Archive for August, 2007

On Dream Street

Saturday, August 25th, 2007

by Melanie Almeder
Tupelo Press 2007
Reviewed by Mike McDonough

7.5 of 10 stars

Sounds Like [?]

almederI grew up in one of those wealthy seaside towns that endure hoardes of Sunday watercolorists painting quaint things (or turning spare, Yankee light into an expensive tropical languor). These lines from Melanie Almeder’s “Elegy for Grief” sum up my feelings about the atmosphere evoked by Sunday painters:

our best theatrics, the gods, our losses,
refuse to punish us,
but loll among us, abstracted
into other mild states resembling the play of light.

Fear Sunday painters: Almeder is not one of them. She knows the price of beauty’s abstracted grief; her remembered beloved is:

no more than the window there
open to endless kudzu.  You are no more
than the crumbling limb of a marble statue, than the pink light
against which swallows stitch untranslatable erratics.

On Dream Street, Almeder’s debut, is a book of transformative lyric poems: each reaches towards a visionary moment. Taking a cue from W. Eugene Smith’s evocative photograph “Dream Street,” the book unfolds a series of well-constructed visions in an often elegiac mood. The trouble with prominently featuring a photograph from a certain artist is that it promises special insight into that artist’s work. By itself, Almeder’s title poem doesn’t tell me anything that isn’t better found in the picture. I don’t get any sense of Smith’s wartime milieu or his troubled, intense life. Almeder’s poem mentions the old Ford in the picture, but I’m pretty sure that’s a 1950 Studebaker Champion Convertible. That fact could carry the emotional weight of the poem by itself, given the nostalgia of a certain generation for Raymond Loewy’s distinctive designs. Almeder’s poem subordinates those details for the sake of a more generalized lyric transformation. The book as a whole ends up doing better service to Smith’s photo than the title poem.

My personal pique aside, Almeder’s poems don’t really need much topicality. Parked off the road at a rakish angle, the car is gone to seed, and is in shadow just enough to leave doubt as the identity of that inimitable bullet nose. Almeder knows that grief ruthlessly strips the specificity of things, but leaves very strong impressions behind. Her poems are not as much an enactment of grief, but a dream of grief, which keeps the mood from being oppressive.

Almeder’s poems work best as a description of a generic landscape, and in cases where the speaker is addressing another person. Even when specific places are mentioned, such as Rangeley Lake, I don’t get much locational magic. There are exceptions to this. The poem about Key West is spot on in mentioning the railroad’s “long want,” which has more resonance the more you know about the quixotic feat of building a railroad across the Florida Keys. There is an insistent music that comes through, as in “Mock Orange,” describing camelia blooms:

it was not God,
but those lithe lord gods themselves,
mocking birds, intoning every other voiced thing
from dirt-slicked limbs of magnolias, until, distracted,
they tipped past the waxed leaves the sun makes silver of;
not God, lord gods; not love, insistence, disregard.

Even if you are deaf to floral content, this is strong music. It’s a neat trick when the rhythm of the line tends to make you pronounce “voiced” as two syllables sans accent mark, and without messing up the normal pronunciation of “waxed.” Some problems crop up, though. The looseness of Almeder’s line encourages the occasional weak repetition as well as stage props such as “truth be told,”“I tell you,” or “after all.” Like Frost supposedly limiting a poet to 10 lifetime uses of the word “beautiful,” I’d like to mandate a limit on the number of times a poet can use the ejaculatory “O.” (Wait. Let me rephrase that.) As an example of both the strength and weakness of her line, in “Ode to Peterson’s Field Guide to Birds,” when describing plovers, she writes:

They were not “plaintive,” I tell you,
they simply peeped like small trucks backing up
and off they went…

Though the mood is generally dreamlike, sharp reality checks often rise up, and her sense of rhythm generally carries us through.

I shouldn’t waste my time quarreling with blurbers, but I have to take issue with Gregory Orr’s absurdly qualified comparison: “Emily Dickinson’s intelligence stretched out over a longer sinuous line that wraps around itself” would not be Emily Dickinson’s intelligence but a parody of it. Whitman’s intelligence chiseled to a thin line might be A.R. Ammons, but the point is it would be a different animal. Almeder’s work develops a rhythm and intelligence all its own, though she does invokes Dickinson’s “thing with feathers” in different ways.

The poem “Women Made of Words” lives up to its Wallace Stevens epigraph, “What should we be without the sexual myth, the human revery or poem of death?” This is an achievement by itself. Here’s a sample:

No more, the torturers: without the sexual myth, they transmogrify
into window cleaners, buffing simulacra of cloud migration.
And then sex withers, drips off like Morning Glory blossoms.
Off drops Helen of Troy, Carthage.
Gone the begotten trench, the bloody stump, pulchritudes of land
bombed into a pocked birdlessness.

I’m not sure I should suggest that Stevens would be a better comparison for the tone and reach of the book, but I’ll try to describe the kinds of transformations that Almeder’s poems work towards. Her vocabulary is sometimes rather baroque. Her music aspires to a certain density. Her knowledge of the natural world, while pervasive, scores more philosophical points than ecological ones. God is constantly mentioned, but always keeps his distance. Her humor is best shown by her sense of grief. “Cure#4: If the Roof of Your Home by Sad Chance is Chosen by Buzzards As a Roost” starts with: “Cancel paper delivery immediately— / they will only beat you to it, eat the news,” and ends with:

They will preen
in the rooftop drains.  Your ceiling will begin to leak.
Forget the buckets. Give it at most one week. Move.

Which doesn’t really sound like Stevens at all. Though it traverses some well-known poetic territory, Almeder’s visionary music manages to leave enough actual and rhetorical space for the reader to make their own comparisons.

*


Sunday Houses the Sunday House

Monday, August 20th, 2007

by Elizabeth Hughey
University of Iowa Press 2007
Reviewed by David Sewell

6stars_7

Good Enough

hughey cover

I have no special insight into the cost-revenue ratio employed in the publishing of poetry books, whether the page count determines the cover price or whether there’s any sort of consistency in this regard throughout the industry. Is it laughable to introduce the concept of profit margins when talking about poetry books? Is that $14 price tag a phantom number, something picked blindly out of an overturned beret? Are profits being actively maximized (a necessity with such low volume?), or are publishers just barely keeping the lights on? No matter. What I really wonder is whether a poet who is publishing his/her first book is likely to be given fewer pages by the publisher or whether he/she is just likely to have at his/her disposal fewer pages of poems the publisher is willing to print under its imprimatur. I wonder because it seems that first books lately (or the ones I’ve been reading, anyway) have been slight on page counts. But more disturbing than this page-count modesty is that many of these collections, often of about 50 pages of poems, still contain what might—perhaps too harshly, perhaps perfectly fairly—be called filler.

Which, long way round, is how we arrive at Sunday Houses the Sunday House by Elizabeth Hughey, winner of the 2007 Iowa Poetry Prize. Hughey is a strong poet, but this is not an exceptionally strong book. The good poems in it are quite good. But strip out the lesser poems, which to me seem not nearly half as good as the book’s best poems, and you’re left with only 30 or so pages. Not a lot, really. But I don’t blame Hughey for this. It is more the poetry-prize process, the editor responsible for the shape of the book (am I being naïve here?), and the poetry-industrial complex that deserve the blame.

To be clearer, I think Hughey has a really good book in her, perhaps just over the horizon. Sunday Houses, though, is only about half-way home. Poems like “A One and A,” for example, show a strong, inventive voice with masterful control. Here are the last four lines:

With that, the party that I skipped eight years ago finally ends.
Tony wakes in the kitchen chair, Adam calls a taxi, Katherine
takes off her purple dress, and Dave and Allison move to Austin
with their terrier.

As in this poem, Hughey is often interested in temporality, in troubling linear time by traveling back and forth and all around it. This suspension of events or a line of thought or whatever, this artful time travel is not just a poetic gimmick: it really gets to the seemingly haphazard organizing that goes on in our minds, the time-space relationship in general, the almost arbitrariness of many aspects of ourselves and our lives, and, especially, the relationships and the physical and emotional wounds that just won’t seem to heal no matter how much time has elapsed. Does anything actually stop happening, she seems to be asking, or does our attention just shift? The only problem is that she uses this blueprint more than a few times. In a longer book, maybe this is fine; in a book this length, with poems this length (short), the foundation starts to look less solid.

She takes us backwards in time in “The Long Hello” (“I am going to live this whole thing backwards next time”), to arrive at the really good closing line, “After years of eating saffron, I will know nothing about saffron.” But then we have “Country Song” and “Happiest Hours” later in the book, on facing pages. From “Country Song”: “When I received a letter / from you, I had already read it.” From “Happiest Hours”: “I walk back through the / years, knock on George’s door, and find him on the couch.” The book isn’t chiefly about traveling backwards in time, which would, perhaps, justify repeated sorties in this direction. And it’s short, so three or four instances of the exact same engine in a relatively small space come across less like a theme than a lack of inspiration. On their own, though, these poems are strong. The closing of “Happiest Hours” is almost worth the price of admission:

They’ll have a baby named after a common flower. Some hot
nights, George will sleep naked on the kitchen floor. It gets pretty
bad again after that, so I tell him that I’ll stop for now. He says to
get from his apartment to a cornfield, you have to do much more
than go left.

But the strength of the individual poems is weakened by the reality of the book, and that’s a real shame, and is unfair to the poems and to their writer. It’s an old complaint, but it’s still true that if you set the bar high for yourself, and Hughey clearly does, every attempt that fails to achieve such a height will be especially clear. Whether this is fair doesn’t really matter. 

I’m not arguing for a book as a sort of monolith, for a book full of the same sort of poems. Like every word, every line, every poem…every book is its own little monster, and it’d be idiotic (a mode I’m surely not above), to argue for some blueprint or other. I’m only saying that, in the book that I have here to review, the temporally complicated, world-upside-down, event- or character-driven poems (which often appear in prose blocks, or at least long-lined poems) are infinitely more successful than the other poems, which vary in their exact form (lineated usually, in couplets sometimes) but are, as a whole, more image driven, much shorter, and lacking the spark that seems responsible for the better poems.

In “Looks Skyward in Coastal Counties,” we have, apparently, answers to questions we’re not privy to: “A blue ribbon, James. / The Great Lakes, Richard.” Such lines, and the poems they compose, seem like not much more than ballast. “Warnings to Be Heeded” lists warnings to be heeded. We might read something biographical in the things listed, but even then, there’s not a lot there. “Subjects Not Suitable for Autofocus, Fuji Instruction Manual / Love, by Guy De Maupassant” is a strange and clever found poem, contrasting lines from a camera manual with lines from the syphilitic Frenchman. There’s a “telephone play”, a poem called “Tied for Impiety” that lists examples of things or people who are tied for impiety…my point is that these poems seem more inspired by the need to write a poem than by something burning hot inside the poet. And, at the risk of repeating myself, this is a first book, and I can’t help but believe that a first book should be a big, unified artistic/poetic/aesthetic/personal statement, not a sometimes-really-good-sometimes-just-okay compilation.

The other lesser poems, I’m not so sure what they’re up to—mainly they ruminate or riff on an image for not very long, racing, it seems, to get to the end (the last five lines of the 11-line “Egg, Egg,” for instance). Often these are very short poems, more imagistic and more abstract. “Look Skyward in Coastal Counties,” “Not to Mention the Trees Coming Up to My Waist,” and “What Bird,” for example, seem to operate on a level of mysteriousness that neither benefits the poems nor is earned by the lines that are present in them. Other poems (“Afternoon,” “Dogwood, David, Dogwood”) are perhaps too clearly and too strongly driven by the concept behind them (and, though, in truth, I find “Dogwood, David, Dogwood” to be a strange choice for the last poem in this collection, it does have its charms).   

But anyway. The dissolution of constructs—whether linear time or the domestic order or actual houses and people—is a lot of what’s happening in these poems. It’s an interesting viewpoint, a real attempt to examine, like an even more articulate Demian, the life around us by taking it apart, by walking all over it. Indeed, it seems that it’s domesticity that Hughey has her most trenchant observations about—and where she most consistently shines. Though the author photo belies the sentiment somewhat, lines like “I am no across- / the-room beauty” and “I play the woman / as cool as an open refrigerator” show a talented poet with an intriguing personal point of view, and lines like “Nothing is left unfucked in this world” and “The wrecked world is mending itself like a starfish” take that beyond the personal. And in a really interesting way.

It seems, though, that Hughey is really only able to strut her stuff in a certain type of poem, the ones I’ve been talking about as being successful. While I can hear the opposing viewpoint, that shorter, lighter, somehow different poems add levity and balance and make for a better book, in this case, I’m not buying it. And that is, basically, my argument for why one half of this book is better than the other half—the less-good poems seem less important not just to me or to the imaginary reader, but to the writer.

But this is starting to feel like I’m grinding a personal axe, which is less the case than that I feel the need to approach this review in a way that interests me as well as, hopefully, you. The mystery inherent in good poetry, I think, makes a lot of reviewing beside the point anyway. As I’ve said, these are many good poems here, but good is not always (if ever) good enough. Sunday Houses the Sunday House was good enough for the Iowa Poetry Prize, but was the Iowa Poetry Prize good enough to Sunday Houses the Sunday House? Hard to say.

*