Alex Lemon's book Mosquito, winner of the 2006 Tin House New Voice contest is a triumph... though I still don't quite understand how section 2 moves the book along, maybe that's just my failing... they're beautiful poems nontheless.
But what was most striking to me about the book was the introduction written by Mark Doty. Of course, it's Mark Doty and wouldn't anyone want an introduction by him. However, the thing that was wonderful about it was that it was something that addressed everyone-- not just Alex's writing, not just poets in general-- everyone, calling into play the ways that we use language and the ways that we don't.
Here's a little piece of that:
"Physical pain," Elaine Scarry writes in The Body in Pain, her brilliant examination of the intersection of suffering, language, and power, "does not simply resist language but actively destroys it, bringing about an immediate reversion to a state anterior to language, to the sounds and cries a human being makes before language is learned."
How does pain erase speech? First, of course, because the one doing the hurting is too englobed in the experience of hurt to make any words: hit your thumb with a hammer and it's as if the bone-deep intensity of that experience hijacks all energy from the mind; nothing can be seen or felt but the throbbing, blinding "this-ness" of that experience. As if there were nothing in the world but ache.
Throbbing, blinding, ache: the relative paucity of the words themselves point to the second reason why pain eludes the saying. We don't have the vocabulary for it. English, which has an endless supply of terms for, say, getting drunk, offers the barest scraps to help us name the way we're ailing. Pain can be throbbing, stabbing, shooting, piercing, or burning, and that's about it. Is this because intoxication is primarily a social experience, whereas pain is the opposite, always experienced alone? Words exist for the realm of the shared. Our poverty of terms for pain may indicate that we've given up on creating a lexicon, understanding that the solitary, suffering subject remains solitary. When we are wordless, we tend to be world-less as well. What cannot be conveyed about the self and the body lodges stubbornly in either silence or "sounds and cries."
But poetry is unlike other language, and its difference from daily speech lies in part in its relationship to those wordless utterances. Poetry bases itself in the sheer expressive power of vowel and consonant; rhythmic, bodily sound-making; moan and exhalation; the outcry that shades into song. Stanley Kunitz says that his poems begin in sound, and "sense has to fight its way in." The music that lies beneath speech is a vehicle of feeling.
Perhaps it's this grounding in the physicality of language that gives poetry its courage to wrestle with the difficult, if not downright impossible, work of getting the barely sayable onto the page. Poetry's power exists in exact proportion to this attempt; the harder it tries to do what can't be done, the more beautiful and engaging its failure. Or perhaps better to say that its failure--the inability of words to be commensurate with the power of experience--begins to come out the other side, and somehow or other, through some feat of linguistic legerdemain, a poem is made that does what speech shouldn't be able to do. A miraculous poem approximates the character of subjectivity, how it is to be in the world.
~
Style, that amalgam of the found and the made, the improvised and the adapted, can be the meeting ground between self and world. A means of self-presentation is forged, and in doing so the contents of individual experience can be signaled, given shape. The pain of others--just like their joy or pleasure or wit or desire--can remain entirely invisible to us unless it is given utterance, but plainspoken language generally fails to carry much of a depth charge. Not long ago, at a university in the north of England, a reader asked me if I couldn't just come out and say things; did I need the appurtenances of metaphor, the fancy dress of linguistic performance? No matter that to state how I'm feeling or thinking might take me a sentence or three, and not necessitate the several books of poetry and prose that she had neatly stacked on the desk in front of her, their pages marked with colored Post-it notes.
No, the crucial thing was that I couldn't say "it," because when named directly, abstractly, "it" vanishes. The subjective world can't be rendered in a summation: "I nearly lost my life but now I am better," Alex Lemon might say, but so what? That statement might move us in conversation, but on the page it's empty. It is the made machinery of style that manages to replicate how it feels to be alive, and that's why we require it.
If you can, I highly recommend this book to anyone who has an hour to give to poetry.