Labels

Deep Analysis


I am a woman lying on a leaf;
Leaf is silver, my flesh is golden,
Comely at all points, but I became your grief
When you would not listen.

Through your one youth, whatever your pursued
So singly, that I would be,
Desiring to kiss your arms and your straight side
-Why would you not let me?

Why would you never relax, except for sleep,
Face turned at the wall,
Denying the downlands, wheat, and the white sheep?
And why was all

Your body sharpened against me, vigilant,
Watchful, when all I meant
Was to make it bright, that it might stand
Burnished before my tent?

I could not follow your wishes, but I know
If they assuaged you
It would not be crying in this dark, your sorrow,
It would not be crying, so

That my own heart drifts and cries, having no death
Because of the darkness,
Having only your grief under my mouth
Because of the darkness.

Philip Larkin

I find it very difficult to understand men. In fact, that task becomes more difficult day by day. I try to guess their next move, but, you see, they are exquisitely mysterious... Maybe that's why I will never get tired of them, jajaja. Well, the point is that sometimes I wonder if I could enact a man, that is, if I would be able to write a poem or a story from the point of view of a man without allowing my reader to be aware of the fact that I am a woman. And I say so because I have found shocking examples of male writers giving voice to female creations. Larkin, for instance, has been accused of being a misogynist (I disagree, although some people think like that), but in the poem above I just cannot find his voice; what is more, if I had read the poem without knowing it was Larkin's, I would not have guessed the author was a man.

Is it that you, men, understand women better than you want to admit?
Is it a matter of sensibility?

*Drawing: Eve by Florian Nicolle
Labels:

Comments

Unknown said…
Hello Selfish Enough, it is an interesting issue you are posing. I have a theory of my own, or should I say a set of questions of my own? Setting aside the fact that in my very particular case I find myself in the same predicament, namely, that I do not understand women, actually I find that I understand them less and less. One would say that time should have given me wisdom and perhaps a new light; but as Doris Lessing said “Unfortunately, there was no doubt, too, that a lot of time, a lot of pain, went into learning very little”. Enough of digressions, sorry for that. As I said above, setting aside the fact that I do not understand women and that I like them very much nevertheless, perhaps we are not that different as we may seem. You see, it’s very difficult to like something or not get tired of it if we do not recognize a familiar element in the thing, no matter how foreign it may seem to us. Take for instance food (forgive my rudimentary example), it has to taste similar to what we usually eat, otherwise, why do people in Mexico add chiles to their hamburgers or hotdogs? Have you ever tried Mexican food in a foreign country? Man, it taste completely different, even Chinese food tastes different here than in the US. Thus, American food has to taste a little bit Mexican in Mexico and Mexican food has to taste American in the United States. What if Mr. Larking was able to find that place where men and women are alike? What if he was able to put it down in words? Then he may only need to change some poetical voices or pronouns or whatever (I know I am oversimplifying, but for the sake of the discussion, please humor me), because he would be appealing to that thing we men and women share. He would only need to give some cues and we, as readers, would fill the gaps unconsciously.

All this is, of course, a theory, I do not claim to hold any truth in this, it’s just that your comment set my imagination going. I think you could enact both men and women as long as you focus on the “thing” that we share. If Mr. Larking could, why can’t you?
29 May 2009 at 19:35
Post a Comment

Popular Posts