BILL SCALIA Reviews
Miniatures by
Meredith Cole
(Marsh Hawk Press, New York, 2012)
The landscape of Meredith Cole’s book (at least that
which suggests the most viable cohesion of the collection) is Japan. Part of the challenge of the work for the
reader is defining just what “Japan” means.
Cole’s ostensive definition refers to the nation of Japan, where she has
spent time living and working. In this
sense, “Japan” exists in time and space.
The material definition is of Japan as a collection
of images and experiences, and this is exactly where Cole’s book is
strongest. Her eye for detail is
surgically precise, and Cole uses specific images to give rise to experiences
that could not have risen in any other way, in either the speaker or the
reader. It seems here that the thought
(image) occurs before the experience, rather than the two occurring interdependently. This is the skill of poets, and this Cole
does well.
But an odd moment occurs in the poem “Daisies,” in
which the poet, describing being given a clutch of flowers one only finds in
August, writes: “You must keep in mind it was August, / these things depend on
the season / although you have never been to Japan / and you don’t know how
damn hot it was . . . ”. I must assume
that “you” is the reader (she gives us no direction otherwise), and my first response
was, naturally, “how does Cole know I’ve never been to Japan?” Of course she can’t know this about any
reader; this claim only makes sense, philosophically and aesthetically, in
terms of formal definition: “Japan” is defined by its qualities reveled to us
in the body of the text. These qualities
of Japan are indispensable from the poet’s experience of Japan (her friends,
her job, her partner), so that “Japan” is an experience more so than it is an
actual place.
This is all fairly conventional literary practice, of
course (she doesn’t pretend toward documentary realism), and we expect in a
first person narrative work that we cannot separate the speaker’s experience
from the experience itself. But there is
another, rather peculiar, dimension to the experience of Japan in this book: the
poet begins to refer to herself in the third person. I am assuming the “Meredith” referred to in
the poems is in fact the poet herself; really, it makes little difference,
because the tension increases with the shift from first person to third
person. That is, in terms of formal
definition, “Japan” is solely perspective from the observer “Meredith”;
likewise, “Meredith” is defined in relation to “Japan.” Cole deflects the role of the poet/speaker
into the existential; in defining “Japan,” she is defining “Meredith” – but is
it “she” – or “Meredith”? performing the act of self-definition.
She is correct, then, that we have never been to
“Japan.” But neither has “Meredith,” it
seems, and the reader gets no closer to “Meredith” here than the accumulation
of details and impressions. Perhaps
this is her larger point: the self as defined by (and I stop just short of
saying determined by) our tactile
experiences, which give rise to emotional engagement (and which in turn
connects inward impression and outward expression / self-definition). This happens in the book every time the “I”
becomes “Meredith.” From the reader’s
perspective “Japan” is reflected through a broken glass, darkly; from the
speaker’s perspective, the reflected images reveal not an “I” but infinite
shadows of “she.” The book revels in
collections of images, and in seeking connection (externally, ourselves to a
larger, transcendent meaning, or at least a verification of authenticity) and
internally (aesthetically, within the structures of the book) we want the
images to exceed their ostensive function; that is, we want them to be extra-determined. This extra-determination
(as opposed to over-determination) might have been achieved by the poet
utilizing conventional poetic devices (both metrical and aural). But in Miniatures the varied images add up to
something less than a sum of their parts. This is no sleight of hand; the
impression is not of something left out, or even of something aside, but of
something that cannot be reclaimed because it was never assured of its
existence in the first place.
*****
Bill Scalia holds a PhD in American Literature from Louisiana State University. His most recent essays include “Toward a Semiotics of Poetry and Film: Meaning-Making and Extra-Linguistic Signification” (in Literature / Film Quarterly) and “Bergman’s Trilogy of Faith and Persona: Faith and Visual Narrative” in the anthology Faith and Spirituality in Masters of World Cinema (Cambridge Scholars Press, 2008). Bill teaches writing and literature at St Mary’s Seminary and University in Baltimore, MD.
No comments:
Post a Comment