Lerner/Berrigan response

Lerner’s The Lichtenburg Figures begins with the language of something minuscule and imprinted that questions its preservation or length of stay. This idea stems from the Lichtenburg Figures, which claims to be fern-like patterns that briefly stay after a lightning strike. This idea is mentioned in the second to last line of the first poem: “on forever in a good way? A brain left lace from age or lightning?” I believe the beginning defines the close attention Lerner has to things that appear after a violent happening, only to disappear shortly after. It opens the book to his creation of violence through language and juxtaposition. His cover enacts this phenomenon with a petri dish resembling the fern marks with a lot of black space. Also, the first and last poem of his book focuses on a line of poetry: “Real snow on the stage. Fake blood on the snow.” Lerner shows a sense of confusion in juxtaposition where the reality of things is skewed, much like his characters, shift in speakers, and heightened versus slang rhetoric.
I would compare this beginning and ending to the work of Lerner’s Topeka friend, Cyrus Console. Console’s Brief Underwater uses sequence poetry in order to show the failure of autobiography through detached narrative and heightened rhetoric. His first and third to last poem repeats the first line, “When I first saw the need for a study of this kind…” In relation to Lerner, Console reflects on assessment. Similarly, his ability to use observation or evaluation in order to discover the failure or violence of something brilliantly shows the failure and violence of language. Overall, both poets books’ function circularly, that the entire context of the poem “runs in a circle” to the first question of language or autobiography.
Also, poet Ada Limon, in her book, This Big Fake World, tackles the beginning and ending similarly to Lerner in format, but functions differently. Limon’s appropriately titled first and last poems, Prologue: This Big Fake World, and Epilogue: This Big Fake World, appear outside of her experiment: a story in verse. The poems allow for an omnipotent speaker to provide insight to the language and events of the characters in the story. This functions like Lerner’s in the sense that Limon’s book is assessed by these two poems as “before and after” pieces: a circular resolution that ties the book together.
Upon viewing how the book moves beyond the beginning, Lerner’s last line of the first poem and first line of the second poem have a conversation with the reader that invites the reader to move forward in assessing the violence of language: “The chicken is a little dry and/or you’ve ruined my life” with “I had meant to apologize in advance.” The speaker’s apologetic tone in a way serves as a disclaimer to the immediate violence and parataxis/syntaxis Lerner proposes in his opening poem: diving right into the assessment of language and juxtaposition. This opening transition defines the core of Lerner’s book. Instead of his book flowing through rising and falling action, it flows through parataxis (language next to another) and syntaxis (long and unraveling language). For example, page 38 appears to be a poem of cliché and made phrases, which have juxtaposed lines that propose and answer (parataxis): “‘Have you met my mother?’ I won’t dignify that with an answer” (Lerner 38). Also, some of his references focus on syntaxis: “I am Diego Rodriguez Velazquez. I am a dry/and eviscerated analysis of the Russian Revolution,” “I, Dr. Samuel Johnson, experience moments of such profound alienation…care of my sister, Elisabeth Forster-Nietzsche,” and I am Charlie Chaplin” (Lerner16). This shows confusion and violence in language through description and metaphor. This shapes his book in the ultimate experiment to have juxtaposition frame the violence of language.
Lerner’s shifting characters/speakers propose more confusion, where the linkage of poems becomes an interesting part to analyze. First, the poems do not have titles, just decorative symbols to separate each poem. I think this allows his book to connect by a sort of snowballing effect: where ideas are constantly questioned, and sometimes repeated. Also, it blurs the recurring characters, setting, and time zones. It’s hard to decipher where a poem flashes back to when it projects the future. This also resembles Console’s book, where it shows the failure of autobiography.
Looking closely at the linkage with dedication, the three poems for Benjamin operate on a confusing level as to who Benjamin is…is it Lerner himself? Pages 24-26 are in dedication. The obvious linkage is in the repetition of the last line to flow into the first line of the next poem. These three poems focus on the themes of metaphysics, at times asking rhetorical questions: “How then to justify our margins?” (Lerner 26). My question is, is Lerner asking himself these questions? Is he trying to make sense of the dreams he has and the thoughts he possesses? Is he trying to make sense of his poems? His book? Is this the theme he is trying to create in the book? Is this the ultimate question?
Many of the critiques of Lerner’s book is the attempted 14-line sonnets. I believe this is his experiment: I think Lerner uses a structured form of poetry in order to fully utilize the volta of a sonnet: the turning point of attitude/mood/tone of the piece. Even though his poem estranges from the traditional happy to sad tone of a traditional love sonnet or sonnet of beauty, he confuses the form with his tension of defamiliarized rhetoric and shift in narrative/speakers. However, he uses the traditional form of a sonnet in order to show the obvious violence of language.

Now for Berrigan…

Upon closely reading The Sonnets, I believe the beginning ends when the Roman Numerals start. It seems like the sonnets with titles, such as “Poem In the Traditional Manner,” begin the book off with some clever juxtaposition and parataxis. I am still questioning as to why Berrigan focuses on six Numeraled poems before introducting the titled poems. I’m not sure why they are stuck in the middle of the numerals. Does this reflect his carefully constructed “chaos?” It seems that his poetry flows in a spastic way, mirroring lines from previous poems, only to be incorporated in one fluid sonnet. I feel that Berrigan has a sort of “snowball” effect, where the poems individually represent a chaotic approach to understanding happenings in life, while one sonnet finally puts the lines together in a somewhat understood text. I especially like the links of the line: “On the green a white boy goes” (Berrigan 19). Also, I noticed the structure of his sonnets at the beginning of his book are fluid with no gaps, while nearing the end of the book, his poetry formulates gaps and pauses in the middle of the formal sonnet. This may show the failure of telling a perfect story or autobiography. I also like the idea of incorporating famous poets, actors, and public figures into his work in a way that makes these names familiar to him and the reader. It shows a nice tension between dreams versus reality. I think this is a major theme of his work along with the obvious theme of time. I feel that these two themes create a certain anxiety in his work, playing up the parataxis- having completely unrelated lines/objects/phrases being set side by side in a seemingly put together line of poetry. Quickly, I want to take note of the cover art. I mentioned in class about my first impressions. I believe the art was a representation of Americana, however, I was stumped by the feet with arrows. Here’s a thought: Does “Lord, it is time. Summer was very great./ All sweetly spoke to her of me/about your feet, so delicate, and yet double E!” (Berrigan 4) have any influence on the art? Does the arrow point to the division of how a foot can represent the double E? I see it. Am I crazy? This line is beautiful by the way. I’m curious as to who the her is and why is it positioned so I read that the Lord told her about his feet? Is there religious connotation to this? Does this represent the message Berrigan is trying to explain? :)