On Saturday I saw the first hummingbird of the season in our front garden. I’ve counted eight butterfly species there this summer and found a monarch chrysalis hanging from a tropical milkweed plant. Brown and green anoles have densely colonized the garden, which has never been so lush.
Because of the ample
lighting I usually read while seated on the couch by the oversized front window.
The garden is a comfort. Framed by the window, it’s like a slow-motion movie. The
appeal is less aesthetic than – what? Metaphysical? I like to be reminded of life’s
profusion and persistence, the opposite of sterility. There’s little difference
between “weed” and “flower.” I like Louise Bogan’s endorsement of weeds in “The
Sudden Marigolds” (A Poet’s Prose: Selected Writings of Louise Bogan,
2005):
“What was the matter with
me, that daisies and buttercups made hardly any impression at all. . . . As a
matter of fact, it was weeds that I felt closest to and happiest about; and
there were more flowering weeds, in those days, than flowers in gardens. . . . Yes:
weeds: jill-over-the-ground and tansy and the exquisite chicory (in the terrains
vagues) and a few wild flowers: lady’s slipper and the arbutus my mother
showed me how to find, under the snow, as far back as Norwich. Solomon’s seal
and Indian pipe. Ferns. Apple blossoms.”
A reminder that poets
ought to know the names of wildflowers, according to Seamus Heaney. Not every
poet would agree. I was looking for something in Zibaldone, Giacomo Leopardi’s
2,500-page commonplace book kept between 1817 and 1832, when I happened on a
passage from April 1826 that only Leopardi could have written:
“Go into a garden of
plants, grass, flowers. No matter how lovely it seems. Even in the mildest
season of the year. You will not be able to look anywhere and not find
suffering. That whole family of vegetation is in a state of souf-france [suffering],
each in its own way
to some degree. Here a rose is attacked by the sun, which has given it life; it
withers, languishes, wilts. There a lily is sucked
cruelly by a bee, in its most sensitive, most life-giving parts.”
Leopardi’s understanding of biology is limited but his Zeitgeist
remains consistent. He goes on for a full page turning a mini-Eden into a raging
Hell:
“The spectacle of such abundance of life when you first go
into this garden lifts your spirits. And that is why you think it is a joyful
place. But in truth this life is wretched and unhappy, every garden is a vast
hospital (a place much more deplorable than a cemetery), and if these beings
feel, or rather, were to feel, surely not being would be better for them than
being.”
It's almost as though Leopardi had read the crackpot bestseller The Secret Life of Plants (1973) by Peter Tompkins and Christopher Bird. I first encountered Leopardi more than half a century ago in Samuel Beckett’s Proust (1931). The Irishman refers to the Italian’s “wisdom that consists not in the satisfaction but in the ablation of desire.” Beckett quotes two lines from “A se stesso” (“To himself”): “In noi di cari inganni, / Non che la speme, il desiderio e ’spento.” (“Not only our hope / but our desire for dear illusions is gone.” Trans. Jonathan Galassi, Canti, 2010).
Melville, too, found a
kindred spirit in Leopardi. In his 18,000-line Clarel: A Poem and Pilgrimage
in the Holy Land (1876), Part I, Section 14, “In the Glen,” he writes:
“If Savonarola’s zeal
devout
But with the fagot’s flame
died out;
If Leopardi, stoned by
Grief,
A young St. Stephen of the
Doubt
Might merit well the
martyr’s leaf.”
[Zibaldone was edited by Michael Caesar and Franco D’Intino, translated into English by seven translators, and published by Farrar, Straus and Giroux in 2013.]
No comments:
Post a Comment