Frederick Glaysher claims to be an epic poet and also wrote an epic "The Parliament of Poets." This is a huge proposition and amazing ambition. It's him? Does he have it? Before answering these two important questions by reviewing his book, let me outline why I think this is a big problem. The use of the word epic is very loose, but it is very useful now. We can say that the film Ben Hur is an epic, or that some very dangerous adventures of Antartica are epic, which is useful because the word conveys a sense of scale and importance; but when we talk about an epic This is not what we mean.
To illustrate this, in my opinion, the last complete and true epic in English is the "lost paradise" written by John Milton in C17. In addition to the poem, there are two more: from Old English. Anonymous Beowulf, and the unfinished Elf Queen from Edmund Spenser of C16th. Byron's Don Juan may be a true simulated epic. In addition, Milton's only poet who is extremely close to writing in epic style is Keats and his two sublime, but not finished. It may not be complete [even if he ever lived], Hyperion Shard. Yeats is a natural and impulsive epic poet, but does not write a true epic. This brought us to the C20 and all the false poets [British and American] claim to write a series, modern epic, but not doing such a thing. The most shocking example is Ezra Pound and his Cantos: incredible and incredible tosh disguised as a genius, just like the way we are now too familiar with conceptual art and music. In fact, there are only two types of people who have read Cantos: university professors, who can skillfully unlock it; and the poets who want to write like that [except of course completely different - solipsism smears the panes in their own way: There are brown smudges there, but there are green stains here and naturally vote for the model to prove their own boring. [As for the modern epic of the human mind - starting Wordsworth, Whitman and others - although they have strange purple patches, it seems to be a long and boring form of narcissism].
I need to be too far from this comment to define an epic, but if it means anything, the essential clue is the word "style": there is a style of height, and lofty will never be far away, despite all human beings to humans. They are all a value system, but for us this is a very important value system because people can inform the journey of the epic; the epic never devalues the meaning of humanity - they inspire us. That's why Pound's Cantos are not epics [even poetry]: they are a form of Gnosticism, they are just a higher way of learning, not accessible, only those in knowledge. In short, Cantos is anti-democratic, just like Pound. The real epic makes all the smart people happy with the years, because they speak to them in a language they can understand, even if the language is promoted #39;
Therefore, Glasser has built his epic in his twelve books, such as Milton, but the actual model is how Dante's Divine Comedy progresses. Since Dante was guided through the three levels of his Catholic model, Glaser is now in a good conceited imagination - or conceived - himself on the moon, and by various poets and writers from all continents [not just It is the leader of Virgil. The country and the region returned to Earth about four times in order to learn to make him an epic poet and actually write this poem. Indeed, the end of this poem is like Dante's poem; he left us with the love of moving the sun and the stars. Compared with Glaysher, he ended his super vision with dancing/crossing the endless space and the stars of the field'. The poem is at least 9,000 lines long, and there is a "song" in the real epic simulation. And, mimicking Milton, a commentary on poetry; there is a claim in this respect that this verse is similar to a blank verse, but I can't agree with it, although this is not necessarily a criticism.
However, the extraordinary is the language, as well as the style. Ancient, ancient languages, inversions and modern spoken proverbs have a peculiar mix. The surprising lines actually end in indefinite or definite articles, and I find it hard to understand why. However, the opening speech in Book 1, the range of Homer Smith or Milton, gives an old style:
"O Muse, O Maid of Heaven, O Circus Moon,
The moonlight glory of the midnight sky,
I beg you to bless the tongue of their servant.
Falling on your beam of light,
Moonlight blessing, from my mouth
May at least pour some love
I will keep you a sweet blessing and serve you.
God's creation, and his creative words,
Brahma, the thunderous roar of the Bible
Upanishad, Allah, compassion,
Bhudda's meditation mystery,
Confucius and the Tao. Great spirit"
But in fact, this is very good writing, even moving, and surprisingly: Glaysher kept the power of this poem for all twelve books! Therefore, although in any rhythm sense, I do not think that this poem is regular or recurring, but in some way he has shaped a line that successfully promotes the development of the narrative. In addition, because his vocabulary is very strong, and because he often switches from one style to another, people never get bored - poetry stimulation. In fact it is almost an idiot! For example, in Book 3, we got the words about Greek heroes from "Bob" [Robert Hayden, Glaysher's mentor], which is very classic, but then Glaysher's role reflects:
"I think who needs meridian driving when I have Queen Mab."
This is a weird match [Transformation Drive / Queen Mabu], but it works; there are hundreds of such intersections between the time and the present, and the words that make them focus and juxtaposition.
So, although Glasser looks old in some places, because poetry is about the current problems we care about - the more specific fate of the Earth and humans - and because linguistics is so diverse and skilled, we realize that this is one The poet works for the deliberate effect, not the one who only read poetry three hundred years ago. An excellent quality of this poem is its clarity and luminous quality. I like the fact that despite the wide range of terrain and vocabulary references, this poem is easy to understand and follow: it is a poet who writes poetry for people, not a person who wants to be smart, not a concealer. Confused people who lack poetry.
Therefore, I am surprised that Glaysher is really an epic poet, this is an epic! Therefore, it is difficult to congratulate this achievement because it has been waiting for a long time. Particular interest of members of the Classical Poets Association is Volume 6. Remember that the poet is back from the Earth to the Moon, including access to all continents on Earth and dialogue with all poets. The sixth volume covers China, and most of its emotions will bring a very pleasant impression to Falun Gong supporters and followers: China has a fabulous exposure to political corruption, including:
"Marxists have proved the worst side
human history. The unsatisfied desire for blood.
Only university professors in China
Continue to worship their optimistic gods.
They always claim to be # for the people.
But never asked them everywhere
What do they want. Responsibility and heaven are forgotten. "
Please pay attention to the main humor of American university professors who are still defending Marxism; there is actually a lot of humor in the poem. On the subject, it is also epic: it is about human survival, though - like Dantian - all the horror of human history. It can be said that in some places the language is a cliché, but considering the length of the poem, each line and image can be "fresh". 70 years ago, the famous British critic FR Leavis was as ridiculous as Milton because his language was not specific. Like John Donne; in other words, Leavis completely missed the epic and how to write an article: If every line must be imaginatively involved, then we will never surpass Book 1. Homer knows that dawn is good, so It is not necessary to introduce a new analogy whenever dawn is introduced.
Finally, agreeing with Glaser's consent, I think this is the highest honor in poetry [becoming an epic poet], and I should point out that I think there are two shortcomings in this magical work. One is aesthetics and the other is theology.
First of all, in aesthetics, although the work has kept my interest from beginning to end, and full of curiosity and creativity, I think it has suffered from a lack of dramatic tension. Although the poet suffers [it is indeed dismembered at least twice: once lost his mind, and the other is torn by Octavio Paz!], in fact he has a feeling that he can actually die or lose everything In addition to becoming the poet's crown. This is a conversation one after another - interesting, but not really dramatic Homer, Virgil and Milton are dramatic. Of course, because Dante is a model, sometimes it's not surprising: even Dante can hardly keep up with the tension in his endless conversation as he rises. I personally have not seen anyone who thinks that purgatory and heaven are higher than hell; of course, Dante's poetry benefits from the closer terrain of the three imaginary locations. There are certain benefits to having Glaysher's characters visit all continents - a dissipative effect.
More seriously, sometimes the weakness of this poem is my theological opposition to it. In the eighth volume, he said:
"Milton will guide you from here.
Through ancient and modern pilgrimages,
Many people reveal their creed as one...
Orignal From: Comment: Frederick Glaysher's Poet's Parliament, Earthrise Press, 2012
No comments:
Post a Comment