I have never
seen a copy of Aesopic, subtitled Twenty Four Couplets by Anthony Hecht to
Accompany the Thomas Bewick Wood Engravings for Select Fables with an afterword
on the blocks by Philip Hofer. It was published by the Gehenna Press in an
edition of five-hundred in 1967 and today sells for as much as $960. To my
knowledge Hecht never reprinted its contents, though in The Hard Hours (1968) he includes a suite of nine couplets titled “Improvisations on Aesop.” The editor of The
Selected Letters of Anthony Hecht (2013), Jonathan F.S. Post, quotes one of
the Aesopic couplets, “The Nightingale,”
in a footnote to the letter Hecht wrote to Ashley Brown on April 18, 1978:
“What is it
to be free? The unconfined
Lose
purpose, strength, and at the last, the mind.”
Brown had
used the lines as an epigraph to his essay “The Poetry of Anthony Hecht,” published
that year in Ploughshares. In his letter, Hecht relates “The
Nightingale” to his frequent allusions to King
Lear. His poems and Shakespeare play, he writes, “both touch on not so much
madness as the fear of madness.” Hecht had his own Johnsonian anxieties
about his sanity, but the couplet also suggests something about the composition
of poetry and, by implication, all the arts. An “unconfined” poem is likely to
be self-indulgent, flabby, atonal and dull – that is, like most contemporary
poetry. An artist needs something to press against; namely, form. The best
poets press hard and avoid tedium by devising unexpected variations in their
formal patterns.
In a letter
written two months earlier, Hecht replied to John Benson, who had lettered the
word AESOPIC (OED: “of, relating to, or characteristic of Aesop, a semi-legendary
Greek fabulist of the 6th cent. b.c.”) on the title page. Benson had asked
whether Hecht would “consider writing lapidary inscription for a `group of
standing stones.’” Hecht says he finds Benson’s letter “flattering and
bewildering,” adding, “After all it isn’t every day I’m invited to become part
of a literary Mount Rushmore, or given the promise of such marmoreal
perpetuity.” Hecht treats the offer with politely ironic detachment, noting
that such engraved texts – “the pious platitudes on post offices and court
houses, or else the mortuary inscriptions `That teach the rustic moralist to die’” – generally adhere to the “convention of their sentiments.” Hecht might
have cited Dr. Johnson in the Life: “In
lapidary inscriptions a man is not upon oath."
Hecht here reminds
me of my involvement a decade ago with an American poet who died a few years
back. Let me explain. He was renowned for drunken, online tantrums which often,
in a morbid sort of way, were more interesting than his poems. I received several
of his overheated emails, written in varying states of coherence. All smelled
of Smirnoff’s. In his final collection, The
Darkness and the Light (2001), Hecht included a two-part poem titled “Lapidary Inscription with Explanatory Note.” Here is the first part:
“There was
for him no more perfect epitaph
Than this from Shakespeare: `Nothing in his life
Became him
like his leaving it.’ All those
Who knew him
wished the son of a bitch in hell,
Despised his
fawning sycophancy, smug
Self-satisfaction,
posturing ways and pig-
Faced beady
little eyes, his trite
Mind, and
attested qualities of a shit,
And felt the
world immeasurably improved
Right from the very moment
that he left it.”
No comments:
Post a Comment