Wednesday, March 25, 2015

"Dipping" into Heaney more: Peninsula

A selection of Heaney's poems in Door Into the Dark are concerned with landscapes and what they mean for their inhabitants. I said in my blue book writing on "Digging" that "Heaney is spacing himself from his father and grandfather after the alliterated lines...Similar to how Larkin looks back and wonders what people thought of him when he was younger, Heaney looks back and distinguishes himself from the past generations." This makes sense when we look at what Ireland was doing post- WWII. England had pulled back after experiencing the vast destruction caused by the war, and artists like Heaney and Larkin reflected this in their cynical, slightly rebellious and obscene (for the time) poetry. 

In "Peninsula" we get this pulled back, even escapist, feeling from our narrator who ironically enough starts his poem to us in a nurturing older brother way/ advice column way. His tone is more instructional, in the first few lines, then flows into a gentle description of the peninsula's landscape, and returns back to advising. In this way Heaney follows suit of his previous work and Larkin, but then deviates when he describes the landscape and his ultimate moral. He uses phrases like "horizons drink down sea and hill" and "ploughed fields swallow..." with repeated imagery of consumption, almost like gulping down medicine to get rid of an ailment or vacuuming something up to make sure that its not there anymore. Then "you're in the dark again," literally and metaphorically. As a spectator of war, he saw the consumption of human life in its most horrific light but he is now just as lost as he was before, until he reaches his final stanza. In it he says that you may not have something new to talk about, but you will have a greater understanding of what is now around you and how it was shaped, "in their extremity." 

Wednesday, March 4, 2015

"Lambs"


One section that I understand...

Chapter 4 where the mother freaks out on her kids: The grandfather has the dialogue at first, then the mother starts disciplining her children and the girl is back to narrating. I think I understand the "religious rearing" aspect. The grandfather walked into his daughter's house and sees that his grandchildren are not behaving according to what he feels is the proper Christian way. Grandpa and the kids are having a normal conversation until Mom gets back, and then the kids go off to play because kids get bored listening to adult conversations. The grandfather's judgment weighs heavily on the mother, who then takes her anger out on the children. It's sad, but understandable why the mother would punish her children in this instance. She was raised to act a certain way and when her children don’t act that way, she feels guilty for letting her father down. She was forced to adhere to all the Christian doctrines when she was a child, and now she probably looks back on her childhood and wants more than to punish her children all the time. It is an example of the mother's conflicting ideas of spirituality, which the girl seems to be having as well.

One section that gave me difficulty...

The girl drawing on the picture of Jesus, drawing blood coming from his eye (knows that she’s defacing god's image): "I'd like to hear him crying, screaming most of all. How bad was it Jesus? Mr. Jesus Christ. I thought Christ was his second name.” It looks like she is making Christ suffer more by drawing more blood on him, giving him more wounds, digging in with the marker. Is the girl just trying to wrap her head around God? Or is she grappling with his dual nature/ humanity of God? It seems like she wants to know and understand him. She could be trying to relate to him by asking him how much it hurt.