Rage against the tyrant July 6, 2012
Because the poem she posted today was like a shot gun blast
to my head, I’m tempted to defend myself against it as I decipher the poem.
Yet once more, I vow to keep free of overt editorializing since
I have in the many other hundreds of pages of this journal, more than enough
space to tell my side of the story. All that represents her side in these pages
comes from my interpretating her poems as honestly as possible, trying to
convey what she is trying to say in order to create some kind of balance.
Besides, she is not completely wrong in some of her claims.
What stands out most immediately is her use of the pronoun “they”
instead of “you,” expanding the scope of the poem beyond one villain, although
it is clear from the litany of lines the poem is aimed at me and is in reaction
to things that have gone on beyond our literary exchange, most notably my talk
about her with our former temporary boss.
The other oddity is her use of rime, giving the poem a
military cadence, hammering in each point she is trying to make, claiming “we”
or “they” have caused her heart to pound (no doubt in fear or panic) which
drains her energy as if “we” or “they” want to steal it.
In this poem, she is defying her attacker, saying he can cause
her heart to beat harder, drain her energy, cause her to lose sleep, cause her
to distrust people she previously trusted and reek other havoc on her, try to
shut her down, and beat her until she bleeds, misread her honesty, dismantle
her sanity, spread gossip about her till “we” or “they” chokes ourselves to
death with the hope someone will believe them, spin tales and pout when life deceives
us, yet “we” or “they” cannot reach her soul or “even come near it.”
She warns that there will be a reckoning although “we” or “they”
won’t heard it as “we” or “they” pretend righteousness “we” or “they” don’t
have a right to claim.
Then she alludes to the old children’s rhyme about sticks
and stone never hurting her, claiming “we” or “they” won’t hurt her with a
stone. This is also an allusion to the Biblical verse about “he who is without
sin cast the first stone,” a stone thrown, she claims in anger or fear or a “narcissistic
act of self-deception.”
Still more defiantly, she points out that when salvation
comes “we” or “they” will be too deaf (perhaps deaf, dumb and blind) to be
aware of it.
Then, in a gesture that hints of kindness, but also still
bitter, she wishes me, we or they luck in that we or they might find
redemption.
There is nothing subtle in this poem, despite her great
ability at using language. This is pure reaction, pure rage, mingled with a lot
of pain, and an intense sense of betrayal – she is clearly uncertain yet who to
blame (thus the plural pronouns) or who to trust.
Taken in context with some of her previously posted poem,
this poem shows real shock at the events that occurred, considering her
previous poems had become more reflective, with a more peaceful and thoughtful
frame of mind, from which she got jolted. This poem is both a reflection of her
anguish and rage, but more importantly and expression of her defiance. She will
not let these things destroy her and will not give the culprit the satisfaction
of knowing just how deeply she has been hurt. She will retain her soul and her
dignity.
Comments
Post a Comment