From
late 1989 to spring 1992, Clive Wilmer interviewed fellow poets on BBC Radio 3.
At least as edited in Poets Talking: The
‘Poet of the Month’ Interviews from BBC Radio 3 (Carcanet, 1994), the
conversations are less polite and more substantial than most bookchat. Reading
them today is sobering, as ten of the twenty-one poets Wilmer interviewed are
dead, including Thom Gunn, Czesław Miłosz and C.H. Sisson. Sisson (1914-2003),
an English civil servant who worked for the Ministry of Labour for more than
thirty years, speaks in 1989 of Lucretius and his rendering of De Rerum Natura: The Poem on Nature:
“What
I like about Lucretius basically is what I think Dryden said: he tells the
reader nothing but what he thinks. There is this great directness about him, as
indeed there is about Dryden himself…the tone is not that of somebody talking
down to a dumb pupil; it’s very much someone who lives through discoveries for
himself and must communicate it to
somebody.”
Cool
urgency in language, coupled with acuity of vision, is rare. Elsewhere, Sisson
writes with counterintuitive precision: “the avoidance of literature is
indispensable for the man who wants to tell the truth.” He means language as
ornament or palliative. “It needs a poet rather than a mathematician,” he
writes, “to realize vividly the shadowy and elusive connection between word and
fact.” Sisson admired Swift and Wyndham Lewis. His understanding is almost as savage
as theirs, and he has no time for happy talk or soothing words. His calling is ancient
and difficult. He tells Wilmer:
“…we’re
all the servants of language. One
hears so much about personality and people, but these things matter so much
less. The service a poet does is not to his blessed personality or to any other
minor cause. It is to the language. It is what he has done in the end for the
language, which is not an abstract thing: it is the invention of words that
last.”
Wilmer
commiserates with Sisson, contrasting “casual opinion” with “an attempt to say
something fundamental about the human condition in the language of poetry.” The
reader remembers that Sisson also translated Virgil, Catullus, Horace, The Song of Roland, Dante, du Bellay, Racine,
La Fontaine and Heine, when he says:
“I
believe less and less—and this may be just a symptom of old age—in the ability
of one person to understand another or in one’s own ability to find words which
in any way capture what one sees in the world around one. And there are poems
in which I go so far as to say one shouldn’t be writing these poems because
language is not up to it. But of course, it’s all we have, and I would say that
poetry is the nearest thing to human speech we have. That is to say, if human
beings can marginally manage to speak to one another, they surely do that in
great poetry as nowhere else.”
Around
the time of the interview, Sisson was writing “The Trade” What and Who (1994):
“The
language fades. The noise is more
Than
ever it has been before,
But
all the words grow pale and thin
For
lack of sense has done them in.
“What
wonder, when it is for pay
Millions
are spoken every day?
It
is the number, not the sense
That
brings the speakers pounds and pence.
“The
words are stretched across the air
Vast
distances from here to there,
Or
there to here: it does not matter
So
long as there is media chatter.
“Turn
up the sound and let there be
No
talking between you and me:
What
passes now for human speech
Must
come from somewhere out of reach.”
No comments:
Post a Comment