National Poetry Month, day seventeen

A longer poem today, but the poet who may be my favorite of all time: Alfred, Lord Tennyson. His work often has a mystical, fantastic tone that appeals to me, and his language is old enough to feel like I’m entering a different poetic world when I read him, but his concerns are universal enough that I don’t feel a lack of relevance. Tennyson appeals to my sense of language even more than Shakespeare does, and he always seems to describe the world in terms that reflect its sadness and its beauty.

The Lady of Shalott
by Alfred, Lord Tennyson

Part I
On either side the river lie
Long fields of barley and of rye,
That clothe the wold and meet the sky;
And thro’ the field the road runs by
     To many-tower’d Camelot;
And up and down the people go,
Gazing where the lilies blow
Round an island there below,
     The island of Shalott.

Willows whiten, aspens quiver,
Little breezes dusk and shiver
Thro’ the wave that runs for ever
By the island in the river
      Flowing down to Camelot.
Four gray walls, and four gray towers,
Overlook a space of flowers,
And the silent isle imbowers
      The Lady of Shalott.

By the margin, willow veil’d,
Slide the heavy barges trail’d
By slow horses; and unhail’d
The shallop flitteth silken-sail’d
      Skimming down to Camelot:
But who hath seen her wave her hand?
Or at the casement seen her stand?
Or is she known in all the land,
      The Lady of Shalott?

Only reapers, reaping early
In among the bearded barley,
Hear a song that echoes cheerly
From the river winding clearly,
      Down to tower’d Camelot:
And by the moon the reaper weary,
Piling sheaves in uplands airy,
Listening, whispers ” ‘Tis the fairy
      Lady of Shalott.”

Part II
There she weaves by night and day
A magic web with colours gay.
She has heard a whisper say,
A curse is on her if she stay
      To look down to Camelot.
She knows not what the curse may be,
And so she weaveth steadily,
And little other care hath she,
      The Lady of Shalott.

And moving thro’ a mirror clear
That hangs before her all the year,
Shadows of the world appear.
There she sees the highway near
      Winding down to Camelot:
There the river eddy whirls,
And there the surly village-churls,
And the red cloaks of market girls,
      Pass onward from Shalott.

Sometimes a troop of damsels glad,
An abbot on an ambling pad,
Sometimes a curly shepherd-lad,
Or long-hair’d page in crimson clad,
      Goes by to tower’d Camelot;
And sometimes thro’ the mirror blue
The knights come riding two and two:
She hath no loyal knight and true,
      The Lady of Shalott.

But in her web she still delights
To weave the mirror’s magic sights,
For often thro’ the silent nights
A funeral, with plumes and lights
      And music, went to Camelot:
Or when the moon was overhead,
Came two young lovers lately wed:
“I am half sick of shadows,” said
      The Lady of Shalott.

Part III
A bow-shot from her bower-eaves,
He rode between the barley-sheaves,
The sun came dazzling thro’ the leaves,
And flamed upon the brazen greaves
      Of bold Sir Lancelot.
A red-cross knight for ever kneel’d
To a lady in his shield,
That sparkled on the yellow field,
      Beside remote Shalott.

The gemmy bridle glitter’d free,
Like to some branch of stars we see
Hung in the golden Galaxy.
The bridle bells rang merrily
      As he rode down to Camelot:
And from his blazon’d baldric slung
A mighty silver bugle hung,
And as he rode his armour rung,
      Beside remote Shalott.

All in the blue unclouded weather
Thick-jewell’d shone the saddle-leather,
The helmet and the helmet-feather
Burn’d like one burning flame together,
      As he rode down to Camelot.
As often thro’ the purple night,
Below the starry clusters bright,
Some bearded meteor, trailing light,
      Moves over still Shalott.

His broad clear brow in sunlight glow’d;
On burnish’d hooves his war-horse trode;
From underneath his helmet flow’d
His coal-black curls as on he rode,
      As he rode down to Camelot.
From the bank and from the river
He flash’d into the crystal mirror,
“Tirra lirra,” by the river
      Sang Sir Lancelot.

She left the web, she left the loom,
She made three paces thro’ the room,
She saw the water-lily bloom,
She saw the helmet and the plume,
      She look’d down to Camelot.
Out flew the web and floated wide;
The mirror crack’d from side to side;
“The curse is come upon me,” cried
      The Lady of Shalott.

Part IV
In the stormy east-wind straining,
The pale yellow woods were waning,
The broad stream in his banks complaining,
Heavily the low sky raining
      Over tower’d Camelot;
Down she came and found a boat
Beneath a willow left afloat,
And round about the prow she wrote
      The Lady of Shalott.

And down the river’s dim expanse
Like some bold seër in a trance,
Seeing all his own mischance—
With a glassy countenance
      Did she look to Camelot.
And at the closing of the day
She loosed the chain, and down she lay;
The broad stream bore her far away,
      The Lady of Shalott.

Lying, robed in snowy white
That loosely flew to left and right—
The leaves upon her falling light—
Thro’ the noises of the night
      She floated down to Camelot:
And as the boat-head wound along
The willowy hills and fields among,
They heard her singing her last song,
      The Lady of Shalott.

Heard a carol, mournful, holy,
Chanted loudly, chanted lowly,
Till her blood was frozen slowly,
And her eyes were darken’d wholly,
     Turn’d to tower’d Camelot.
For ere she reach’d upon the tide
The first house by the water-side,
Singing in her song she died,
      The Lady of Shalott.

Under tower and balcony,
By garden-wall and gallery,
A gleaming shape she floated by,
Dead-pale between the houses high,
      Silent into Camelot.
Out upon the wharfs they came,
Knight and burgher, lord and dame,
And round the prow they read her name,
      The Lady of Shalott.

Who is this? and what is here?
And in the lighted palace near
Died the sound of royal cheer;
And they cross’d themselves for fear,
      All the knights at Camelot:
But Lancelot mused a little space;
He said, “She has a lovely face;
God in his mercy lend her grace,
      The Lady of Shalott.”

Share This Post

National Poetry Month, day sixteen

Wow, we’re now on the back half of the month! So a brief post today about that wonderful form, usually used to comic (and sometimes bawdy) effect, the limerick.

The limerick packs laughs anatomical
Into space that is quite economical.
But the good ones I’ve seen
So seldom are clean
And the clean ones so seldom are comical.

Or:

The limerick’s an art form complex
Whose contents run chiefly to sex;
It’s famous for virgins
And masculine urgin’s
And vulgar erotic effects.

When I was in junior high, I suspect that all my male classmates had committed to memory a limerick beginning with “There once was a man from Nantucket”.

Here’s just one that I found that made me happy:

There once was a young lady named bright
Whose speed was much faster than light
She set out one day
In a relative way
And returned on the previous night.

A nerdy limerick! I find this pleasing on multiple levels.

I wonder: has any limerick ever been composed that was also a truly great work of poetry?

Share This Post

Symphony Saturday

You know how sometimes you want to listen to a piece of music that is light and airy, that flits around like the will o’ the wisp, that is imbued with bright charm and delicate wit?

Well, forget all that, because now we’re meeting Anton Bruckner!

Bruckner, in my experience, is one of those “love him or hate him” composers…or maybe that’s not quite fair. Maybe it’s not “hate”, but I’ve definitely encountered listeners for whom Bruckner is amazing, and for whom Bruckner is just someone they don’t really care if they ever hear again. His symphonies are long and, at times, repetitive; he thinks nothing of writing a five-minute exposition and then putting in a repeat. His orchestrations are, at times, very heavy and dense, and if Bruckner himself wasn’t quite a Wagnerian, there is at least a part of Wagner in the scope of his works and their weighty nature.

Unlike Wagner, Bruckner was a man of very deep faith, and I find it impossible to listen to Bruckner without feeling some of that spiritual nature coming through. He writes for the orchestra, at times, as though it were an organ, and his music seems almost designed to fill the cavernous spaces of enormous cathedrals, with long fugal passages and gigantic chorales and a general sense of vastness that is leading the way to Mahler.

Bruckner does not seem to have been the most self-confident of composers, which makes his works problematic for musicologists as he was constantly revising earlier works and muddying the waters as far as determining which versions are definitive. Look at the list of known revisions for today’s work, and you’ll see the problem.

This symphony, the Fourth in E-flat major, is often cited as the best starting point for Bruckner, and I tend to agree. The symphony does have one of the most magical openings to any symphony ever written, with the shimmering strings and then the high horn calls that seem to beckon from a distance. For the listener willing to go where Bruckner is leading, he draws you in, slowly and gently, so that when it all opens up in glory, there’s simply no question that this is where he was going all along.

I actually have not heard a lot of Bruckner, but what I have heard, I love. Here is Bruckner’s Symphony No. 4, the “Romantic”.


Next week: another Bruckner. We’ll be doing three of these altogether, so if Bruckner’s not your thing, well, I’ll see you in May!

Share This Post

National Poetry Month, day 15

For me, poetry is usually about the beauty of the language and the skill with which it evokes emotion, but there are also times when a skilled poet uses words to convey a visual sense so keen that I feel like I’m there. This is another great reason why writers should read poetry.

I read this poem for the first time this morning, after I literally opened a collection and flipped through it to come to a random stop…here. And this poem hit me between the eyes, so incredibly vivid are the details the poet uses to create his word-picture. This is just amazing.

Working in the Rain
by Robert Morgan

My father loved more than anything to
work outside in wet weather. Beginning
at daylight he’d go out in dripping brush
to mow or pull weeds for hog and chickens.
First his shoulders got damp and the drops from
his hat ran down his back. When even his
armpits were soaked he came in to dry out
by the fire, making coffee, read a little.
But if the rain continued he’d soon be
restless, and go out to sharpen tools in
the shed or carry wood from the pile,
then open up a puddle to the drain,
working by steps back into the downpour.
I thought he sought the privacy of rain,
the one time no one was likely to be
out and he was left to the intimacy
of drops touching every leaf and tree in
the woods and the easy mutterings of
drip and runoff, the shine of pools behind
grass dams. He could not resist the long
ritual, the companionship and freedom
of falling weather, or even the cold
drenching, the heavy soak and chill of clothes
and sobbing of fingers and sacrifice
of shoes that earned a baking by the fire
and washed fatigue after the wandering
and loneliness in the country of rain.

On the poet.

Share This Post

National Poetry Month, day fourteen

After a really long cold spell, we’re finally getting some spring-like weather here in WNY. Who knows how long it will last…but as long as it’s here, this poem seems appropriate.

Spring, the sweet spring
Thomas Nashe

pring, the sweet spring, is the year’s pleasant king,
Then blooms each thing, then maids dance in a ring,
Cold doth not sting, the pretty birds do sing:
    Cuckoo, jug-jug, pu-we, to-witta-woo!

The palm and may make country houses gay,
Lambs frisk and play, the shepherds pipe all day,
And we hear aye birds tune this merry lay:
    Cuckoo, jug-jug, pu-we, to-witta-woo!

The fields breathe sweet, the daisies kiss our feet,
Young lovers meet, old wives a-sunning sit,
In every street these tunes our ears do greet:
    Cuckoo, jug-jug, pu-we, to witta-woo!
        Spring, the sweet spring!

Share This Post

Something for Thursday

When you’re writing a swashbuckler of a novel with young lads first learning to use a blade and pistol as your hero and dastardly men on black horses with eye-patches and a big red feather in their black hats as villains, you need to listen to some swashbuckling music to get in the mood. Erich Wolfgang Korngold is my go-to composer when there’s some swash to be buckled, so here’s a suite from his score to the Errol Flynn historical adventure film, The Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex.

Share This Post

National Poetry Month, day 13

Not all poetry is about positive things. Poetry can be angry and visceral, as in this poem by Wilfred Owen. Owen is known as one of the great poets to write during World War I, and he was actually killed in action on November 4, 1918 — just a week before the armistice ending the war was signed.

The Latin phrase at the end of the poem means: “It is sweet and noble to die for one’s country.”

Dulce et Decorum est
by Wilfred Owen

Bent double, like old beggars under sacks,
Knock-kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed through sludge,
Till on the haunting flares we turned our backs,
And towards our distant rest began to trudge.
Men marched asleep. Many had lost their boots,
But limped on, blood-shod. All went lame; all blind;
Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots
Of gas-shells dropping softly behind.

Gas! GAS! Quick, boys!—An ecstasy of fumbling
Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time,
But someone still was yelling out and stumbling
And flound’ring like a man in fire or lime.—
Dim through the misty panes and thick green light,
As under a green sea, I saw him drowning.

In all my dreams before my helpless sight,
He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning.

If in some smothering dreams, you too could pace
Behind the wagon that we flung him in,
And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,
His hanging face, like a devil’s sick of sin;
If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood
Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,
Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud
Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues,—
My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
To children ardent for some desperate glory,
The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est
Pro patria mori.

Share This Post

ROGUE ONE and other thoughts on the state of STAR WARS

So, the first trailer for ROGUE ONE: A STAR WARS STORY dropped last week, and…well, it looks good. How good? I won’t hazard a guess, but it does look like a Star Wars movie. Felicity Jones as the heroine looks fine, although the trope of the good guys having to trust everything to a rogue whose methods or motivations are questionable isn’t the freshest thing in the universe. Also, I’m a little turned off by the apparent gritty tone of the film, which looks to me like Star Wars melded with Battlestar Galatica. Maybe it’s not full-on grimdark, but the film’s producers have noted in past interviews that their story isn’t as morally unambiguous as the main-line Star Wars story, which isn’t something I’m thrilled about. There’s a place for morally ambiguous stories of war in science fiction, but Star Wars to me is about mythic storytelling, so I’m not sure how the tone will fit.

More troublesome to me is that we’re going to the Death Star well again, this time to tell the story of how the Rebellion got the “complete technical readouts of that battlestation” in the first place. I’m not sure this is a story I’ve ever really cared about hearing, especially since this will be the fourth movie in the Star Wars universe where a big spherical planet-destroying space station is a major plot point. This, coupled with the derivative story in The Force Awakens, and with the coming films centering on young Han Solo and young Boba Fett, seems to indicate that Star Wars is heading into a period of self-referential self-milking. And it’s not just the movies: we’ve had numerous novels and comics over the years that told versions of what happened in between the movies, and Disney’s first act of business upon acquiring Star Wars was to strike all that from the record and then…immediately start producing more novels and comics that tell versions of what happened in between the movies.

Frankly, I’m starting to get a sense of Lather, rinse, repeat from Star Wars. It’s the feeling I had during the second season of Star Trek: Voyager, when it became clear that we weren’t going to see exciting new stories but just more TNG-flavored tales told on a new ship with a blander crew. Maybe I’m wrong and these movies will be great, but I want new stories, not constant revisitings of the old ones. I’m not interested in Star Wars as ritualistic theater where the same stories are told all the time.

::  Something crystalized for me a few days ago, via a post on Tumblr, regarding the approach Disney is taking to Star Wars as a whole, and the misgivings I had about the characterizations in The Force Awakens. Someone wrote this:

There are posts about Finn that come across my dash frequently that really concern me.

It’s not that I don’t think musings about what a sweet innocent soul he is and imagining what his humble life must’ve been like are coming from a loving place, but Finn’s character has already been filled in via a canon source, and it was not humble.

Read the novel “Before the Awakening,” where you will learn that while FN-2187 may have pulled shifts as a janitor just like any military trainee has to work some shit jobs, he was actually the absolute rock star of his elite band of Stormtroopers. He was the natural leader, the best of them all, the highest scores in every possible measure, someone Phasma and Hux were well aware of as the shining example of what their pet Stormtrooper program could accomplish. He was everything they’d worked for for years.

The only problem was, he cared too much about his fellow Stormtroopers, even though they didn’t return the feeling, due to indoctrination and some envy of his superiority. It is pretty obvious, reading BtA, that Finn is Force sensitive. It is that Force sensitivity that set him apart, and made him the one who could overcome a lifetime of indoctrination and get out.

I know it’s the fault of the film for sketching him so lightly, but guys, it is crucial that we start acknowledging who Finn is, and his strengths. Which, canonically, are leadership, strategy, all the skills a commander must have. I worry that there is too much PRECIOUS PURE CINNAMON ROLL going on and not enough shared knowledge of his *canon character background and gifts*.

Please spread the word about Finn. This sort of thing shortchanges him horribly. When the FO lost FN-2187, they lost more than just another Stormtrooper. They lost a future general, and the Resistance picked one up.

There are so many ways this makes me crazy (none of which are the poster’s fault), but at the crux of it is this:

NONE OF THIS IS IN THE MOVIE.

And I’m not exaggerating here. There is not ONE thing in the movie that supports any of this. The Tumblr poster says that the movie “sketches Finn lightly”, but I think that’s drastically understating things. The film strongly suggests that Finn is a space-janitor who is seeing his first space action. There’s no other reasonable reading of what we see in the film: the way Finn is stunned by the single death of a single stormtrooper, the way Finn lowers his weapon when he’s supposed to be killing innocents, the way he just stands there slackly as Kylo Ren wanders through, the way he has to rip off his helmet to try and regain his composure…sure, Finn’s training comes through at times, just by virtue of his knowing stuff (“Fly low! It’ll screw up their scanners!”), but mostly, there isn’t one thing in The Force Awakens that establishes Finn as “the absolute rock star of an elite band of stormtroopers”. There really isn’t one thing that clearly establishes him as being Force-sensitive. There isn’t one thing that establishes that Finn is held in any particular esteem by Hux and Phasma (who are still awful, terrible characters). As far as the movie is concerned, Finn is just some random stormtrooper who inexplicably develops a conscience one day. Nothing of his background is established in the movie, no context is given at all for his change of heart, and to be told “Well, you gotta read this other novel to get it” is incredibly weak tea.

And that’s what makes me crazy about how Disney is approaching Star Wars now.

First of all, it’s simply not reasonable to expect people to be up on the minutiae of every single thing out there that has been declared to be “Star Wars canon”. I’m not planning to read any of these novels; at most I’ll read some of the comics. Most people who see the films will do even less than that, but now we’re leaving crucial bits of information out of the films entirely. That bit about Maz saying “That’s a story for another time!” when she’s asked how she got Luke’s original lightsaber? Well, there’s no doubt in my mind we’ll get that tale in some other media format, and that’s a ridiculously cynical approach to storytelling. “We’ll just leave crucial stuff out, so people who want a coherent tale will be forced to indulge all this other stuff!” Ugh.

The movies have to be coherent, and if they’re not going to be, then I have a problem. I’m not going to sit back and enjoy Daisy Ridley and John Boyega and the others if the story they’re wandering through is leaving out key details as a selling point for books, comics, and video games. In truth, I’m going to find it hard to care. If the movies can’t tell the entire story — and that means playing fair with the characterizations and explaining the presence of major items like Luke Skywalker’s first damn lightsaber — then the movies are at best lazy and at worst they are reduced to marketing devices. And wouldn’t that be an irony? To see Star Wars movies reduced to pushing other media tie-in stuff so that fans can learn what the hell is going on? Years after people were busily accusing George Lucas of selling out and using his creation to sell stuff, we’ll cheerfully look the other way because now Disney is doing it.

So yeah, I call bullshit — utter, complete bullshit — on the idea that if I didn’t read some novel, I don’t really understand Finn as a character. That is the job of the movies, and if they’re actually not going to do it, well then, I for one will pine for the days of George Lucas being in charge.

Share This Post

National Poetry Month, day 12

For being “dead” as poetry is always said to be, I sure have met a lot of poets online. I sure have met a lot of folks who still practice this “dead” art form and who are still invested in its future. I sure have met a lot of people who are knowledgeable about poetry and who still insist that there are new things to say, or new ways to say old things, or new ways to say new things, using the tropes and mechanisms of poetry.

When I go to bookstores, I always see people browsing the poetry section, and I see lots of new poetry books adorning the shelves. I even buy some myself, on occasion. I’ve bought several poetry chapbooks for my Kindle.

Poetry is dead? Well, if it is, there sure seems to be large number of people who never got the memo.

Natasha Head is a poet I first met on Instagram, and then on Tumblr and Twitter as well. She’s active on Facebook, and what’s more, she’s very active in the Canadian poetry community, and she has appeared on podcasts to read her work and she’s been printed in Canadian journals and she has published several collections of her own work. She’s quite a wonderful poet who has become an essential voice in my own writing world.

Poetry is dead? I’d tell you not to tell her, but really? I don’t think she gives a shit. She’s too busy writing poems.

Losers Like Us
by Natasha Head

I had the car and the notebook
You had the weed and the beer
We both had the urge for leaving
Get up and get out of here

We made it as far as the sidewalk
Never knew that at one point it ends
Never knew where the concrete would take us
Never knew that we’d never again

Hid the car in the lot at the old rink
Took the path beaten on the forest floor
Took the notebook the weed and the beer
Took again and then took some more

The camp wasn’t much to look at
There really wasn’t much to see
Just me with my little notebook
And you with your bag of weed

The bench was hard and splintered
But to us it was good as a throne
The smoke was heavy and skunky
If it wasn’t, we would have stayed home

The soundtrack was a walkman
With blaster speakers doctored by you
Suicidal Tendencies, Social Distortion
Back then, the balls and chains were few.

You let me tell you stories
I let you read what I had wrote
I let you sing my simple words
Even then it was poetry you spoke

All we knew for certain
Was that we couldn’t be caught
Losers like us have a way of evasion
We slip away with barely a thought.

(via)

Share This Post

ForgottenStars.net

The official site of Kelly Sedinger: Reader, writer, photographer, and dreamer

Skip to content ↓