I'd like to propose this for general reading.
http://www.lesmurray.org/pm_aor.htm
Les Murray - An Absolutely Ordinary Rainbow
-
- Perspicacious Poster
- Posts: 6599
- Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 1:35 am
- Location: At the end of stanza 3
Still struck by the emphasis on dignity.....that the weeping is in a dignified way + (the end) there is a the dignity of "having wept". You might even read it as having dignity as a central theme.
Seth
Seth
We fray into the future, rarely wrought
Save in the tapestries of afterthought.
Richard Wilbur
Save in the tapestries of afterthought.
Richard Wilbur
-
- Prolific Poster
- Posts: 459
- Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:34 am
- Location: Hertfordshire/Durham, UK
This one came up in that essay I mentioned, David. Absolutely crackerjack poem, typical of early Murray in his expression being a little more circumlocutive (he's the reverse Geoffrey Hill).
Yes, but his religion shines out of it as well, don't you think? We have to recognise it, even if we don't share it.Antcliff wrote:Still struck by the emphasis on dignity.....that the weeping is in a dignified way + (the end) there is a the dignity of "having wept". You might even read it as having dignity as a central theme.
The reverse Geoffrey Hill! That's a great thought, Owen. Must think about that some more, though - isn't GH circumlocutive as well? I haven't read enough of him to be sure.OwenEdwards wrote:This one came up in that essay I mentioned, David. Absolutely crackerjack poem, typical of early Murray in his expression being a little more circumlocutive (he's the reverse Geoffrey Hill).
-
- Perspicacious Poster
- Posts: 6599
- Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 1:35 am
- Location: At the end of stanza 3
Not sure. A common need for weeping comes out.Yes, but his religion shines out of it as well, don't you think? We have to recognise it, even if we don't share it.
We fray into the future, rarely wrought
Save in the tapestries of afterthought.
Richard Wilbur
Save in the tapestries of afterthought.
Richard Wilbur
True. I could be reading something into it, rather than reading something in it. I've done that before.Antcliff wrote:Not sure. A common need for weeping comes out.Yes, but his religion shines out of it as well, don't you think? We have to recognise it, even if we don't share it.
-
- Prolific Poster
- Posts: 459
- Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:34 am
- Location: Hertfordshire/Durham, UK
I suppose that his understanding of our common need for weeping is informed by his faith.
I rather meant by "reverse Geoffrey Hill" that Les becomes easier to read in his later work, where Hill becomes progressively harder til eventually you rather imagine he's working with the Navaho coders to make an unbreachable fortress of semantics.
I rather meant by "reverse Geoffrey Hill" that Les becomes easier to read in his later work, where Hill becomes progressively harder til eventually you rather imagine he's working with the Navaho coders to make an unbreachable fortress of semantics.