June 22, 2012
a visceral kind of criticism
It’s a visceral kind of criticism, sexy, strange, and suspenseful. Nabokov said to read for the tingle at the tip of the spine. Dickinson spoke of poems that took off the top of her head. Language enters McLane’s body like a current. Her whole body bucks and shudders. Her responses are forcefully somatic—“Some of her poems bypassed my brain and registered directly on the nerve endings”—and matched by the syntactical sophistication of her thought, her attraction to contradiction. Witness her response to the conclusion of Elizabeth Bishop’s “The Fish” (“everything / was rainbow, rainbow, rainbow! / And I let the fish go”): “Some days this seems coercively tidy and moral and obligatorily epiphanic and another instance of romantic ideology and sickening other days it seems a parable for living or rather attending.” Criticism is a temporal art, she reminds us. Our judgments are subject to mood; they are various and fickle. McLane destabilizes the authority of the critic—and the poem. “Poems aren’t for teaching; they insinuate,” she writes.more from Parul Sehgal at Bookforum here.
Posted by Morgan Meis at 01:45 AM | Permalink






















Comments
Ah, yes, this is more like it, the way forward from the cloistered, self-inflicted wounds of contemporary literary criticism: the changeable, flawed and passionate human being at the center of the reading experience.
Long overdue. Let's hope the discipline takes this as the life preserver it didn't know it was waiting for.
Posted by: Philip Graham | Jun 22, 2012 9:51:37 AM
Post a comment