Skip to main content Help Control Panel

Shakespeare's Monkeys

Infinite Monkeys. Infinite Typewriters.

More in aphasic's athenaeum of illiteration

(some thoughts on) The Fertility of Turtles

Not being conversant in 'critique', I accept the notes below may constitute utter bollocks - but they may also reflect the extent to which poetry can capture the imagination of the reader. I've recently read a host of comments in the discussion thread regarding 'bad poetry'. For me, bad poetry is stuff written and published for the exclusive benefit of the writer, to fulfill a personal need, with no regard for the reader. How do you identify a writer's motives? Well, I have no idea - that's as far as I got :> Perhaps it's a gut feeling, although the comment process usually proves to be a solid indicator of attitude.

So, anyway - a personal appreciation/exploration of...
[featuring annoying brackets/parentheses/slashes/sundry punctuation marks - question marks inevitably dominate]

The Futility of Turtles - Austin Gorsuch  [in Aesthetic Psychosis]

Title - two aspects...does it make me want to read the poem? The Futility of Turtles? Why? I have no idea, but I care because it's a statement, and

I'm a sceptic - so that's a 'yes'.
Does it say something meaningful about the [purpose of the] poem? How should I know? Revisit...

The car did not stop. Wheels
continued to spin as my father
and I looked to the curb -
the struggling turtle
attempting to work its way
back onto its feet.


"The car did not stop." Classic first line delivery - monosyllabic, abrupt. Impact - the importance of first impressions/primacy. A line with
consequences, preceded by [dramatic?] caesura/endash.
"The struggling turtle" - (intention behind the use of) definite article (i.e. not a/any old struggling turtle, but the/this one) - implying that the turtle in question has been noted/noticed prior to the reader's attendance, an integral part of this story.
So, was it struggling before the (assumed) incident with the car? Or is the car incidental, yet also relevant in metaphoric terms? Does this epitomise the futility of turtles? Did it merely fall off the pavement and tip over into the road, onto its back? [no-one else to blame, or maybe shit just happens]
If the result of an RTA, wouldn't this have been 'the turtle, struggling, attempting to...'?
So perhaps - turtle struggling, car doesn't stop = life goes on, wheels continue to spin, and the reader constructs a drama to accommodate
meaningful interpretation?

Its legs, splayed to the sunlight,
flailed in the crisp breeze
of a day just beginning.


Observation - no intervention, no interpretation, attitudes or feelings expressed, purely (superficially) descriptive (detached?), with no indication as to where this is going, beyond 'a day just beginning' (there's more to come..)
Suggestion of assonance (splayed, flailed) and onomatopoeia (crisp breeze)
Contrast (re. 'Later') - sunlight, crisp breeze = a fresh, new day [but with portent...]

Later, I went out with Mother.
She told me stories about how
she had been dreaming
of being raped, of shooting
her husband, and as I tuned
the voice of convolution
into a studded white noise,


Mother capitalized, no 'possessive' pronoun. Formal/impersonal? Alien?
Contrast between 'my father and I', + two stanzas of shared experience - and 'Later, I went out with Mother.' - stark, unembellished one-line [non-] event.
Stories - fantasies/self-indulgence, emphasised by combining 'stories' with 'dreaming' (intentional redundancy).
Contrast 'dreaming' with violence of rape and shooting.
Joined-up writing [imagery]...tuned/voice/white noise.
Convolution (compare revolution/evolution - progress/outcome)
Studded? Sardonic allusions to...? Ornamental? Hard (rivetted, but not rivetting?). Star-studded? (many connotations e.g. poetic aesthetics & media)
Also, interesting (re. discussion thread on use of commas) to see end-of-line comma combined with double line break [stanza division] - says 'this is connected, but' (?) (hesitation - example of the art of [benign] manipulation?)
And finally (yeah - right)...'being raped, shooting her husband'. The relationship, or not (and the relationship) - repression/distortion > inverse displacement & aggression - fantasy/futility.

I began to imagine her,
on her back, her arms reaching
in futility for the sky
from the dark recesses
of her verdant shell.


The turtle metaphor doesn't appear out of nowhere, we've already 'seen' the 'real' turtle, so this readily paints a picture and forms a strong
impression.
"I began to imagine" - where/how far would this have gone? Sentiments of (unknown) depth.
The 'Mother'/turtle pose - portrays helplessness/hopelessness, but also consistent with a 'rape' scenario and even suggestive of someone having been shot? (irony/poetic justice? - hmm)
But the BIG one - 'verdant'. Verdant?! That's a flag - ambush ahead :] Too clichéd to be anything else? Perhaps, but also marked as lush, fertile [in imagination only? A Mother, so fertile somewhere within the shell of pre-history].
Considering implications of 'lush', but probably too far removed.
Verdant qualifying shell - no, too involved for my limited resources.

I laughed (foolishly).

Why foolishly? Shame? Embarrassment? Indifference towards the plight of the turtle? Applying the turtle metaphor to Mother? The mocking of

Mother's dreams? Painting the shell green? Or was it foolish to laugh - Mother is looking at me like I'm weird/stupid/disrespectful. Pay attention!
More misdirection? Ha! How stupid is that - making such an elementary error. (which one?)

After all, her shell
has no color.

"After all" - seemingly innocuous, but replete with overhanging meaning here.
Conclusion, whether explicit or implicit - as important as first lines [recency, post-hiatus & the classic gestalt favourite 'closure'] even when misunderstood, or a complete mystery, as long as it looks/sounds/feels like a conclusion.
So, even [extended] metaphorical turtles have shells & shells have colour - which leaves a further [nested] metaphor...
[empty] shell = no [quality of/purpose in] life = no colour?

And the title...The Futility of Turtles...that's a 'yes'.
Final note: If you're still awake - really, you should get out of your shell more often :>
Final, final note: I always attempt to approach every poem as being entirely fictional, irrespective of what I may or may not know (if anything) about the writer. Assumptions lure, attributi
on theory rules...

Comments

Leanne - on Feb. 8 2008
That's an excellent critique, but it's not actually my poem   It's by Austin Gorsuch (Aesthetic Psychosis), I just published it for him and it got stuck in my bit for some reason, which annoys me hugely.  It's a good poem though, isn't it?
Anstey - on Feb. 8 2008
The Futility of Turtles is a great poem. I like it more everytime i read it.
Aphasic - on Feb. 9 2008
I've updated the author ref - it's not just good, it's the eighth wonder of the world (why does 'eighth' look so alien?) - so wondrous that I assumed it was one of Leanne's...but no, yes, that's seriously annoying. I guess my note regarding author attributions had some merit 'after all'.
I wish I could see your comments from this window - having just attended an unrelated toilet-seat incident, I've lost my bearings...
Liz Naude - on Jan. 5 2012

wonderful critique, which not only is pertinent to the poem but really helpful to other poets still learning the craft ...thank you. Wow this poem is really great.

 


Laura doom - on Jan. 6 2012

Thanks Liz -- I thought it was messy, but that's entirely in character. I failed to appreciate much of what went on in this piece until I scrutinized and spewed my thoughts. I know poeple who feel that deconstruction 'spoils' a piece of poetry; when I revisited this piece a few weeks later, I still loved the poetry, and still appreciated how much I'd got out of it.


Christy Wells - on Jan. 7 2012

thinking...about 'good deconstruction' versus 'bad deconstruction':)

...thinking (what a rush).

...thinking (with some conviction) that a poem written with a dual accountability to both author and reader...is in a better position, no...is in exactly the right position to receive the appreciation of a well-done deconstruction.  The carefully chosen components of an accountable poem are born and made for this kind of intimate appreciation, while a poem of parts loosely chosen is not yet a firm candidate for a penetrating readership or purpose-driven, proper appreciation. 

(more later)....thanks for sharing.


Christy Wells - on Jan. 7 2012

...a dual accountability to expression with an objective awareness of its capacity for reception and comprehension. 

Otherwise, why bother?  Self gratification is not poetry, good or bad. 


Laura doom - on Jan. 7 2012

Reception as accessibility? Poetry that doesn't attempt to exclude the reader? I guess the extremes of exclusion are 'the statement' (this is what I want to say, and I'll use any means at my disposal to ensure you 'get it' according to my intention) and obscurity (there is no way anyone will 'get' this; how could they? It means nothing to me, beyond sating my literary sadism). And then there's poetic indifference (I don't really care if anyone else cares, as long as they care about me; pure self-indulgence aka the blog/journal syndrome).

Comprehension--that's an elusive concept. The ability to understand the language of a poem; to interpret the purpose and/or meaning of a poem? Which/whose interpretation? Is technique relevant to deconstruction? Does it matter? I imagine there are writers who revel in the various interpretations being derived from their stuff, and others that despair. Derma and Leanne had a long conversation somewhere on this site relating to the 'ownership' of a poem (does the author effectively relinquish 'control ' (for instance, in terms of interpretation) of a work once it is in the public domain; which extended into Barthes territory--readerly and writerly text--and on into the far reaches of the mind-fuck universe.

Meanwhile Laura suffers cortical meltdown, and wonders how Christy can be so succinct. Ignoring her imminent demise, the demented disciple of doom continues...

So, a dual accountability for the writer, but does that also apply to the relationship between writer and reader? Does the reader have responsibilities? And assuming such indefined (or ill-defined) criteria can't be enforced (at least in the 'free' world [another millennium of discussion here]), is poetry--creation, appreciation, criticism--safe in the second-hands of the SpaceBook netwank degeneration? Have I mislaid the subtext narrative?

I don't think I've had this much fun since discovering the joys of spoiling my ballot paper by smearing it with the blood of the local fascist candidate...

[Laura thinks: Christy thinks too much for my cognitive equilibrium]
 


Christy Wells - on Jan. 11 2012

While wondering what mystery precludes this occasion of first person self reference, Christy thinks with some more conviction that comprehension is so much less elusive in the presence of distinction(s).


Laura doom - on Jan. 11 2012
[laura overbalances and falls into disrepute]
Share
* Invite participants
* Share at Facebook
* Share at Twitter
* Share at LinkedIn
* Reference this page
Monitor
Recent files
Member Pages »
See also