The piercing chill i feel analysis

WEEKLY OBJECTIVES

After this week, you should be able to...

· Define imagery as it relates to literature

· Recognize imagery in poetry

· Explain symbolism in poetry

· Differentiate between natural and conventional symbolism

· Practice college-level writing with appropriate focus, development, organization, and mechanics

· Practice college-level research & citation

What is imagery?

–

When you consider the term imagery, you might only think of images that you perceive with your eyes. However, the literary term refers to words and phrases (often figurative language) that appeal to the five senses:

–

1. Taste

2. Smell

3. Touch

4. Sight

5. Hearing

An Example in Poetry Let us consider for a moment how powerful sensory detail can be in a poem… how imagery can convey much more than physical sensations, but can reveal a flood of emotional associations. Consider this example, where a comb initially conveys a sense of touch:

THE PIERCING CHILL I FEEL By Taniguchi Buson

The piercing chill I feel: my dead wife's comb, in our bedroom, under my heel. . .

Buson could have made the entire poem more ghostly and abstract in order to to convey a sense of loss. In fact, the piercing chill in the first line and title are quite generic. We know what cold feels like and we have experienced pain, so we understand this chill to be a cold that pierces (not literally), but one that goes beyond the surface and perhaps wounds him internally. It is familiar: there are many instances in the human effort to communicate negative emotion when cold and pain are used together.

These last lines,

my dead wife's comb, in our bedroom, under my heel. . . are what really make this poem worthy of being called a poem. They take the familiar ambiguity of the first lines and transport us to a unique image that amplifies the emotion being expressed in these words. The reader’s journey through the poem’s familiar language is disrupted by a more concrete object: the “dead wife’s comb,” much in the same way that speaker’s journey through the bedroom is disrupted when he encounters the object under his foot. We almost experience the same type of surprise that the speaker experiences by stepping on the comb! Furthermore, the comb is loaded with potential associations that help us identify what the speaker is feeling or precisely how he is “chilled.” This is an object that once passed through his living wife’s hair. It is a reminder of the life that is now gone-- of the movement of his wife’s hand as it guided the comb. The “heel” is of course the other part of the image. The speaker doesn’t merely see or pick up the comb, but he steps on it before he otherwise notices it. This might say something about the speaker’s disposition. He is perhaps either numb or beginning to distance himself from the loss. If nothing else, this object takes him by surprise, the way the full comprehension of loss is surprising. The comb also has the effect of “piercing” him in a more literal sense. Add to this the understanding that the heel (since Achilles and the Roman poet, Statius) has become a symbol of vulnerability. It is easy to see why imagery is able to enrich language and poetry in particular. Without the comb, the poet’s “piercing chill” won’t penetrate a reader. Another Example and How to Make Sense of It

Consider Ezra Pound’s short poem:

In a Station of the Metro: The apparition of these faces in the crowd; Petals on a wet, black bough.

Like the last poem about the comb and the dead wife, there is a certain emotional disposition that is revealed through the poet’s use of imagery. The first word that perhaps gets our attention is “apparition.” The speaker says that certain faces in the crowd create this apparition. At first we may read this to mean that the faces are ghost-like. Perhaps this speaker is somewhat haunted by them. However, we can take the word to mean that the faces exist only on the level of perception: or that they have simply appeared within this crowd. Perhaps the poet means to have the word suggest all three meanings. The next image is the most concrete or objective: “petals on a wet, black bough.” One way to make sense of this image is to consider what we associate with petals, the feeling of wetness, the color black, and the bough of a tree. Do we also associate certain feelings or experiences with subways and crowds? Next, we can consider parallels between the various images in the poem. Is one image supposed to represent or explain another image? Are the petals another “image” of those faces or do they convey an emotional association with those faces? What do petals suggest to you, when coupled with the faces in a crowd? Is there a connection between the image of a tree branch and a subway? The black bough (a large, main branch rising from the trunk of a tree) seems to parallel the branching tunnels or tracks of the metro. Even the black seems to parallel the dark that the train must travel through. However, another parallel might be better if we pay attention to the parallel structure between the two prepositional phrases; it is the crowd that contains the faces in the first clause, and the bough that holds the petals in the second clause. So while the petals somehow explain the faces (if we hold to the parallel phrasing), the bough explains something about the crowd. Perhaps the crowd in the subway becomes an image of the ever growing and changing organism that is human society. Together, individual lives form a great, dark tree and our faces linger like leaves from its branches. Suggested in all of this, of course, is a sense of mortality. The passing of time and death is not only seen in the blackness and apparitions in the poem, but also in the suggestion of fallen leaves. Since the petals are "on a wet, black bough," it would appear they have detached from the higher, thinner branches and stuck to the wetness of this main branch. The tree will renew itself with new faces in the Spring, but there is a cycle of loss as lives pass from this world or simply from the speaker's sight. In the end we know, if nothing else, that the poem intends that the imagery of leaves and a tree suggest something about the Metro Station and the faces in it. There is a lot of room in between for explanation, so you can have fun figuring out what makes the most sense to you! Ultimately, while reader's interpretations will vary, the imagery and the Metro station will necessitate a great deal of commonality between the better interpretations of the poem. We might all come close to sharing similar reactions if we all read the poem with the same attention to detail. These details include both those in the poem and the details of our own experiences-- our time spent with actual trees and petals, for instance. About “In a Station of the Metro,” Pound himself says: “I dare say it is meaningless unless one has drifted into a certain vein of thought. In a poem of this sort one is trying to record the precise instant when a thing outward and objective transforms itself, or darts into a thing inward and subjective.” If you want to explore more commentary on poem and the image, see the following page: http://www.english.uiuc.edu/maps/poets/m_r/pound/metro.htm (Links to an external site.) If nothing else, a quick review of this web page will demonstrate that a lot can be intelligently written about even a very short poem. Imagists and Imagisim It's also useful to note that one particular school of poets earned their name by further emphasizing imagery in their works. According to Gale’s glossary of literary terms (found at http://www.gale.com/free_resources/glossary/index.htm (Links to an external site.)) Imagism was an:

“English and American Poetry movement that flourished between 1908 and 1917. The Imagists used precise, clearly presented images in their works. They also used common, everyday speech and aimed for conciseness, concrete imagery, and the creation of new rhythms. Participants in the Imagist movement included Ezra Pound, H. D. (Hilda Doolittle), and Amy Lowell, among others."

You can explore more information about these poets by starting at this website: http://www.imagists.org/ (Links to an external site.)

Rhetoric: Anti-imagery

The antithesis to imagery in poetry, is rhetoric (when you think of rhetoric, you might think of a lecture, sermon, or person telling you things with a megaphone). A rhetorical poem depends more on abstracts and ideas in order to make meaning. I’m not suggesting that rhetoric and imagery can’t coexist in the same poem. However, if the poem relies more heavily on rhetoric, we would classify it as a rhetorical poem. Take a look at a small excerpt from Kahlil Gibran’s The Prophet:

“When love beckons to you follow him, Though his ways are hard and steep. And when his wings enfold you yield to him, Though the sword hidden among his pinions may wound you. And when he speaks to you believe in him, Though his voice may shatter your dreams as the north wind lays waste the garden. For even as love crowns you so shall he crucify you. Even as he is for your growth so is he for your pruning.”

In his writing, Gibran uses images, but the emotional weight or power of the poem is not tied to them. Rather, they serve multiple understandings about the nature of love. The poetry is more clearly about ideas and instruction. It tells us many things, but doesn’t so much seek to paint a vivid picture in our minds. We have to think about love in this passage, and in the end we see an explanation of how love seems to work. While there are brief glimpses of wings, gardens, and a sword, these images play second fiddle (pardon the cliché) to the rhetorical instructions of the poet.

If you liked the excerpt from The Prophet, you can find the entire poem here: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/gibran/prophet/prophet.htm (Links to an external site.)

I should emphasize that there is an advantage of using imagery in any written work or performance in words. Consider the following quotes from public speeches:

Ronald Reagan: "'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still." (Imagine if Reagan had simply said: America should be strong, an example to all, successful, and open to all people-- it doesn't quite have the same power does it?) Martin Luther King, Jr.:

"Let freedom ring from the snowcapped Rockies of Colorado!

Let freedom ring from the curvaceous peaks of California!

But not only that; let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia!

Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee!

Let freedom ring from every hill and every molehill of Mississippi. From every mountainside, let freedom ring."

(Imagine if King had simply said: let Colorado be more free, let California be more free, let Georgia be more free... you would have no sense of the resounding echo of freedom's bell, or of the pinnacle of freedom as suggested by majestic mountains!)

A writer or speaker who relies on imagery depends on the unique details that surround him in the physical environment and therefore has a good chance of communicating something fresh and realistic. Images also seem to impact readers on a more visceral level. Things we can see, taste, hear, feel, or touch convey not only the specific thing that is being described, but also a rich set of associations in the reader. This complicates the writing and increases its effect. In poetry, this type of complexity is even more pronounced. Rhetoric, on the other hand, requires contemplation and more work on the part of the reader’s mind. While some rhetoric can be very stimulating, there is also the chance that rhetoric can convey stale thinking or ideas that are too familiar. An inexperienced poet or writer runs a better chance of writing bad poetry if he or she sticks chiefly to rhetoric. Take for instance a few beginning lines about love. If we are to communicate our thinking about love, we might rely on something familiar to convey love’s significance:

I love you more than words can say

In this case, “more than words can say” is a cliché and it is a self-defeating statement. It initially sounds romantic, but it is so familiar that it seems lazy. This statement is also an apology: “my words cannot attempt to express this.” Yes, but if you are trying to write poetry, you have to at least impress your reader with the effort. Compare the above failure to what Pablo Neruda states at the end of one of his love sonnets (Sonnet XVII (100 Love Sonnets, 1960):

so intimate that your hand upon my chest is my hand, so intimate that when I fall asleep it is your eyes that close.

There is some rhetoric found in the statement “so intimate that…” However, the power of these words is truly solidified in the imagery of the hand on the chest and the eyes closing in sleep. It is a wonderful confusion of the imagery that truly suggests intimacy, that the speaker has become so entangled with this lover that they are no longer separate beings at all. If Neruda had relied purely on rhetoric, he might have said: “so intimate I can no longer distinguish you from me.” Thankfully, Neruda understood the power of imagery.

I’ll leave the last words on imagery to my favorite poet, Larry Levis:

“The image draws on, comes out of, the "world of the senses" and, therefore, originates in a world that passes, that is passing, every moment. Could it be, then, that every image, as image, has this quality of poignancy and vulnerability since it occurs, and occurs so wholeheartedly, in time? […] In truth we pass, and the Image becomes more moving to us because it remains and at the same time records something that passes. The images we write hold still, and their stillness is curious because it reminds us that, someday, up ahead, at the end of the story, completion is inevitable but incomprehensible. Freud called it ‘the riddle of death,’ but a riddle is also an image, a stillness.” (from “Some Notes on Grief and the Image”)

If you are absolutely confused by what Levis said in the previous passage, think about some old home movies you might have seen or old photographs you looked at of your childhood. Those images record time and become still. They do not change or grow with you. Have you ever looked at such images and felt a bit sad? As if something along the way was lost or is still being lost? I think this is initially what Levis is talking about. This is part of what makes the image powerful in poetry as well.

Symbolism

Our textbook has a very nice definition of symbolism, but I’ll reproduce it here for convenience:

“[…] an image so loaded with significance that it is not simply literal, and it does not simply stand for something else; it is both itself and something else that it richly suggests, a manifestation of something too complex or too elusive to be otherwise revealed."

This can apply to images in literature, film, or even in physical reality. For instance, you might buy roses from a nursery to express something specific:

–Red roses– symbolic of love and respect

–Pale pink roses- symbolic of grace and joy

–Orange roses – symbolic of fascination

–Pale peach roses- symbolic of modesty

If you want to be more certain about what you say with roses, you might check out Morrison Garden’s handy table at http://www.rkdn.org/roses/colors.asp (Links to an external site.)

Another useful distinction is made in our textbook: there are natural symbols and conventional symbols. What are natural symbols? Usually, these are objects occurring in nature that often transcend cultural boundaries. Very often, they can have the same meaning around the world.

In the table below, I have added some images of natural symbols along with their usual meanings provided by http://www.symbolism.org (Links to an external site.):

Forest: mental darkness, chaos

“The forest is the realm of the psyche and a place of testing and initiation, of unknown perils and darkness. Bettelheim elaborates […]: ‘Since ancient times the near impenetrable forest in which we get lost has symbolized the dark, hidden, near-impenetrable world of our unconscious. If we have lost the framework which gave structure to our past life and must now find our way to become ourselves, and have entered this wilderness with an as yet undeveloped personality, when we succeed in finding our way out we shall emerge with a much more highly developed humanity.’”

Mountain: stability, spiritual ascent

“Throughout history, mountains have symbolized constancy, eternity, firmness and stillness. Mountain tops, notes J.C. Cooper, "are associated with sun, rain and thunder gods and, in early traditions of the feminine godhead, the mountain was the earth and female, with the sky, clouds, thunder and lightning as the fecundating male." On the spiritual level, observes Cooper, ‘mountain tops represent the state of full consciousness.’ Cooper notes that pilgrimages up sacred mountains symbolize aspiration and renunciation of worldly desires.”

Rain: fertility, renewal

“Rain has a primary symbolism as a fertilizing agent. It represents a descent of the heavenly influences and symbolizes penetration, both as fertility and spiritual revelation. In this sense, notes J.C. Cooper, rain joins in the symbolism of the sun's rays and light. All the sky gods fertilize the earth by rain. In Aeschylus, it is written that ‘The rain, falling from the sky, impregnates the earth, so that she gives birth to plants and grain for man and beast.’”

Valley: security, shelter, cultivation

“In J.C. Cooper's An Illustrated Encyclopaedia of Traditional Symbols, it is noted that the valley represents ‘life, fertility, cultivation, flocks and the sheltering feminine aspect.’ In Chinese symbolism the valley is the yin, shadowy state, with the mountain as the yang and sunny state. In stories the valley has symbolized the peaceful and restful area reached after crossing the mountains and the deserts. A valley is the destination of the wagon trains of American western films. Valleys and the lush vegetation within them provide the places where new lives can begin again, where a man can establish a family.”

More on Symbolism

Conventional Symbols:
As opposed to natural symbols, conventional symbols develop through the agreement of a certain group of people. Even flowers, which seem to be very natural, organic things are discussed as conventional symbols, because a more specific meaning is created within certain social contexts. This makes the symbolism less universal. Readily apparent conventional symbols would be national flags (think of all those stars and what they represent on the U.S. flag, for instance), wedding rings or a crucifix. The specificity of these symbols can be readily understood; how many of us know what the Islamic crescent moon and star represent? An explanation of one conventional symbol, the crescent moon and star:

Christine Huda Dodge, writer and Muslim educator, explains the crescent and star this way: "For hundreds of years, the Ottoman Empire ruled over the Muslim world. After centuries of battle with Christian Europe, it is understandable how the symbols of this empire became linked in people's minds with the faith of Islam as a whole.

Based on this history, many Muslims reject using the crescent moon as a symbol of Islam. The faith of Islam has historically had no symbol, and many refuse to accept what is essentially an ancient pagan icon. It is certainly not in uniform use among Muslims. “It wasn't until the Ottoman Empire that the crescent moon and star became affiliated with the Muslim world. When the Turks conquered Constantinople (Istanbul) in 1453, they adopted the city's existing flag and symbol. Legend holds that the founder of the Ottoman Empire, Osman, had a dream in which the crescent moon stretched from one end of the earth to the other. Taking this as a good omen, he chose to keep the crescent and make it the symbol of his dynasty. There is speculation that the five points on the star represent the five pillars of Islam, but this is pure conjecture. The five points were not standard on the Ottoman flags.” – from http://islam.about.com/library/weekly/aa060401a.htm (Links to an external site.) One more thing to make this distinction between natural and conventional symbols clear: can a bridge be a natural symbol? Our first response may be that it can’t be natural. It’s man made, of course! It must be a conventional symbol!

However, if it becomes universally respected as a symbol of connections between people or places, couldn’t this be a natural symbol? After all, the bridge has been around a long time and its basic utility makes it an easily identifiable symbol across cultural boundaries. Ultimately, the distinction between the two types of symbols will probably be made depending on how the bridge is being used. If we are discussing the Golden Gate bridge as a symbol of western beauty and human achievement, we are certainly talking about a conventional symbol. If, however, the symbolism of the bridge is to be understood in a more universal way, we may be leaning towards a more natural understanding of this symbol that would be understood regardless of culture or a more specific context. Plus or Minus? Natural or Conventional? Another example to help us distinguish between these two types of symbols is given to us by Dennis: F Kinlaw : “Natural symbols are symbols whose bases are not in the decisions of men. They instance in themselves the things symbolized. By simply being what they are they speak of more. The plus sign, like the minus sign or that for division, is arbitrary. The person unacquainted with mathematics would find nothing in the symbols to suggest their meaning. The plus sign (+) in another context though would serve as a natural symbol. It could symbolize an intersection, a crossroads, a place of decision. That meaning is reflected in the nature of the symbol.” Crossroads, in this case, work in the same manner as the bridge. It is hard to conceive of an intersection unless we imagine manmade roads. Yet they still have such a basic and universal utility, that they are found in all cultures and places. So the word “natural” is really used to convey the nature of the symbolism. How do we understand symbolism in poetry? Part of our reading this week will be to explore symbolism in poetry. However, we’ll look at one example from your text before I send you symbol hunting. One good piece of advice from our textbook, is not to force our understanding of symbolism into a story. Sometimes the literature is clearly using an image as a symbol, but other times caution is warranted. How do we test this? The answer isn’t a nice equation unfortunately. Here are a few pointers:

· We must determine if understanding something as a symbol really contributes to the meaning of the entire story or poem

· If it seems to contradict the rest of the work, it’s possible the image wasn’t intended to be symbolic

· If it seems like we have to try too hard to justify the image as a symbol, maybe it is not symbolic.

· Does it fit a pattern of symbolism? If the work is otherwise literal, perhaps the object in question is meant to be literal as well.

The sick rose O Rose, thou art sick! The invisible worm That flies in the night, In the howling storm, Has found out thy bed Of crimson joy, And his dark secret love Does thy life destroy. – William Blake At this point you might want to open your textbook to page 633 so that you see the poem while you read the text below. What follows is a rundown of symbolism in this poem. But first… Let’s tune our “symbolism radar,” so to speak: What strikes us as symbolic in this work? The rose might catch your attention; after all, we just discussed flowers as being potential symbols. Another question should occur to you: Why is the speaker talking to a rose in the first place? Usually when things don’t at first seem to be literal, the poet is being symbolic. If we think it strange that this guy is talking to a rose, the poet is probably up to something. Your symbol radar should be kicking into gear. Before assuming the speaker is just silly, we give him the benefit of the doubt. Maybe the poem is more serious if we consider it as symbolic! The Rundown of symbolism in this poem: “Rose: a symbol of perfection and the flower of Venus (the Roman goddess of love). It also stands for joy and peace. The rose is always seen as feminine and sometimes represents the female genitals. A red rose can represent life, spring, passion and blood. A white rose can represent purity and virginity.” “Worm: a symbol of death. It is connected with lowness, vileness and contempt. It is also a masculine force, sometimes being seen to represent the penis. In this poem, worm is also specifically the canker worm which eats the roots of the rose.” “Storm: a symbol of chaos, confusion, fear, wildness, destruction and change. The storm can also be seen as blowing away the old and frail and giving the new room to expand. If the storm is seen to have creative effects, there must first be great wildness and destruction.” “Night: a symbol of darkness, of things secret and hidden. It is also a symbol of evil. Satan is referred to as the Prince of Darkness.” “Bed: a symbol of sleep and the vulnerability and innocence of sleep...[also the implications of a marriage bed]…In this poem it is also, of course, a garden bed.” So, do all of these symbolic implications fit as presented in these summary statements? I’m willing to get rid of the suggestion of the storm being a creative force of any kind. In this poem, I would only associate it with the arriving chaos and destruction as enacted by the worm. I would take this not merely as a literal rose. Not only is the speaker addressing the rose as if it were a person (and there is no sense that the speaker is a literal gardener), but there is also the matter of this worm flying in the night. This doesn’t sound like a literal worm either. It’s either a silly image, or there is more here than meets the eye! If we take the rose as a woman, then the speaker is addressing a real person and the threats in the poem must represent some kind of real threat. Of course, if the woman is a virgin, or is simply pure in a spiritual sense, the poem could be speaking to the threat of her being unchaste, or it could be the destruction of her spiritual purity. It is probably meant as both (Blake uses many conventional Christian symbols in his writing, and the Christian world view would link virginity to spiritual purity. It does help to research the author a bit to make sure you are on the right track. It’s not a guarantee, but it doesn’t hurt). Ultimately, the symbolism does suggest that this worm or interloper is perhaps a representation of evil or even the Devil himself. The darkness and the storm coupled with the worm’s night-time arrival are certainly clues. The fact that the worm is invisible pushes us even farther in this direction. The worm operates on a level that is not within the realm of physical sight. Therefore the decay and the danger that is suggested in the poem is a decay or threat to the spirit– to the soul. His “dark secret love” can still represent the physical love of a man. But if so, this is a man who doesn’t act in the proper ways of a husband and seeks to spoil the woman’s virginity (and thereby threatens her soul). There would still be a spiritual (or invisible) evil at work. There are many ways that a woman’s life can be seen as destroyed by the end of the poem. The Christian regard toward chastity itself (especially of Blake’s time– 1757-1827), could render such a verdict. The woman, according to this speaker has lost her virginity, and has therefore destroyed herself. We could still return to a less physical understanding. There has been some form of spiritual desecration (not unlike the physical desecration of premarital sex) and the woman is spiritually tainted by the experience. It could even be original sin, and the woman’s (and every woman’s) inability to escape from this trap. The worm then becomes a symbol of death itself (and of the Biblical serpent), of the evil that was visited upon mankind when Adam and Eve first betrayed God. Perhaps the rose is more specifically a symbolic Eve. No matter our ultimate conclusions, I think both spiritual and physical understandings of the symbolism are in play. Understanding both lends a richness and complexity to this poem and its message.