Of Wanderings & Such

Coffee Spoons and Peaches

I have to say, it's hard to read Eliot when you're starving in the middle of the night. Between cakes, tea, and ices and coffee spoons with peaches, I had valid cause to complain of a rumbling stomach by the time I approached the end of the poem. Knowing Eliot, not a single word in this poem was placed out of mere chance, so I'd really like to figure out the meaning behind all the food references.

Speaking of coffee spoons, I thought this was the most beautiful stanza in the entire poem:

For I have known them all already, known them all:-/ Have known the evenings, mornings, afternoons,/ I have measured out my life with coffee spoons;/ I know the voices dying with a dying fall/ Beneath the music from a farther room./ So how should I presume?" (49 - 54)

I have measured out my life with coffee spoons..." What better way to say that the night is young and you're running out of time. There are plenty of dark references in the poem, which I think lead to create a sense of loss of time, or rather time quietly, but quickly slipping away. The etherised patient on the table, for instance. And then there were the restless nights.

I'm in awe of Eliot. You've got to know the rules pretty darn well to go ahead and break every single one of them. This is no romanticized, form focused poetry, yet his "free-verse" has a strong structure. He slips in the rhyme right under your nose and you'd never even notice it was there.

"Shall I part my hair behind? Do I dare to eat a peach?/ I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach./ I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each." (122-23)

So far, I've noticed the following rhyming scheme being repeated: a, a, b, c, c, d, d, e, e, f, g, g, with some tweaking here and there.

The man was a genius with literary technique. I've never seen fog personified like a little animal, licking "it's tongue into the corners of the evening," (17) or sliding along the street, rubbing its back on windows. Ladykiller, him. I don't see how any woman wouldn't fall to her knees, swooning, after receiving a proposal like this.

"After the sunsets and the fooryards and the sprinkled streets,/ After the novels, after the teacups, after the skirts that trail along floor -/ And this, and so much more?-" (102 - 04)

I love this... after the lace has worn off and the cake has been eaten, I'd still want to be with you. Today might look wonderful, but when the sun starts to set in tomorrow, I want you to be by my side.

Someday, I'd like to think that I can write like that. Someday, I hope to write a poem that would make Frost proud.

The Lean Mean Unthinking Machine

Talk about symbolism... no really... go ahead, talk about it. It's been a long time since I've read a work of literature that screams "symbolism" at every technical level. From the props, to the settings, to the dialogue and characters, every word of Machinal seems deliberate and carefully placed to emphasize the unthinking automation of machines.

Judith Barlow in her introduction says, "Treadwell attacks capitalism for putting even intimate relationships to an economic footing, but her critique extends to technology, medicine, law, motherhood, the press, romance (including a speakeasy that closely resembles a singles bar) and even religion. It is a recognizably feminist critique as well," (vii). Speakeasy...does that sound Orwellian to anyone? This is my kinda play. I should have been in college in the 60's...I'm always more than happy to jump on the anti-capitalist bandwagon. Give me a picket line and slogans any day. Peacefully, of course.

The play raises some interesting issues. Mass production and profit making become so important to the corporate world that almost every individual is nothing more than a tiny bolt in the great clockwork machinery of making money. It's interesting how Treadwell satirizes material needs.

HUSBAND: "All my life I've wanted a Swiss watch that I bought right there. All my life, I've counted on having that some day - more than anything," (25).

Not only does he repeat what he wants (like a programmed machine), but he has waited for nothing other than a Swiss watch his entire life. A watch. Did anyone notice that absolutely every character has repeated a line at least twice? I see little blue men marching along in little armies chanting "death to intelligence."

Of course, the play also raises some rhetorical questions. Would money mean everything if we hadn't come to depend on it the way we have? How are basic human relationships prioritized alongside wealth? Why is it that the ones closest to us are the ones who can (almost) never hear what we're truly saying?

I'm not saying that the murder was justified. Like John said in class one day, you don't just go around killing people, no matter how disappointed you are with life. But, no one listens to the poor girl, which (in my mind) obviously raises the question, what is the status of a woman in the world, and how far has the society come to subjecting her to its own will? Just how far can you push a person before something in the mind snaps and throws them over the edge of reason? As always, a humanist point of view.

What I find even more intriguing is a similar theme across plays from this particular era. Is this a response to the World War in its wake or just another anti-capitalist social statement? What indeed was the true motivation behind Rice's Adding Machine? Hot dog!

Themes and Styles of the Great Gatsby

"We heard it from three people, so it must be true." Daisy, 9.

The quote above quite possibly describes the attitude of the characters in a nutshell. It also reflects a number of recurring themes, often found in Fitzgerald's work. I'm almost certain that The Great Gatsby is a huge social statement made by Fitzgerald against upper crust society by way of satire. For one, as Gatsby's character slowly unfurls in the book, the word "Great" in the title seems ironic. Thus far into the book, Gatsby is just as human as the next person, just as equally given to vanity as everyone else. Is that what makes literature great? It's ability to connect with the human spirit at a personal level? This isn't necessarily a rhetorical question, but I do digress. However, might I add that the imagery is absolutely dynamite. I can see, smell, feel, touch, and taste this world of fantasy that Fitzgerald builds for us.

Anyway, the themes that I've noticed so far:

Fitzgerald's flair and need for drama. I noticed this with Bernice Bobs Her Hair as well. If there aren't women swooning over men, then there's a point of revelation in the story where everything either comes together or falls apart. To answer my own question, it's probably so he could come up with a story that people would want to read. After all, who wants to be a starving writer?

His focus on upper crust society. It does remind me of the very visible class divide that exists in America (and the rest of the world), but it seems to me that Fitzgerald prefers to stay within his comfort zone, and write about what he knows. Incidentally, this is a rule of thumb with writers. If you want a good story, find one that doesn't fall too far from home. However, I do wish that there was an element of risk with his work.

I might as well play the devil's advocate. Granted that he does write about the wealthy class, but he usually brings to light their excess and waste, the hypocricy, and the impression of social norms and cultural conventions on people. I find it interesting that the Great Gatsby has to buy his way into people's hearts, and more often than not, they're people he doesn't know. All this just to find his way back to Daisy. Ya think he coulda just said "Hello"?

While we're at it, lets talk about another technique of his. The manipulative nature of either the protagonist, or the very trusty sidekick. The only reason Gatsby invited Nick over to one his parties was to find a way to meet Daisy again. I'm just surprised he admits it.

So why do I focus on "literariness" and "style"? Because I'm taking two other Literature classes this semester that focus on the two topics above. Also, because I'd like to see literature being talked about in a human sense, along with absorbing an instinct to recognize good writing. I'm a poet, so I focus on imagery. That doesn't mean I'm an expert at it - that just means that I want to learn how to improve my writing. Besides, it's a different take on the traditional means of analyzing literature, i.e. talking it to death. So what'd y'all think?

P.S. - Why is it that blog posts look so darned long only when you're drafting them?