Failure in "Armor and Flesh"

Mendi Lewis Obadike's first book of poetry, "Armor and Flesh" is transparent in the themes it attempts to tackle - sexual and racial identity, the battle within the self between love, apathy and anger, articulation and silence. The speaker in Obadike's book is "wanting softness, but "needing hardness." I feel this book is born of trauma, and regardless of whether it is truly an autobiography, is clearly confessional in nature. This is evident not only because of the consistent use of the I, but also the nature of poems, such as "Gassed," which seem only concerned in providing a background (of life events) in which other poems can be considered, as in, the weight of a particular piece cannot survive, but this may act as something as an unconscious influence. Many of the shorter pieces in this book seem far from complete, and in fact, they act more like small connector blocks to drive home the issues of larger more complex ones. For example, "How She Figures," while yes, incredibly vague, could easily attach itself to poems considering the women of Haiti, Dominican Republic, and Caracas, or the confessional pieces involving the inability to speak, or the pieces involving racism. I think "Tug of War" works in much the same way, as a poem standing on one leg, which has no particular context, but existiing as an elaboration on other pieces. "Strategy" also applies here ("She sneezes/on the chance/someone will bless her"). When I consider that for this class, we are studying how a book is created, thematically and structurally, I see Obadike's "connectors" as immature and not quite thought out, perhaps poems which were started but never finished, yet could have been stanzas in other pieces.

It is immediately noticeable that Obedike lacks a mature and refreshing language with which to tackle these issues. There are perhaps a few lines which I might not have heard before, but certainly I have seen all of her forms before. She relies on the audience's cultural connection with her experiences, such as our knowledge of racism in the South, the Rodney King decision, a cursory knowledge of the hardship ridden lives of Haitian women, to engage us, rather than attempting to redefine our perceptions, deepen them. Also, her extensive use of the shadow poem reveals to me that she is more comfortable working with the language and form of others, rather than inventing her own (not to mention her use of song lyrics). It is a shame to me, that in trying to articulate a unique and personal experience, one which, in its human suffering and identity confusion, many could emotionally connect with, she makes little attempt to confront cliche. An amazing example of this is "Excess Makeup Reverie" where she speaks of the woman as wearing a makeup mask. Although, I am unaware of whether her work is mostly cliche, or just unoriginal, or maybe didn't go through enough revision.

This book was disappointing, but I feel I have learned, in a sense, what not to do with a book of poems. How blatant connections and language can ruin the mystery and complexity of poetry, and how shadow poems can be used as a crutch.