I that knew what harbour'd in that head

Yesterday I bought Bring Up The Bodies - Hilary Mantel's sequel to her 2009 smash hit Wolf Hall - and so far it's just as unputdownable as the original. She continues the story of Thomas Cromwell's ascendancy in the court of Henry VIII, with the same wild energy and gorgeous embodiments. See James Wood's review of both novels for a much better overview than I can give here. This is more by way of an introduction to this weekend's poem.

When I was reading Wolf Hall, you might remember, I posted a poem by Thomas Wyatt, a minor character but (at the time) a major poet. The other major poet from the early sixteenth-century was Henry Howard, the Earl of Surrey, who died in 1547 at the venerable age of 30. Wyatt and Surrey were both published in Tottel's Miscellany, an anthology important in collecting and shaping the poetic experience of the early English Renaissance. They were precursors to Sidney and Spenser, who in turn precursed Shakespeare, Marlowe and Jonson. This poem is Surrey's sonnet on the death of Wyatt - a touching tribute, and a fitting way to mark the lives of both. Fans of Midsummer Nights Dream should enjoy the reference to Pyramus and Thisbe in the final line.  

Divers thy death do diversely bemoan:
Some, that in presence of thy livelihed
Lurked, whose breasts envy with hate had swoln,
Yield Cæsar's tears upon Pompeius' head. 
Some, that watched with the murd'rer's knife,
With eager thirst to drink thy guiltless blood, 
Whose practice brake by happy end of life, 
With envious tears to hear thy fame so good.
But I, that knew what harbour'd in that head ;
What virtues rare were tempered in that breast ;
Honour the place that such a jewel bred, 
And kiss the ground whereas the corpse doth rest ; 
     With vapour'd eyes : from whence such streams availe,
     As Pyramus did on Thisbe's breast bewail. 

Wind, willows and water

Among my favourite novels are two animal tales: Wind in the Willows (1908) and Watership Down (1972). Both involve animals whose lives unfold in the English countryside; animals with powers of speech and reason and even wit. Both are charming books, but only in one does the charm arise from watching animals be animals. In Watership Down, the rabbits are rabbits. In Wind in the Willows the animals are arguably humans.

Rat and Mole, Badger and Toad certainly have animal qualities like heightened sense of smell and the homing instinct, but they are essentially Edwardian gentlefolk living fairly gracious riparian lives. They all wear clothes and walk upright (Toad seems to have hair); they inhabit a carefully stratified social world, and affect the diction of characters from Wodehouse and Waugh. They buy their food from shops; they eat (at tables or in wicker chairs) sumptuous breakfasts washed down with ale and coffee; delicious al fresco luncheons; and suppers accompanied by cheeses and wines. There’s one scene that’s always troubled me: Rat and Mole sit at ease by the fire in Rat’s bijou sitting room; they are apparently alone in the house when ‘dinner is served.’ By whom? This is not the only passage that suggests servants are one of the several luxuries these mild-mannered beasts enjoy. In a wonderful 2009 article Rosemary Hill regards the book as a sigh of nostalgia for the lost world of Edwardian suburbia, when boating and picnicking filled the long days of the leisured classes. The story, too, turns on behaviour more proper to adult humans than rats and toads: dangerous addictions and excesses, fraud, theft, imprisonment, escape, and in the end, violent overthrow of interlopers. Charmed though I always am by this book (Kenneth Grahame’s prose is radiant) it’s certainly not because it offers any real insight into animal life.

The rabbits of Watership, on the other hand, are wild animals whose lives are governed by weather, terrain, predation, and instinct. They speak, but they speak a language called Lapine. They have social structures, but these resemble the structures that abide in real warrens, according to Richard Adams’ careful research. The human world, and even other animals, are utterly strange to them. They are a band of brothers who come to value each other deeply, but they never transcend their animal desire to fight each other in mating season, or their animal pragmatism about defacating and breeding. (One can’t imagine the genteel Rat even excusing himself to use the lavatory, and certainly not courting a lady-rat; he and his friends are indubitably bachelors.) Inhabiting the rabbits’ world, far from evoking nostalgia, makes you feel how alien and menacing humans and ‘man things’ are to wild creatures.

Yet, without disowning this animality, Watership Down is an intensely political novel as well. It’s about freedom; about the treacherous compromise between safety and liberty. In their travels, Hazel and Fiver and their companions come across two other warrens: one is the Brave New World of rabbitry, where the rabbits are sleek sophisticates who engage in a conspiracy of glazed silence about their mortal danger. The other is 1984. A highly militarised warren run by a lapine tyrant, Efrafa is full of pitiful creatures, brutally oppressed in the name of safety. Hazel’s band comes to embody the perils and the promise of true freedom.

The Willows are a world away from such political concerns. The animals’ highest goods and deepest joys come from eating, drinking, communing, and resting. Their freedom is simply the fresh air in which they pursue their simple pleasures. Looked at one way, that makes them just the parasitic aristos for whom they stand in. Looked at another, it makes them creatures in the best, blessed sense. 

All leaflife and starshower

A couple of weeks ago I came across this extraordinary little poem by the Russian poet Osip Mandelstam, whose translater is the American poet Christian Wiman - of whom, more soon.

In 1934, Mandelstam was arrested for writing an epigram critical of Stalin. He and his wife were exiled, then later given a reprieve. He wrote that only in Russia was poetry taken seriously: "Is there anywhere else where poetry is so common a motive for murder?" During the Great Purge, he was again arrested for anti-Soviet views, and sent to a Siberian concentration camp where, in December 1938, he died.

This poem was written on 4 May, 1937. It's one of the best expressions I've ever seen of the fleeting fitful beauty of being alive, the futility and absolute urgency of trying to say what it is. It has added plangency given Mandelstam only lived another nineteen months. This poem, ‘And I was Alive,’ is going straight to the top shelf of poems that help me live. 

And I was alive in the blizzard of the blossoming pear,
Myself I stood in the storm of the bird–cherry tree.
It was all leaflife and starshower, unerring, self–shattering power,
And it was all aimed at me.

What is this dire delight flowering fleeing always earth?
What is being? What is truth?

Blossoms rupture and rapture the air,
All hover and hammer,
Time intensified and time intolerable, sweetness raveling rot.
It is now. It is not.

 

Not unwelcome waves the wood

It's undoubtedly time for some Autumn poetry. There's Keats, of course, and Shelley and Blake. There's Rossetti and Browning and Stevenson and Frost. Almost everyone who's put poem to paper has written about this stirring season. One of the lesser known offerings comes from eighteenth-century Scottish minister and editor, John Logan. His ecstatic poem (the full version contains no fewer than 26 exclamation marks), "A visit to the country in Autumn" contains some of the cliches of Autumn, but has I think some fine and lovely phrases, and deserves a place at Autumn's altar. These are five of its nine stanzas.

'Tis passed! No more the summer blooms!     
Ascending in the rear, 
Behold congenial Autumn comes,     
The sabbath of the year! 
What time thy holy whispers breathe, 
The pensive evening shade beneath,     
And twilight consecrates the floods; 
While Nature strips her garment gay, 
And wears the vesture of decay, 
O, let me wander through the sounding woods.  

Ah! well known streams! Ah! wonted groves,     
Still pictured in my mind! 
Oh! Sacred scene of youthful loves,     
Whose image lives behind! 
While sad I ponder on the past, 
The joys that must no longer last;     
The wild flower strown on Summer’s bier, 
The dying music of the grove, 
And the last elegies of love,  
Dissolve the soul and draw the tender tear!

Alas! misfortune's cloud unkind      
May summer soon o’ercast;  
And cruel fate's untimely wind      
All human beauty blast!  
The wrath of Nature smites our bowers,  
And promised fruits, and cherish'd flowers,     
The hopes of life in embryo sweeps;  
Pale o’er the ruins of his prime,  
And desolate before his time,  
In silence sad the mourner walks and weeps!   

Relentless power! whose fated stroke      
O’er wretched man prevails!  
Ha! love's eternal chain is broke,      
And friendship's covenant fails!  
Upbraiding forms! a moment's ease  
O memory! how shall I appease      
The bleeding shade, the unlaid ghost?  
What charm can bind the gushing eye?  
What voice console the incessant sigh,  
And everlasting longings for the lost?  

Yet not unwelcome waves the wood  
That hides me in its gloom,  
While lost in melancholy mood      
I muse upon the tomb.  
Their chequered leaves the branches shed,  
Whirling in eddies o’er my head,      
They sadly sigh, that Winter’s near:  
The warning voice I hear behind,  
That shakes the wood without a wind,  
And solemn sounds the death-bell of the year.

Avatars

I'm not much given to personal vanity, but a traumatic passport photo has unmasked a hidden streak of narcissism. It made me think about how in this digital age, where private, public and celebrated are on a compressed continuum, we all exercise control over our image. We painstakingly construct online personas (I'm doing it now) and make our happy snaps the avatars onto which we project our constructed selves. We press our social intercourse between the leaves of a book of faces.

It also made me think about a line I gleaned from somebody else's online persona, that the self has replaced the soul in modern culture. This goes beyond social media. It's about the way the good life has come to mean organic food, exercise and calorie counting, renewable energy, work-life balance, self-help in its manifold forms. The good life used to be much more to do with the ground of being than the mechanics of living. And almost nothing to do with faces.

So, as photos become the avatars of our constructed selves, our constructed selves become the avatars of our neglected souls: the projection of who we would like to be onto what we think the world demands of us. A bad passport photo becomes far more traumatic than it would be if I accepted that it was not, nor was ever meant to be, a window on my soul.