Эмили Дикинсон How many Flowers fail in Wood...

Да, я тоже думал, не лучше ли написать:
"Бросает всем ветрам", но не знаю наверняка.

Сергей Долгов   24.01.2010 16:52   Заявить о нарушении

Андрей, вот очень к месту статья о стручке и этом стихотворении (найденная Ю.Сквирским):
http://mail.google.com/mail/h/1fr6vxuuwcn2o/?view=att&th=1266216b44425401&attid=0.1&disp=attd&zw

Сергей Долгов   25.01.2010 02:51   Заявить о нарушении

Это, очевидно, номер письма кого-то к кому-то

Андрей Пустогаров   25.01.2010 13:10   Заявить о нарушении

Андрей, извини. Текст небольшой, думаю стихира переживёт, если я помещу его ниже, в двух окнах:

Daneen Wardrop

The "Nameless Pod": Miscarriages of Language
in =mily Dickinson's Fascicle 28
Emily Dickinson is =ften seen as a poet of death but almost never as a poet of birth. Her =oncern with death has been considered relentless and obsessive in its attempt =o register experience after the grave, but her concern with =estation has gone largely unnoticed. More specifically, I think that Dickinson =s more than a great poet of death--she is a poet of language after =eath--and commensurately, she is a poet of language before birth. Of course =oth are impossible, but she strains toward them, trains herself at the =left between the signifier and the void. That cleft brackets existence, =s it brackets a normative ontology. The other sides, after-death and before-birth, find the voids where signification breaks up and disintegrates. Dickinson plays on those nether sides. The site of =eath has been visited by various critics; the side of birth will =oncern us here, the realm of gestation. How does the state before birth =igure in Dickinson's poetry and how can she say it; indeed, how sayable is =t?
Representing motherhood is a high-stakes endeavor for a female =oet. For a nineteenth-century female poet, the taboos involved in the =riting of a motherhood that was anything but replete, fulfilling, and inevitable--not to mention post-delivery--are formidable. To enter =nto representation of pre-delivery motherhood, or a gestation with any =ut the most sentimental of images, defies the boundaries of Victorian =ecorum and prudence. Further, to represent a gestation that ended before full =erm is so risque as to be nearly unthought of. Even in the twentieth =entury, the representation of gestation and the unborn is relatively rare in =anonized poetry.
If we take into account French language theorists such as Julia = Kristeva, the representation of gestation by women is considered, =n fact, the territory of male writers. Kristeva claims that the jouissance =f gestation can only be experienced but not told by mothers; i.e., =omen can be but not have the rapture of gestation. Given the historical =bstacles, Dickinson's courage in taking on such an endeavor is remarkable. =iven the theoretical problems, her position as a writer is formidable. We =ave come to expect daring from Emily Dickinson in all her poetic endeavors, =ut the audacity of this project is staggering.
She not only wrote of gestation, she wrote of gestation not =arried to full term. The pregnancies in her poems may have resulted in =iscarriage or abortion. It is important to stress that the representation of gestation in no way implies that the poet herself necessarily =xperienced gestation. Such a claim would be tantamount to asserting that =ecause Dickinson wrote of death that she died before the writing of each =uch poem, or that because she wrote of the sea that it is imperative =he travelled there. One of the primary conditions of poetry entails =he exploration of imagined experience; hence, Dickinson could write =bout being a wife when she was never actually a wife, about being a boy =hen of course she never was, and so on. Whether she was ever pregnant =oes not concern her poetry. That she was aware of miscarriages and =bortions, however, does.
That awareness is made manifestly clear when we turn to studies =f nineteenth-century motherhood, pregnancy, and abortion which =uggest that contraception and abortion were widely advertised and available in = Dickinson's time. Janet Farrell Brodie in her recent =I>Contraception and Abortion in Nineteenth-Century America states that when she =egan her study she expected information on the topic to be sparse but "it =uickly became apparent that in the second quarter of the nineteenth =entury information on American reproductive control [including abortion, =iven Brodie's definition of contraception] was neither all that rare =or all that tabooed" (ix). Kristen Luker, too, reports that "contrary to =ur assumptions about 'Victorian morality' the available evidence =uggests that abortions were frequent" (18). Carl Degler also affirms "the widespread practice of abortion, especially after 1830" (227) Many =apers, medical journals, and broadsides carried advertisements for =roducts designed to regulate the "courses" or menses. Medicines such as =ue, tansy, savin, cotton root and ergot were mentioned in conjunction =ith "'ladies' relief' or promises to 'cure irregularities'" (Brodie =). While we may not recognize in these euphemisms offers of medicines to =nduce abortion, nineteenth-century women would have, states Brodie, who =urther asserts that each "contraceptive method had its own synonym, many =f them an obscure and transitory argot" (5). So available was information =n abortion that women could even read about it, in some cases, in =hurch newspapers:

. . . newspaper advertisements for patent medicines =esigned to bring on 'suppressed menses' were common during the era; =ccording to a number of sources, such advertisements appeared even in church = newspapers. Discreet advertisements for 'clinics for ladies' =here menstrual irregularities 'from whatever cause' could be treated =and where confidentiality and even private off-street entrances were = carefully noted in the advertisement itself) were common. (Luker = 18-19)

Dickinson, increasingly appreciated and =nderstood as a poet immersed in her culture rather than an ahistorical =ecluse, couldn't help but be aware of such medical issues. Dickinson may =ave been very well informed about the ambivalent emotions caused by a =erminated pregnancy, as her sister-in-law and intimate friend, Susan Gilbert = Dickinson, may have experienced one or several such pregnancies. =ccording to Mabel Loomis Todd's journal, Ned, the Dickinsons' first child =ad been born five years after Sue and Austin married, and "only after Sue =ad 'caused three or four to be artificially removed' and had failed =n repeated attempts to prevent his birth" (cited in Sewall I; 189). =n fact, Loomis Todd attributed Ned's epilepsy to Sue's attempted abortion. =n a later journal Loomis Todd again recorded that Sue "'had four =children] killed before birth'" (Sewall I; 189). Sewall responds to these =ournal entries with partial caution: "These revelations may all be =actual; they may not be; they may be partly so" (I; 189).
Even if Sue never terminated a pregnancy, though, Dickinson =ould have been fully aware of the subject of miscarriages and abortions. In =er poetry she would have thought to disguise this awareness, just as =he advetisements for women's health (remedying "suppressed menses," =or instance) were disguised. Dickinson chose a variety of guises or euphemisms for the idea of gestation, but one of her major ones =rew, understandably, upon the natural world. Consider, for example, the = following poem from fascicle 28:

Сергей Долгов   01.02.2010 00:40   Заявить о нарушении

Второй фрагмент:
In this concise poem (#404) that has =eceived little critical attention, the speaker asks two seemingly =hetorical questions: How many "fail" in "wood" and--I think a different =uestion-- "How many cast a nameless pod?" The first question asks about the =nborn, while the second asks about the mother. The questions target the =motional difficulty of the topic and the reality that there are no easy =nswers. The poem, upon first reading an exploration of relative values and =uman potential, carries loaded words in the last two lines: "Scarlet =reight" and "bear." When we encounter these words, the poem twists on its =xis to accomodate new meaning. "Scarlet Freight" offers a brilliant =uphemism for pregnancy, prompting connotations of blood and carrying. Equally =dmirable for its duplicity is the pun on "bear," here functioning both as a =ord of perception and parturition. Given that a nineteenth-century poet =ould not speak directly of miscarriage and abortion, could a more effective =eans of indirect speaking have been devised?
"How many Flowers fail in Wood--" appears tenth in the =wenty-three poems of fascicle 28. Emily Dickinson uses the strange word, =pod," four times (poems 6, 8, 10, and 18) in the course of fascicle 28. She =ses "pod" only nine times (ten times, including the plural instance, =pods") in her entire oeuvre, including once in the preceding fascicle, =ascicle 27, in the opening poem. This fascicle 27 poem, "There's been a =eath" (#389), occupies a significant place so as to alert us to the =ultiple usages of the word "pod" in fascicle 28. There are numerous =easons for reading Dickinson by the fascicle rather than by the poem, and =dentifying the importance of an image through the repetition of a word such =s "pod" provides only one of them. In Choosing Not Choosing Sharon =ameron, one of the most eloquent exponents of reading the fascicles, =sserts that in the Thomas Johnson edition, "the unit of sense is the =ndividual poem," whereas in the R. W. Franklin manuscript books the unit of sense =s the fascicle (15). My perspective on understanding Dickinson as a poet =f gestation and the signifier is dependent upon the fascicle as a =nit of sense. Fascicle 28 offers a forum for Dickinson's poems of =ignification that address the signifier by recourse to the image of gestation. =oems about prayer--the nature of the signifier in the public vs. the =rivate realm--bookend the fascicle. "My period had come" opens the =ascicle with the speaker attempting to locate a balance between signifier and signified, and "I prayed, at first, a little" concludes the =ascicle with the speaker again attempting to locate that balance, but shifting =o find a slightly different denouement. Within the fascicle we can see a =arked alternation between poems of language and poems of gestation--not =hat the poems are so easily divided into singly determinate themes, nor =hat any one poem is "about" any one concern--but we can see that certain =oncerns are visited and revisited throughout the fascicle. Strangely, =eading the fascicle offers a kind of containment of Dickinson, but a =ontainment, it should be added quickly, that makes the unit all the more =xplodable. These oppositional tendencies pull at each other and circle back =n each other in the manner, I think, that Cameron describes as "choosing =ot choosing." We might call it containing not containing, or even =arrying not carrying, expecting not expecting.
If it seems anachronistic to speak about Emily Dickinson's =ascicle 28 in Kristevan and Lacanian terms, still it is worthwhile to attempt =o understand the dilemma faced by women writers who both must be and =ave in relation to symbolic language. It must have been especially =rustrating for the woman writer to face the phallic term from the 1800s, when =he didn't know exactly what paradigm was enacting such restraint upon =he process of signification. Fascicle 28 offers a glimpse into that =ilemma as we see the image of the pod operating as a kind of =ineteenth-century chora. Surely Dickinson, of all poets, would have been interested =n pushing language to its limits, not only on the side of =eath--after death--but also on the side of birth--before birth--too. The poem =rom fascicle 28 that we started with, "How many Flowers fail in =ood--," states the dilemma most succinctly: as the pod is formed by both =he outer and inner components, not only is the inside of the pod nameless, =o is the womb-like casing of the pod. Women write from a position of namelessness in the phallic culture: "How many Cast a nameless =od/ Upon the nearest Breeze--/ Unconscious of the Scarlet Freight--/ It =ear to Other Eyes--." Dickinson out-others the other in this poem. She understands the workings of the unconscious and how things can be =orne differently for different people. Dickinson examines the =amelessness of women in this poem, and she does it by suggesting the chora. She =ets near it, where it's hard enough for the male poet to go but the female =oet paradoxically cannot go because she is it. Dickinson is it and has =t, to the extent that she can. Dickinson plays against the patronymic, =gainst the Name of the Father that generates language. Iterations abound =hat we need the Name of the Father, the phallus as signifier, in order to =nter the symbolic order. And perhaps we do. But if there were ever any =eyond to the pahllus, any alternative to the father, any parasignifiance =o the patronym, then Dickinson supplies it--or she gets awfully close. =t's a project of recursion, to try, as Nicodemus did, to reenter the =omb with language and to come back still speaking.

Сергей Долгов   01.02.2010 00:42   Заявить о нарушении

Сергей, читать это со странными значками затруднительно, но, по-моему, это обычный филологический бред с фаллическими Отцами и прочей дребеденью.
По-моему, налицо, как из живого делают чучело.

Андрей Пустогаров   01.02.2010 01:46   Заявить о нарушении