrary to his message that it is up to the people to support each other as comrades in order to revolt. He is suggesting that mutual empathy and sympathy for a cause is an exercise of futility.
All of Mayakovsky’s war cries are lost in this quiet of his final speech. Nature has consumed his battlefield: “Night wraps the sky in tribute from the stars.” In the last two lines, Mayakovsky reflects on the time again, the late night, which may have been the hour at which he wrote most of his works. His final words are ominous and powerful: “In hours like these, one rises, to address/The ages, history, and all creation.”
PART I: poems i read by russian futurist vladimir mayakovsky and my feelings on them
To his Own Beloved Self, 1916
To All and Everything, 1916
Our March, 1917
Call To Account!, 1917
Attitude To A Miss, 1920
You, 1922
Back Home, 1925
Good!, 1927
Conversation with Comrade Lenin, 1929
My Soviet Passport, 1929
At the Top of My voice, 1930
Past One O’Clock ..., 1930
After reading these poems by Vladimir Mayakovsky, I noticed a man who was both deeply personal and icily distant. Mayakovsky’s poetic voice is powerful and discursive. It’s clear that he cares about his country very much. He has such strong desires that his words could be misconstrued as reckless abandonment of his self. I believe the contrary. Mayakovsky was a man who was very proud of his country and desired to have the working class overcome their adversity, to rise up and form a government free of old men’s’ traditions. He cared so deeply for this cause that his poems often digress into a furious tangent, and thus much of his poetry involves violence and allusions to war. His poems leave little ambiguity as to the message he is trying to convey to the reader. Poems like “Our March”, “Conversation with Comrade Lenin”, “My Soviet Passport” and “At the Top of My voice” are among the most notable in regards to Mayakovsky’s overt communist propagandist message.
The perceived recklessness is Mayakovsky’s way of conveying the message that he would die for his country. These poems are confessional, despite the political overtones. The poems I’ve read have painted an intimate portrait of a man who was tortured by his desires, personally and publicly. He references women in many of his poems and expresses a great ambivalence towards them. In one poem, entitled “You” Mayakovsky writes, “You seized/and snatched away my heart/and began/to play with it--/like a girl with a bouncing ball.” The tone of this poem seems rather playful, with the imagery being that of silly, bouncing things. His elation is clear in the description of the girl playing with his heart. At the same time, however, the idea of someone playing with his heart like a ball seems to suggest an underlying sensation of pain that comes with his love.
His ambivalence toward women is also exemplified in the poem “To All and Everything”: “I swear by my pagan strength--/gimme a girl,/young,/eye-filling, and I won’t waste my feelings on her./I’ll rape her/and spear her heart with a gibe/willingly.” Mayakovsky is pledging his allegiance to the Soviet cause, in this case at the expense of his own sexuality. Sex is subordinate to the political agenda he supports.
I read these poems chronologically and I found that after reading all the other poems, each replete with violence and rape fantasy, the most haunting poem was one that was discovered amongst his papers after his suicide in 1930. The poem is titled “Past One O’Clock…”:
“Past one o’clock. You must have gone to bed.
The Milky Way streams silver through the night.
I’m in no hurry; with lightning telegrams
I have no cause to wake or trouble you.
And, as they say, the incident is closed.
Love’s boat has smashed against the daily grind.
Now you and I are quits. Why bother then
To balance mutual sorrows, pains, and hurts.
Behold what quiet settles on the world.
Night wraps the sky in tribute from the stars.
In hours like these, one rises to address
The ages, history, and all creation.”
Mayakovsky’s lethargy is obvious in this poem. After finishing it for the first time, I felt a shiver. I found it to be a tragic, yet strangely beautiful end to a man so passionate and torn between his self and his state. Many of Mayakovsky’s poems contain many verbs, reference to movement, and recklessness, whereas this poem is more tranquil, with perhaps a twinge of disappointment at his unrealized dreams. After reading all of these poems, I felt very moved by the passion transmitted through his words. I was reminded of the first stanza of W.B. Yeats’ “The Second Coming”:
“Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.”
To All and Everything, 1916
Our March, 1917
Call To Account!, 1917
Attitude To A Miss, 1920
You, 1922
Back Home, 1925
Good!, 1927
Conversation with Comrade Lenin, 1929
My Soviet Passport, 1929
At the Top of My voice, 1930
Past One O’Clock ..., 1930
After reading these poems by Vladimir Mayakovsky, I noticed a man who was both deeply personal and icily distant. Mayakovsky’s poetic voice is powerful and discursive. It’s clear that he cares about his country very much. He has such strong desires that his words could be misconstrued as reckless abandonment of his self. I believe the contrary. Mayakovsky was a man who was very proud of his country and desired to have the working class overcome their adversity, to rise up and form a government free of old men’s’ traditions. He cared so deeply for this cause that his poems often digress into a furious tangent, and thus much of his poetry involves violence and allusions to war. His poems leave little ambiguity as to the message he is trying to convey to the reader. Poems like “Our March”, “Conversation with Comrade Lenin”, “My Soviet Passport” and “At the Top of My voice” are among the most notable in regards to Mayakovsky’s overt communist propagandist message.
The perceived recklessness is Mayakovsky’s way of conveying the message that he would die for his country. These poems are confessional, despite the political overtones. The poems I’ve read have painted an intimate portrait of a man who was tortured by his desires, personally and publicly. He references women in many of his poems and expresses a great ambivalence towards them. In one poem, entitled “You” Mayakovsky writes, “You seized/and snatched away my heart/and began/to play with it--/like a girl with a bouncing ball.” The tone of this poem seems rather playful, with the imagery being that of silly, bouncing things. His elation is clear in the description of the girl playing with his heart. At the same time, however, the idea of someone playing with his heart like a ball seems to suggest an underlying sensation of pain that comes with his love.
His ambivalence toward women is also exemplified in the poem “To All and Everything”: “I swear by my pagan strength--/gimme a girl,/young,/eye-filling, and I won’t waste my feelings on her./I’ll rape her/and spear her heart with a gibe/willingly.” Mayakovsky is pledging his allegiance to the Soviet cause, in this case at the expense of his own sexuality. Sex is subordinate to the political agenda he supports.
I read these poems chronologically and I found that after reading all the other poems, each replete with violence and rape fantasy, the most haunting poem was one that was discovered amongst his papers after his suicide in 1930. The poem is titled “Past One O’Clock…”:
“Past one o’clock. You must have gone to bed.
The Milky Way streams silver through the night.
I’m in no hurry; with lightning telegrams
I have no cause to wake or trouble you.
And, as they say, the incident is closed.
Love’s boat has smashed against the daily grind.
Now you and I are quits. Why bother then
To balance mutual sorrows, pains, and hurts.
Behold what quiet settles on the world.
Night wraps the sky in tribute from the stars.
In hours like these, one rises to address
The ages, history, and all creation.”
Mayakovsky’s lethargy is obvious in this poem. After finishing it for the first time, I felt a shiver. I found it to be a tragic, yet strangely beautiful end to a man so passionate and torn between his self and his state. Many of Mayakovsky’s poems contain many verbs, reference to movement, and recklessness, whereas this poem is more tranquil, with perhaps a twinge of disappointment at his unrealized dreams. After reading all of these poems, I felt very moved by the passion transmitted through his words. I was reminded of the first stanza of W.B. Yeats’ “The Second Coming”:
“Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.”
Sunday, May 18, 2008
This Is How I Feel About _The_Stranger_
Camus’ The Stranger is a book that I have heard about dozens of times throughout my high school career, but never sat down and read. Fortunately, a twist of fate involving a job in a bookshop and a free read for English class lead me to it, and I was impressed by the depth and beauty.
I thought that the translator did a really fantastic job. I noticed the language was very simplistic, but Meursault went into excruciating detail describing the scene around him. I felt the discursive monologue really aided in displaying Meursault’s detachment from his own life. Truthfully, that is mostly what I picked up on and, only after reading some articles online did I notice other aspects, like the extent of the absurdity in Meursault’s life.
After placing the concept of absurdism into my head, I was amused by the accidental juxtaposition of Slaughterhouse Five and The Stranger in my life. I found that the two protagonists, both Meursault and Billy Pilgrim, are not so dissimilar. Both are men faced with raw absurdity who deal with this true problem by adapting a defeatist attitude and detaching themselves from reality
Where they differ is their contexts. It’s not Billy Pilgrim’s fault that he has been tossed into World War Two, but for Meursault, it’s not that simple. Meursault is very much in control of his own life, yet denies any responsibility for his own actions. However, I must admit, when Meursault is being questioned in court and he blames the sun for his killing of the Arab, I was torn. I felt that anger and ridicule was the knee jerk reaction that answer was intended to elicit. I thought about it and in the context of my own life it made sense. Sometimes we, as human beings, react to things negatively, like when we are hungry or overheated. I appreciated that Camus presented the validity in one’s physiological responses, yet applied it in a place like a courtroom, where firm reasoning is required, so as to accent the dilemma of trying to defend oneself despite the feeling of futility in defending a senseless act.
Camus seems to be arguing that one cannot let oneself simply “go with the flow.” Meursault asserts that being decisive is pointless because in the end “it’s all the same”, but consequently, Meursault allowing himself to be controlled by the outside—nature, in both senses of the word—displays the tragedies that can occur when one lets his or her self slide.
Meursault’s attitude is not completely inhuman, but it is his inability to feel true compassion, matched with his staunch honesty confuses and irritates the court members, whom, one can be lead to believe, represent society as a whole. Again, Camus does not seem to be arguing that it is crucial for one to integrate well into society, but he does suggest that interaction should be dealt with by grace and delicacy. Given that the placement of The Stranger in my reading schedule was so perfect, I found Meursault to be a fascinating character to digest and I wish that we could have discussed the novel in class as a group.
I thought that the translator did a really fantastic job. I noticed the language was very simplistic, but Meursault went into excruciating detail describing the scene around him. I felt the discursive monologue really aided in displaying Meursault’s detachment from his own life. Truthfully, that is mostly what I picked up on and, only after reading some articles online did I notice other aspects, like the extent of the absurdity in Meursault’s life.
After placing the concept of absurdism into my head, I was amused by the accidental juxtaposition of Slaughterhouse Five and The Stranger in my life. I found that the two protagonists, both Meursault and Billy Pilgrim, are not so dissimilar. Both are men faced with raw absurdity who deal with this true problem by adapting a defeatist attitude and detaching themselves from reality
Where they differ is their contexts. It’s not Billy Pilgrim’s fault that he has been tossed into World War Two, but for Meursault, it’s not that simple. Meursault is very much in control of his own life, yet denies any responsibility for his own actions. However, I must admit, when Meursault is being questioned in court and he blames the sun for his killing of the Arab, I was torn. I felt that anger and ridicule was the knee jerk reaction that answer was intended to elicit. I thought about it and in the context of my own life it made sense. Sometimes we, as human beings, react to things negatively, like when we are hungry or overheated. I appreciated that Camus presented the validity in one’s physiological responses, yet applied it in a place like a courtroom, where firm reasoning is required, so as to accent the dilemma of trying to defend oneself despite the feeling of futility in defending a senseless act.
Camus seems to be arguing that one cannot let oneself simply “go with the flow.” Meursault asserts that being decisive is pointless because in the end “it’s all the same”, but consequently, Meursault allowing himself to be controlled by the outside—nature, in both senses of the word—displays the tragedies that can occur when one lets his or her self slide.
Meursault’s attitude is not completely inhuman, but it is his inability to feel true compassion, matched with his staunch honesty confuses and irritates the court members, whom, one can be lead to believe, represent society as a whole. Again, Camus does not seem to be arguing that it is crucial for one to integrate well into society, but he does suggest that interaction should be dealt with by grace and delicacy. Given that the placement of The Stranger in my reading schedule was so perfect, I found Meursault to be a fascinating character to digest and I wish that we could have discussed the novel in class as a group.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Please Don't
Hi there, I'm a blog! I am under the maintenance of Ben Tavares. He is an Advanced Placement English student from Gloucester High School. Definitely not a robot. Please don't delete me!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)