Daniel Shelton

Daniel Shelton

Prof. Johnsen

ENG 320A, sec. 1

12/10/15

Lucky Number 7

What characterizes contemporary British and Irish poetry? What characterizes modern British and Irish poetry? Without “enslaving yourself to anyone else’s ideas” is what was asked of us. I will respectfully explain who and why the poets, I’ve chosen, characterizes contemporary and modern British/Irish poetry instead[j1]. In my opinion, there were more poets in the first half of the semester that stand out. Although there were many, out of the many poets we discussed in the beginning of the semester, I chose seven poets; each one helped formed my ideology[j2] of what characterizes contemporary and modern poetry in their own way, with Thomas Hardy and G.M. Hopkins as the foundation; the cornerstone.

In order to identify how each poet has influenced and characterized modern or contemporary poetry, it is necessary to first understand what influenced them; their background. Thomas Hardy was known as an English novelist poet; a Victorian realist, depicting every day and banal activities and experiences, rather than romanticized depictions[j3]. Hardy’s style of writing was influenced by where he grew up, in the English village of Higher Bockhampton in the county of Dorset, one of the poorest and most backward of the counties. The rural life changed very little in hundreds of years, which Hardy explored through the rustic characters in many of his novels. Hardy’s poems dealt with themes of disappointment in love and life, and the “perversity of fate”, a deliberate desire[j4] to behave in an unreasonable or unacceptable way; contrariness. One poem, in particular, “Hap” captivated the “perversity of fate” theme perfectly. Hardy discussed his ideology of religion, which he viewed as “chance”, but unlike other poems, did so with seldom, if any, concentration to the setting. Through less concentration of the setting, it focused the reader’s attention more so on dissecting the relationship Hardy has with God. Hardy’s confusion of religion “opened the window” for a beautifully depiction of other emotions, such as anger and sorrow: “If but some vengeful god would call to me…From up the sky, and laugh: ‘Thou suffering thing,’” (Lines 1-2).

The second part of the foundation of poets, in this paper, G.M. Hopkins, was also an English poet, and among the leading Victorian poets, said to be one of the three or four greatest poets of the Victorian era. What differentiated Hopkins’ style of writing from Hardy’s was his strength in religion, his love for nature, and his rhythmic structure. Hopkins’ religious creativity was the result of his upbringing. Hopkins’ extended family constituted a commitment of an eldest son to religion, language, and art not only possible but also probable. In addition, Hopkins’ mother was a devout High Church Anglican who brought up her children to be religious. Hopkins’ “God’s Grandeur”, is a perfect example of what made his style so different from Hardy’s. With “God’s Grandeur”, the reader sees certainty in where Hopkins stood on religion, and also his admiration for how beautiful his surrounding was. Another beautiful reality of “God’s Grandeur” is the abstract meaning of line 4. Hopkins asks a question to the reader: “…Why do men then now not reck his rod?” When paraphrased, it can be interpreted as: “given the visible glory of God, through nature, why do people fail to give him praise?”

Although “God’s Grandeur is a Petrarch sonnet, a sonnet split in two groups: the “octave” (of 8 lines) and the “sestet” (of 6 lines), for a total of 14 lines, Hopkins’ experimental explorations in prosody and his use of imagery catapulted his own rhythmic structure, sprung rhythm. Sprung rhythm is a poetic rhythm designed to imitate the rhythm of natural speech; structured around feet with a variable number of syllables, generally between one and four syllables per foot, with the stress always falling on the first syllable in a foot[j5].

My choice to have Hardy and Hopkins as the foundation of who characterizes modern/contemporary British/Irish poetry is comparable to the ideology of the “Ying-Yang”; polar opposites working and blending well enough to form a stronger cornerstone, than if singled out. Although extreme differences in styles and beliefs with their writings, they both shared one thing in common, the strength that resonated from their poetry. Another reason why I used Hardy and Hopkins as the foundation, centerpiece, is because of Hopkins religious background. As a Christian writer[j6], it was a beautiful and much appreciated thing to see Hopkins bring attention to God. Whether or not the reader is religious, Hopkins poems can speak to the reader in an empowering way. And on the other hand, for the uncertainty of religion and the indifferent view of nature Hardy’s poetry speaks to the reader, fulfilling both extremes with space for someone to find comfort in the midst of both views and theories[j7] .

Following the foundation provided in the artistry of Hardy and Hopkins, is the Irish poet, W.B. Yeats. Yeats is widely considered to be one of the greatest poets of the 20th century. What stood out to me about Yeats is that although born in Ireland, he lived in London for a portion of his childhood and also kept a permanent home there during the first half of his adult life, Yeats still maintained his cultural roots, featuring Irish legends and heroes in many of his poems. One of Yeats’ many poems that stood out to me is “September 1913”. The tone of “September 1913” is gloomy, no chance of hope or resolution. The phrase, “O’Leary in the grave” was not of someone’s physical death and grave, but of the death of Irish legend, John O’Leary’s heroics. Yeats viewed Irish romantic values and predominance, as he saw it, of a bourgeois materialism, without chance of resurrection at the hands of religion; an Ireland that was built on folk tales and traditional literature. Although, I was not a fan of Yeats’ stance on religion, I respected and found his style of which he wrote “September 1913”. Yeats used biblical and religious phrases and tried to manipulate them against religion as being what killed?what made Ireland the folk-telling place which he knew it as.

In my opinion, you cannot find another author who lived a life full of tragedy, from beginning to end, and be able to convey a glimpse of sorrow in their writing better than Charlotte Mew. An English poet, born into a family of seven children; she was the eldest daughter. While still a child, three of her brothers died. Later, another brother and then a sister were committed to mental hospitals in their twenties, where they would spend the rest of their lives. Leaving only Mew and her sister Anne, they decided to never marry so they wouldn’t pass the traits of mental illness to their children. All that Mew knew since childhood was death, mental illness, loneliness, and disillusionment. Her reality became visible in the themes of her poetry. Mew’s poems were varied: some of them were passionate discussions of faith and the possibility of belief in God; others were proto-modernist in form and atmosphere. Mew would often write from the point of view of a male persona, where she often expressed feelings of alienation from the community in which she lived.

Of the many “war poets” whose poetry we dissected, I chose Wilfred Owen, an English poet, as another leader and representative of what it meant to be a contemporary/modern British/Irish poet. Owen, considered one of the leading poets of World War I, conveyed shocking, realistic horrors of trenches and gas warfare. What fascinated me most of Owen was that he composed nearly all of his poems in slightly over a year. Although his writing career was short lived, due to death in war at 25, he personified a category of poetry so powerfully. An example of his detailed horrors of war is illustrated in “Dulce et Decorum Est”. The title, meaning “It is Sweet and Right”, plays as a sarcastic tone of how Owen viewed war. An example of the vividness used by Owen is seen in lines 1-2: “Bent double, like old beggars under sacks, Knock-kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed through sludge,” nothing of those two lines proved to be anything remotely close of to sweet or right. It is what I enjoyed most of Owen’s poetry, mainly in “Dulce et Decorum Est”, it is the sarcastic, in a slightly humorous, way to basically say (paraphrasing) “Fuck this war!” Even the ending of the poem, “The old Lie; Dulce et Decorum est Pro patria mori.” Which means: “It is a wonderful and great honor to fight and die for your country.” Throughout the entirety of the “Dulce et Decorum Est” Owen illustrates, in great detail, why there was nothing sweet or right of the war, and to end the poem as he did, to me said, in a sarcastic tone, “Although the conditions of him and the other soldiers were unpleasant, it’s okay, because there is nothing more sweet and right to die for your country, right?”

Another dark toned favoring poet that stood out was English poet, Stevie Smith. As mentioned before, Smith’s style was often very dark; characters in her poems were perpetually saying “goodbye” to their friends or welcoming death. However, what differentiated Smith from Mew’s style of tragedy poems was that her poetry also had an eerie levity and can be quite humorous, though it is neither light nor whimsical. An example of such work from Smith is visible in “Not Waving but Drowning”. Smith presents two people who find enjoyment out of adrenaline filled activities, in the case of the poem; the two people appear to have been out in open water, and one dies while in the low temperature water. What I found most fascinating about “Not Waving but Drowning” is abstractness; Smith leaves the poem to be interpreted however the reader wants to view it. It could be said that Smith was ahead of her time with her uniqueness, combining a deceptively simple form and mannered language with serious themes, Smith was able “both to compass the pity and terror of her themes and to respond to them with rueful courage and humor,” stated by a Times Literary Supplement reviewer.

Last, but not least, Louis MacNeice; a British poet, who was part of the generation of the Auden Group, also known as the “Thirties Poets” used a relaxed, yet socially and emotionally aware style of poetry. What was interesting about MacNeice is that he was both Irish and British, but favored his British, and “abandoned” his Irish side[j8]. MacNeice’s work showed a humane position to totalitarianism; a political system where the state recognizes no limits to its authority and strives to regulate every aspect of public and private life wherever feasible.

So again I repeat the question asked to the author: “What characterizes modern/contemporary British/Irish poetry?” Contemporary poetry; poetry that implies of a time period, inconsistent meter, variations upon standard rhyme, abandonment of a classical “musical” style of, an otherwise inconsistent regard for standard poetic structure. And modern poetry; characterized by themes of disillusionment, fragmentation, and alienation from society. My answer is: 1) Thomas Hardy, for his style; the ability, Hardy had, to present despair of love in a beautiful way. 2) Through creativity and innovation, G.M. Hopkins. 3) Loyalty to his motherland in the poetry of Irish poet W.B. Yeats. 4) Tragedy from the works of Charlotte Mew. 5) Bold and sarcastic details of horrors and visualization of war through the English poet Wilfred Owen. 6) Abstract humor in tragedy and the uniqueness of English poet Stevie Smith. 7) And politically and socially aware British poet, Louis MacNeice.

Seven different poets, all with different styles and different views, with one common end result; ability to change, innovate poetry in some way, in their era. Each of the seven poets presented forms of leadership, all in a different way than the other. What is also visible in each of the seven poet’s work is how the influence of their surroundings stood out. The phrase “You are a product of your environment” is best illustrated in each of the seven poets and their works. [j9]

Works Cited

[j1]You show us who, and characterize each poet, but that doesn't quite explain why your choice characterizes British/Irish poetry. Wouldn't you have to show that their qualities show up in additional poets?

[j2]I would say either idea or theory

[j3]Since folklore was on the ground in the class and culture he grew up in, there is little that is (literary) romantic in seeing Tess die at Stonehenge

[j4]Whose desire to behave? Hap's? Hardy's? The speaker?

[j5]Will this interest in form be the source of his influence?

[j6]One could suggest, by the way you talk about Hopkins, that Christian is enough to characterize his religion, not torturing his verse to show a conversion from Anglican to Catholic to Jesuit so that nobody that isn't part of his tribe can respond to him.I like that

[j7]And, since both these poets were influential, even foundational for other poets, most poets would be hedged in by these influences, if only second-hand

[j8]Expressed in "Carrickfergus"

[j9]This reasoning is tricky. Why didn't Hopkins whole family write poetry like him?