Some Questions with Answers
1.
Answering bigger and smaller
questions—for example, why is the air “blent”?
2.
Who is recognizing “our compulsions”?
3.
And why are they “robed as destinies”?
4.
And by whom are they robed? And to what
is “that” referring in the line “that much can never be obsolete”?
5.
The final two lines baffle as well.
A
serious house on serious earth it is,
In
whose blent air all our compulsions meet,
Are
recognized, and robed as destinies.
And
that much never can be obsolete,
Since
someone will forever be surprising
A
hunger in himself to be more serious,
And
gravitating with it to this ground,
Which,
he once heard, was proper to grow wise in,
If
only that so many dead lie round.
Answers:
1) The
air is blended in the sense that it holds, in solution, a mixture of smells and
associations (see stanza five). But why “blent”? Why such an archaic, literary
word? At the very beginning of the poem, when the speaker walks into the
church, he finds a “tense, musty, unignorable silence / Brewed God knows how
long.” (Get it, God knows?) By the end of the poem, that defensive, jokey tone
is gone. The speaker is trying to make his language live up to the dignity he
sees in the church. That’s how it strikes me, anyway.
(Here
and throughout, Larkin makes a big deal of the church as container. He starts
off by wondering about the roof, how old it is and whether it’s in good repair.
He associates the end of “superstition” with the caving-in of the roof, when
all that’s left is “Grass, weedy pavement, brambles, buttress, sky.” He calls
the church a “special shell,” and so on.)
2) Who is recognizing our compulsions? Yes. Exactly. I
think this question goes straight to the heart of the poem. If there is no one
in the church (no God, no clergy, no belief, no superstition), then there is no
one to recognize our compulsions. There is no one to call them sins and forgive
them. No one to take them seriously. No promise that we will be rewarded or
punished for what we do or given a “destiny” that is special to ourselves.
3) Why
“robed”? We tend to think of robes as royal or ceremonial garments and as
symbols of redemption: “Lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of
all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne,
and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands; and
cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the
throne, and unto the Lamb” (Revelation 7:9-10). To take our compulsions (a
quasimedical term borrowed from psychiatry) and robe them as destinies is to
... well, you can decide what that might mean, no?
4) By
“that much,” I think Larkin means the feeling that the church is “a serious
house on serious earth.” In the last lines of the poem he tries to explain this
feeling—or at least say where it comes from.
Again,
these are just places you might start. My next question would probably have to
do with the tone of that last stanza. Is there something not quite serious
about that line “A serious house on serious earth it is”? Is there something
wishful, and ironic, about “blent”? And so on. Another reader might ask how
much the last lines had to do with churches and how much with poems about
churches. Both readers would be asking questions, not just about what’s on the
page, but about their own biases and interests and ... compulsions.
So,
as for your most general question—how to read poetry well—I have no idea,
except to pay attention to the specific words on the page, and the implied tone
of voice, and to think about what you read. Just what you’re doing. It sounds
childish to say, but one thing I like about poems is that you are allowed to
stare at them, and think about them, for as long as you like. In this sense,
they resemble slow movies, or portraits, or nudes, or most of what we think of
as art: poems give you permission to pay attention to a degree that would be
rude or embarrassing face to face with, for example, a person.
No comments:
Post a Comment