Pigs in for Heaney?

Yesterday Rooters International reported that the Northern-Irish-born poet Seamus Heaney, son of a taciturn cattle dealer, and winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature, had received an unexpected gift from an unlikely quarter: the Southern Hemisphere. An octogenarian well-wisher by the name of Rotbult Clarms is said to have gifted to Heaney a thriving pig farm of approximately 10,000 acres in Tasmania. Rooters were not able to establish quite how many pigs were roaming wantonly about the property - which is currently being vigorously worked by his son - but the number was said to be 'considerable'. Mr Heaney, questioned on his yielding chaise longue at his home in Dublin, greeted news of the gift with a wholly characteristic measure of caution. 'I think what I fear,' he said, 'is not the problem of the physical displacement of the body, but how the sudden irruption of a wholly alien vernacular of the soil may impact upon the work which is to come.' Mr Heaney, born in 1939, is in the full vigour of his maturity, and if he accepts the gift, may be expected to show a lively interest in all aspects of rural toil. According to a brown-fingered local muck-raker, the pump beside the back door has already been re-named 'Dolly Omphalos' in anticipation of the arrival of its putative new owner.

*

Bogging Down: Lines From my Tasmanian Exile

I could just make out my father

Through the ill fitting weather-

Worn door's wood slats filtering

Thin strips of stubble land

Light to the damp dank dark bog

Where I sat daily

 

Aunt Mary's rosary at the ready,

Straining behind the busted pump,

To see his farming broadness

Dig drills into the thick damp

Black sod as inch perfect apart

As measures on a yard stick

 

This side of the demesne wall,

Between scattered bullaun, tall,

Unmovable as the violet pillowed

Mountains shielding Mossbawn,

My father's vast frame cast

A shadow wider than Tievebulliagh.

 

That morning, as one distracted

by the crack throated call of unsold

cattle, (Or a distant croppie's instant

song) my father turned his head to face

Heaven, and saw so much there

He so little understood.

* 

 Meaty Vernacular

Food companies have been criticised in recent months for describing various products - such as metre-long batches of so-called 'Cumberland' sausages, and air-dried pallets of steak and kidney pies - as 'British' when in fact the meat they contain was found to have been reared and slaughtered thousands of miles away from the British Isles, and with blades tempered in non-European furnaces.

A new Home Counties' lobbying group called British Poets in Defence of Received Vernacular Usage have been lodging similar complaints about the increasing use of words in poems which appear to bear little relation to English as it has been spoken in these islands for the past four hundred years or more. They complain of the 'mongrelisation' or the 'bastardisation' of the language, and even of a tendency amongst younger unpublished poets to play fast and loose with the word 'traditional' - as if the word itself should not be reserved for poems of a certain age. According to the Food Standards Agency, the word 'traditional' means 'something made in its original form', and a product airily described as a 'British Classic' should never contain matter, verbal or otherwise, of an Antipodean origin.

The Poetry Library will shortly be convening a meeting with the Food Standards Agency in order to endeavour to establish some common ground. Various embassies in and around South Kensington will then be alerted to the problem. A prototype of a library face mask is thought to be on the drawing board. The possibility of an 'Honest Poetry Labelling Campaign' is also said to be in the offing, according to various unconfirmed reports emanating from The Poetry Society in Betterton Street.

*

Where is London's National Poetry Centre?

The Stuff of Dreams: one proposed location for the new National Poetry Hub very close to fashionable Hoxton, East London

Look at the photograph above. It was taken by one of our brilliant team of resident Bow-Wow artisans who work in the shed at the end of the garden, overlooking the railway line. Can some miracle rise, Phoenix-like, from these ashes? Could this be the very building which will, in time, come to house London's New National Poetry Centre? 

At present it is nothing but an aspiration, a sculpted cloud. We have always been fond of unrealized projects. Some unrealized projects are unrealizable, of course. That is their comic purport. The Russian artists Ilya and Emilia Kabakov have produced quite a spate of them in their time. Homes in the sky. Heavens on earth. That sort of thing. Having been nurtured under Communism, the Kabakovs have very vivid notions of unrealizable dreams with tragi-comic endings.

London's Barbican Art Gallery is currently hosting a big show of work by the artist-cum-designer Ron Arad. He's the man who makes chairs that look like stretched lengths of well-chewed gum. Occasionally you can even sit in one of them. A large part of the ground floor of Arad's show is given over to glamorous models and drawings of architectural projects which have never taken off. They may never take off. They are much too absurdly idealistic. Or just too absurd.

Ours, however, the one above, is highly significant because it is a disegno of London's new National Poetry Centre. Or perhaps it should be called National Poetry Hub.  It doesn't exist, not yet. But it needs to exist. All capital cities need a national poetry centre. Many have them. Not London.

What about the Poetry Society in Covent Garden? Isn't thata National Poetry Centre? No, not really. Once upon a time, when it lived in Earls Court, it came quite close to being one. The difficulty is that when it moved from one part of London to another umpteen years ago, it failed to take its splendid poetry bookshop along with it. When challenged about its absence by a bookseller, the then director (who left years ago) replied that it was not the sort of thing that the Poetry Society did any more. What did they do then? They did cafés. And so it now has an eye-and-stomach-pleasing café, but not a brain-and-soul-nurturing bookshop. What a pity. And, more to the point, what a manifest dereliction of duty.

So what should a National Poetry Centre be for? And what should be in it? Most important, it needs to have a bookshop which will stock every copy of every poetry book published - on sale or return, of course. London, that great capital, does not have a poetry bookshop, and that is a scandal. Once upon a time it had the splendid Bernard Stone's Bookshop, first on Great Queen Street, and then later - briefly - at Lamb's Conduit Street. Long gone. Like Bernard himself. And Compendium too, in Camden Town, is long gone, which once had a brilliant stock of newly published American poetry…

Poetry turns up here and there, of course, in the bookselling chains, but seldom in any quantities. We know the names we'll find there. Well, why should they bother with poetry when poetry so seldom has much truck with money? Some bookshops represent poetry quite well - Foyles, for example - but not well enough. Not comprehensively.

But what else does a National Poetry Centre need? Well, it needs a piano and some sofas. It needs to be a place for book launches and general hob-knobbing, for the serious things and the more casual things. It needs room where poets can crash out, after convivial hours of booze-fuelled emotion expended on the subject of their neglect.

This is where we come in. But who will find us the thirstily empty Pop-Up Shop?

*

A Wholly Exemplary Public Library

I wish I knew why it is that librarians like new books. In fact, books seem to be getting newer and newer in our public libraries, shinier and prettier. Do these books think that they have to pretend to be something other than mere books after all? Aren't they happy just to be print on the page for the most part? Do they need to look as if they have just tricked themselves out for a party? 

Once upon a time, libraries used to be full of relatively old books - or, at worst, newish books - and no one seemed to mind. People borrowed them all the same. No one sighed when they noticed that they had been well used. No one cursed those books. No one made them feel terrible by suggesting that they might have outlived their usefulness. No one took exception to the fact that they - like so may of the borrowers, then and now - looked a little battered about the edges, as if they might have been involved in some minor skirmish or a small-scale road-rage incident between non-readers. (Some of them may even have been repaired.) No one feared that they might catch something if they took these books home and read them between the sheets.

Yes, these days the best books are always the ones that are being put out for sale, often in small cardboard boxes or brashly coloured plastic crates beside the door, at 5 for £1, so that you almost catch a cold when you're looking through them. (Think what the poor books must be thinking and feeling). But it's not just that the books are new these days. Would that it were just that. So many of the books in our libraries these days don't seem to be real books at all. There are too many pretty non-bookspretending to be books in our public libraries, too many cheap gimmicks masquerading as books. I have an idea. Let's buy up all the books that are being sold off, the good, old books, and set up a new, parallel borrowing service from our homes, for real books. No money need change hands.

That was all by way of a rather long preamble to what I really wanted to say, which is that there is only one public library that I can wholeheartedly recommend in the entire Western Hemisphere, and it is in Woodstock, the old hippy capital of upstate New York. It's a lovely, single-storey wooden building which hangs back coyly at the end of a lovely stretch of wooded lawn. Now that library is full of old books. It positively revels in early editions of Henry James and Edith Wharton and so much else. Almost every book is in a fairly bad way, but they have all grown old so gloriously, so handsomely. They look so loved, so revered, so prized for being nothing other than what they are. They look as if they are looking forward to a future of unrelieved bookishness.

*

Flaming Books

One day the library said goodbye to its readers.

The books climbed down from the shelves,

The larger ones helping the smaller,

And processed through the streets

To a patch of waste ground pent between

The motorway and the abattoir.


There they arranged themselves in pyramids,

Ziggurats and assorted heaps,

And the father of them all,

A King James Bible of venerable age,

Poured paraffin into buckets,

And prepared the conflagration.

 

There was no singing as they burned,

Merely the sight of ash flakes floating

Above the town, round and round,

And then gently settling down

On roofs, in hair,

And across the disgruntled backs

Of proud white cats.

 

Now even the library has gone,

And where the building once stood,

A carnival is held, for the greater good.

Skulls are juggled.

Drink is downed by the dam-full,

And a general love of booklessness

Eagerly gains ground.

*

Motoring On

'From the age of six I felt the compulsion to draw the shape of things. In my fifties, I showed a collection of drawings, but nothing accomplished before I turned seventy satisfies me. Only at seventy-three was I able to intuit, even approximately, the true form and nature of birds, fish, and plants. Therefore, by the age of eighty I will have made progress; at ninety I will have penetrated the essence of all things; at a hundred, I will no doubt have ascended to a higher state, indescribable, and if I live to be a hundred and ten years old, everything, every dot and line, will live. I invite those who will live as long as I to hold me to my promise. Written in my seventy-fifth year by myself, formerly known as Hokusai, now called Huakivo-Royi, the old man maddened by drawing.'

What a tonic to us all that an artist, at the age of seventy-five, in the Year of our Lord 1835, should be anticipating his coming three and a half decades with such relish; should be expecting to spend that time not musing upon issues of his own decrepitude from a battered wheel chair, in a urinous care home, as he pops more and more stupefying pills, but be anticipating the likelihood of making better and better work because - and this is perhaps the most beautiful part of Hokusai's extraordinary statement - he has not yet done the best work of which he believes himself to be capable!

The person who sits in the next desk to mine on the 34thfloor of The Bow-Wow Tower (the building was re-named quite recently) has been reading over my shoulder - as usual. And now he is asking me to explain to you why all this stuff about Hokusai in his shrill old age is of any relevance whatsoever to the Bow-Wow Shop, which purports to be an international poetry forum. He mouths the word P-O-E-T-R-Y at me, letter by letter, as if I have taken leave of my senses.

I snap back at him like a svelte blue shark which has just battened on to an ankle in the shallows. I tell him about the cult of Youth, about Romanticism and what it has led us to believe about the relationship between poetic achievement and hysterical immaturity. In a small side bar of marginal relevance, I inform him of the late flowering of John Cowper Powys. And then, rowing back into the mainstream again, I give him William Butler Yeats, that marvellous, myopic old gent, still copulating wildly in the foam with all those nymphs and satyrs.

He returns to his desk and to the pedestrian duties of a copy editor - as befits a puffed-up manling of four and twenty.

Hokusai died, alas, at the age of eighty-nine, one year short of that moment when he would have penetrated the essence of all things.

*

Many years ago I found myself sitting in a chair opposite William Cookson, founder of Agenda magazine.  It was about midday, early Spring. The sun was making its presence felt. There was a promise of good things to come in the air. All very agreeable. I'd asked him whether I could do some reviewing. He'd invited me over to his flat, which overlooked Battersea Park. It's not very far by bicycle from Clapham to the Albert Bridge Road. I later discovered that it was exactly the same distance by foot.

Cookson proved to be very shy, modest and engaging. He had a rather boyish laugh, which would often be accompanied by an endearing blush. I thought then that he looked quite a lot like Dylan Thomas. Puffy-cheeked. Angelic. Child-like. He was like Dylan in other ways too. He sat slightly slumped into his chair, as if his body had been arranged there by someone else, but not very well. He kept his eyes averted for the most part. He was too modest to look me directly in the eye.

I remember asking him how he decided which poems to choose for his magazine. That was a question which had always fascinated me - how editors decide what to accept. Of course, poems have to reach a certain  level of competence in order to be worthy of consideration at all. But after that? 'What are your criteria?' I asked William, fairly gently. It would have been no good at all to bark at him. That would have sent him scuttling into the half-murk of his extraordinarily messy kitchen. 'If they move me,' he said, with a half-smile - he was always very good at quick - often very quick - half-smiles. I waited for the next two or three paragraphs of critical guff and puff. They never arrived. He had said all that he had to say.

I was flabbergasted by that response. It sounded so…oh, what exactly is the word I am looking for? Amateurish? Casually subjective? Slightly unprofessional? Slightly crude? And yet I know exactly what he meant. You read thousand upon thousand of poems, and then something catches your eye - no, it catches at your mind and your heart simultaneously. It is a little like a burr adhering to a jacket down a country lane. The bloody thing's caught at you - and it sticks. That is one of the reasons I have asked various editors of poetry books to tell us how they choose what to publish. It must be a nightmare - the explaining yourself, I mean. Ratcheting yourself up to a certain level of credibility so that you are not scorned and laughed at by all those thousands you have rejected for the right reasons. That's probably why some of those editors didn't reply. It's just too difficult to lay your reputation on the line.

Here is something quite interesting that the poet A.E. Housman, that exquisitely embittered man, once said in a letter: 'I can no more define poetry than a terrier can define a rat; but he knows a rat when he comes across one; and I recognize poetry by definite physical sentiments, either down the spine, or at the back of the throat, or in the pit of the stomach.'

*

The other day I was having a conversation with  a long-serving art critic from the Daily Telegraph. We were walking through the streets of Venice together, piously endeavouring to avoid the next ice cream stop. My companion doesn't put his foot into the world of poetry all that often, he told me, as he dipped his long forked tongue into the pistachio. Not half bad.

Quite recently though, he told me, he was at a conference where various conversations took place between poets and art critics. They were trying to find some common ground. The art critics got along reasonably well, he noticed. The poets, on the other hand, were pure poison to each other. He'd seldom witnessed such a nasty, back-stabbing troupe of villains, forever at each other's throats… I think it quite shocked him. He didn't know that humanity had fallen quite so far.

When he told me that, I was reminded of something else: that this sort of thing has been going on for a very long time. Poets have often said very nasty things about other poets. Listen to Christopher Smart talking about the way Thomas Gray used to walk, for example: 'He walked as if he had fouled his small-clothes and smelt it.' And then, just a few decades later, there was that pious Jesuit Gerard Manley Hopkins on the subject of Robert Browning. Hopkins hated the way Browning talked 'with the air and spirit of a man bouncing up from the table with his mouth full of bread and cheese and saying that he meant to stand no blasted nonsense.' Coleridge came down very hard on poor old George Crabbe, stuck there in that damp Aldeburgh living on the pitiless Suffolk coast, for 'an absolute defect of high imagination.' Is it all that surprising, given that Crabbe was passing his time amongst murderous, stone-broke fisherfolk who were forever letting creelsful of stinking, slippery eels slither through their fingers? And then there was George Moore, catching a glimpse of Yeats beside the lake at Coole Park on some balmy October evening: 'A tall black figure standing at the edge of the lake, wearing a cloak which fell in straight folds to his knees, looking like a great umbrella forgotten by some picnic party.' And how did Yeats, in his turn, see Moore? He was 'a man carved from a turnip, looking out of astonished eyes,' and 'more mop than man…' I found those particular examples in a book by Geoffrey Grigson, another man who wouldn't hesitate to tear the head off a turnip if it provoked him.

What is it that gets into these poets? My theory is that, for the great majority, it's to do with money - or rather, the lack of it. Given that there's precious little of it washing about in the world of poetry, the only thing poets have to lose is their reputations. So off come the gloves at the least squint of mild disapprobation. That's why ring-fenced bankers are such congenial sorts.

Does that stand up? Please pass the port, Algernon, while you simulate thought.

*


Last week an assiduous reader of The Bow-Wow Shopspotted this announcement just around the corner from Tate Modern, one of London's many grandiose palaces of art. What we admire about it is its brutal honesty.  Finally, it is bread - not poems - that count. Or, as a Frenchman once put it to us: 'Si on a Le Pain on est sauvé.' Yes, this Gallic wizard from the Alpilles was somehow able to herald the importance of the noun by capitalising it even as he enunciated the words. Day by day, Life becomes ever larger than life.