A CRITICAL estimation OF

“THE REDRESS OF POETRY”
From the recipient of the 1995 Nobel Prize for Literature, comes a collection of essays based on lectures he delivered while Professor of Poetry at Oxford. The great Irish poet delivers wisdom about his craft in a style full of humour and devoid of pedantry. With his expansive spirit, Heaney examines poets such as Brian Merriman, Oscar Wilde, and Dylan Thomas and, of course William Butler Yeats. The Redress of Poetry is a rare opportunity to enter the lecture hall and learn from a master.
The ten essays on poetry collected here, adapted from lectures delivered at Oxford between 1989 and 1994, display much of the intellectual restlessness, linguistic wizardry and political conscience that have shaped Heaney’s own poetry. His thesis is that poetry of the highest order must redress social imbalances, at once transfiguring the circumstances it observes and offering an unforeseen, more humane, aesthetic alternative. This is an abstract and rigorous idea, yet non-academic readers will find much to savour as Heaney tests and refines his paradigm in light of a largely canonical selection of poets (most are from the British Isles).
Ranging freely from a brief life of each poet to a close reading of a few poems by him or her, he addresses, for instance, how Elizabeth Bishop’s “One Art” assuages the “loss” to which it alludes; how Christopher Marlowe’s “Hero and Leander” “extended the alphabet” of Elizabethan sexual mores; and how 19th-century rustic poet John Clare achieved a truly lyrical local idiom at odds with official English. With their palpable evocation of the writing process and their disavowal of jargon and trendy political abstractions, these are exemplary essays, and tell us much about the influences and obsessions of this year’s Nobel laureate in literature.
In 1989 Heaney, who recently won the 1995 Nobel Prize for Literature, was elected professor of poetry at Oxford University; the lectures he gave there are collected in this book. By “redress” Heaney means the preferred definition of compensation for a wrong, but he also intends the obsolete meaning of bringing hunting dogs back to the chase, since poetry is a game of “fundamentally self-delighting inventiveness,” one in which a force “unhindered, yet directed, can sweep ahead into its full potential.” Eminently readable, the various essays here are united by a personal yet profound tone. They explore a broad range of poets, from Christopher Marlowe and John Clare to W.B. Yeats and Elizabeth Bishop, but Heaney’s focus is on poetry’s ability to redress “all of life’s inadequacies, desolations, and atrocities,” not by means of direct political response but simply by being its own intrinsic reward. For all literary collections, [For a selected list of works by Heaney currently in print, David Kirby, Florida State Univ., Tallahassee, David Kirby, Florida State Univ. Tallahassee Copyright 1995 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
Nobel laureate Heaney is a pastoralist with a strong and critical sense of history. His rich and earthy poems are about the life of the land of Northern Ireland as well as the evolution of the heavily mythologized Irish identity. Heaney’s sonorous lyricism stems from his love of the cycles of country life, the mystery of the sea, the satisfying rhythm of hard, physical work. But Heaney loves poetry and poetics as well as nature and expresses this passion in his forceful if demanding literary essays. This is his third book of criticism, and it contains 10 lectures Heaney delivered as professor of poetry at Oxford. In the title essay, Heaney explains how poetry balances the “scales of reality towards some transcendent equilibrium.” After considering all the burdens contemporary poets carry, from the long tradition of the form itself to pressing political perspectives, Heaney still insists that “poetry cannot afford to lose its fundamentally self-delighting inventiveness.” This viewpoint underlies his shrewd essays on George Herbert, Christopher Marlowe, the Irish poet Brian Merriman, Dylan Thomas, Philip Larkin, and Elizabeth Bishop. Donna Seaman --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
From Book News, Inc. ten lectures delivered by the Nobel laureate during his years teaching at Oxford--1989-1994. A pretty little book that reminds us of the superiority of the unmerged (until 1995) publishing house. Annotation copyright Book News, Inc. Portland, or. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title. The 1995 Nobel laureate analyses the works of a broad spectrum of poets to discuss poetry's ability to redress spiritual balance and to serve as a counterweight to oppressive forces.
MOST EXPECTED QUESTIONS
Q: IN “THE REDRESS OF POETRY” HEANEY CLAIMS TO DEFEND THE POETRY, HOW FAR HE IS SUCCESSFUL IN HIS CLAIM, ELABORATE?
Q: WHAT ARE THE ARGUMENTS PUT FORWARD BY SEAMUS HEANEY IN HIS ESSAY “THE REDRESS OF POETRY”, DISCUSS.
Ans:
The poet critic Seamus Heaney, in his essay The Redress of Poetry, advocates the effectiveness of poetry, for his intent he brings into play his encyclopaedic knowledge and quotes from contemporary and conventional writers. He has quoted the protectors of poetry from different eras to prove that poetry is the most delicate genre of literature. It has sturdy involvement with emotional make-up of man.
Right through the history, different efforts have been made to charge poetry for a variety of reasons; Plato does not like poets and poetry. He desires to kick them out of his ideal republic. Modern followers of Plato want poetry to serve the nation by following the political ideals of the nation. Seamus Heaney brings sound arguments in favour of the poetry with such quick succession that we seem to be carried away by the strength and convincing approach of his arguments.
From Sir Philip Sidney to Wallace Stevens all defenders of poetry have put their best effort to prove that poetry has very close relation with our existence. Poetry, moreover, is very much useful for society. If Plato desired to turn the poets out of his ideal Republic, he also provided the court appeal through, which poetic imagination sought to redress whatever was wrong or exacerbating in the prevailing circumstances.
Poetry, believes Heaney, always provides an alternative world. The governments have a vision of a new society and give their programmes according to it. The revolutionaries create another ideal world that has always been more cherishing, exciting and pleasurable. By the same token, poets create an alternative world. That world is decidedly better than the actual one. Wallace Stevens says that poetry harmonizes the inner violence with the outer one.
In his essay The Nobel Rider and the Sounds of Words, he insists upon the point that words in poetry always intend more than being merely sonorous. Wallace Stevens does not seem to agree with the disaffected heckler who wants poetry to be more than an imagined response to the modern world. Heaney says that he should know that poetry is not an applied art thus it should not alleviate the prevailing conditions by direct action.
According to Wallace Stevens a poet is a potent figure as he creates the world to which we turn incessantly without knowing it and he gives life to the supreme fictions without, which we are unable to conceive that world. Our real world is full of complexities. A poet gives a very vivid experience of it. He gives us an opportunity to recognize its predicaments, and offer its solutions.
A political activist desire changes not solution. Thus the poet and the political activist have no point in common. Political parties want poetry to serve them as vehicles of their propaganda. During World War II poets were supposed to contribute to war effort preferably by dehumanising the face of the enemy. To justify his view, he quotes Simone Weil who believes that our world is unbalanced; “we must do what we can to add weight to the light scale”. Obedience to the force of gravity is sin. Thus poetry should have a tendency to place a counter reality in the scales. Some of the poets have followed his principle.
Havel believes that poetry an orientation of the spirit, an orientation of heart. It transcends the world that is immediately experienced and is anchored somewhere beyond the horizons. The poets recognize their accumulated, immediate pressures as abiding anxiety and they do not enter as guiding factors within the writing process itself.
Poetry in its form gives delight. It moves from delight to wisdom, which Auden gives in his famous trinity of poetic faculties—making, judging and knowing. The making faculty gives pleasure. This is no doubt an integral quality of poetry. However, it has served society by correcting injustices.
Sometimes it becomes difficult for the poet to redress poetry as poetry. He is under social pressure to produce what society desires. Sometimes to champion the natural cause as we see in the case of Irish poetry. The history of Irish poetry over the last 150 years is in itself sufficient demonstration that a motive for poetry can be grounded to a greater or lesser degree in programmes with a national purpose. But this could not be the guarantee of the success of poetry. For example, Yeats wants to build an Irish style form totally divorced form English symbols and myths. Heaney says this is not possible to cut totally off from tradition; as writers start as reader thus unconsciously imbibe certain traditions from which they wish to succeed.
Heaney says,
“Poetry, let us say, whether it belongs to an old political dispensation or aspires to express a new one, has to be a working model of inclusive consciousness. It should not simplify. Its projections and inventions should be match for the complex reality, which surrounds it and out of which it is generated”.
As the Divine Comedy did a counter-weighing function? Jorge Luis describes that poetry’s pleasure is neither in words nor in form but in the thrill that comes with each reading. This thrill is only possible when poetry is counter-weighing the reality; George Herbert’s poetry is an excellent example in this regard.
Seamus Heaney describes Herbert’s poem Pully to make his point clear. The Pully is a parable about God devising a way to keep the minds and aspirations of human beings turned towards the heavenly in spite of all the pleasures and penalties of being upon earth.
In the essay Seamus Heaney builds different assumptions for redress of the poetry. He defends poetry on the ground of its utility. He deals with the subject matter of poetry and brings example of many poets and critics in his favour. He does not stick to one point. The essay moves like serpent. Quick references blur thesis end the unity is marred by obscure references. He quotes the most modern writes of contemporary America therefore not well acquainted to common readers. However, his style, convincing arguments, and lucidity of vision, persuasive references and precise examples make this essay a masterpiece in his literary achievements.
Q: DISCUSS PROSE STYLE OF SEAMUS HEANEY?
Ans:
As a prose writer, Mr. Heaney has a nimble, elegant charm and the ability to rise suddenly, at his best, from conventional ideas to home truths. He manages to keep a little of in preoccupations. He does not subside into any of the weaknesses that shadow the strengths that have attributed to the poet-critic’s special focus: bardic complacency, a weakness for the anecdotal or anthologising amble, mere posturing and politicking. These Mr. Heaney avoids; and if he occasionally tiptoes with special tact when in the presence of the reputations of living poets, the pressure of guild membership have driven many a writer to far worse.
Heaney’s style is neither verse terse nor verbose or discursive. It has the qualities of preciseness. He tries to convey his thought and meaning through appropriate language and words and avoids all superfluous and vague expressions. There is no rambling about the subject and no beating about the bush nor is there heaping up of unnecessary details.
Much of the clarity of Heaney’s style is due to his preciseness and conciseness. He chooses words that can convey his meaning exactly. There is no looseness or prolixity in his writing. His expression is usually compact, and his language and construction are also marked with the quality of cohesion. He says:
“And in so far as poetry is an extension and refinement of the mind’s extreme recognitions, and of language’s most unexpected apprehensions, it too manifests the workings of Weil’s law.”
Heaney writes with incessant force, vigour and energy:
“It is only right that this should be the case. Poetry cannot afford to lose its fundamentally self delighting inventiveness, its joy in being a process of language as well as a representation of things in the world.”
His verbal communication is not a mere artistic device; it is vehicle for the conveyance of thought. His own language is subservient to the purpose of expressing his thought. He makes a judicious selection of words and uses such words as may be able to represent some fact or some view or something he avoids unnecessary ornamentation and the use obscure and vague language. He adapts his language to the subject he is dealing with. His language thus becomes completely conducive to the presentation of the meaning experience and reflections. His use of proper words in proper places is a great help in conveying his thought clearly and in a straightforward manner.
Heaney’s style is a fitting medium for the expression of his thoughts. He avoids all literary artifice, and writes in an unconscious effortless and unaffected manner. The use of an easy and simple language and appropriate words enables him to convey his meaning effectively. His arguments are rational and to the point.
“Poetry is understandably pressed to give voice to much that has hitherto been denied expression in the ethnic, social, sexual and political life. Which is to say that its power as a mode of redress in the first sense—as agent for proclaiming and correcting injustices –is being appealed to constantly?”
There is a smooth unobstructed flaw in Heaney’s language. His choice of concrete and meaningful words helps him in conveying his sense properly.
“Poetry, let us say, whether it belongs to an old political dispensation or aspires to express a new one, has to be a working model of inclusive consciousness. It should not simplify. Its projections and inventions should be match for the complex reality which surrounds it and out of which it is generated.”
Mr. Heaney writes with authority, persuasive intensity and learning. His ability to go into the texture of poetic language and figures of sound, and his speculations about the way a life and times inform a life’s work, remind one that there is a taste to be satisfied by literary criticism. It is odd to rediscover this – to recall that readers who like poetry do indeed have an appetite for substantial writing about poetry: a genuine though secondary longing, jaded by the perfunctory adjectives of many a book review, dormant through the long, cold, Laputan night of many any academic exercise, and yet surviving to be awakened by the modest, real thing.
It’s one of Heaney’s special strengths that he never ignores this reasoned advice. It’s another that he never follows a rational procedure without exploring whatever instinctive, instantaneous recognition might lie behind it.
The strengths and limitations of poet critics, as a class, seem to come from intensity of focus: they need to think about writing, about poetic composition. And any insight or idea in their criticism grows somehow from the complex, subterranean roots of concern with composition, and with the circumstances of composition. These collected lectures and reviews by the gifted Irish poet Seamus Heaney often explore those roots in exciting ways, dealing intimately with composition as an act of mind more profound than mere rhetoric, and showing how the circumstances of composition extend to the most urgent, painful, historical questions.
In a sense, his characteristic prose style enacts this tension between experience and innocence. On one hand he needs to retain and develop a worldly critical watchfulness, and on the other he has to remain faithful to the obscure sources from which he insists his springs. The underground side of things has always, he says, fascinated him.
The enlarging of imaginative resonance and association –what Wordsworth calls wise passiveness—has a complex political dimension. Just as experience and remembered innocence strove to achieve their mature relationship, so he has had to maintain a nation of (himself) as Irish a province that insist it is British. The first literary language he encountered was the classic canon of English poetry, but its resented dominance was quickly challenged as he investigated his own native culture. The result was not usurpation but inter-in animation (Heaney approvingly uses Donne’s word himself).
In a sly foreword to the volume, Mr. Heaney, who is a professor of English Literature as well as poet, half-apologizes for such passages, “the slightly constricted utterance of somebody who underwent his academic rite of passage when practical criticism held great sway in the academy”. He may feel that the lectures collected here, in passages like those above, are too much like teaching. They are the best kind of teaching. Fascinating and instructive in themselves, they also support more ambitious passages where poetic composition appears in the light not only of he moral situation of a poem or poet, but of all that surrounds, follows and precedes the poet as well.
Such coasting makes the moments when Mr. Heaney’s underlying alertness and seriousness come all the way into the foreground that much more stirring by contrast. If the solemn tag lines indicate that he is allowing himself an easy moment, comic charm can sometimes indicate that he is about to deal with crucial matters.
Heaney now seems to be safely enshrined as a Modern Classic. One has to go beyond Robert Lowell (a friend, admirer, and decisive influence on Heaney’s recent work) back to Dylan Thomas to find anything quite like it. Heaney’s gorgeously crafted sound structures, for that matter—his intricate orchestration of soft vowel and hard consonant sounds, his heavy stressing on monosyllabic words – recall the Thomas of “Light breaks where no sun shines” or “This bread I break was once the oat”.