Kyrie,
by Ellen Bryant Voigt, is a book of sonnets about the 1918 Influenza Epidemic
from the perspectives of a soldier, a doctor, mothers, and siblings. She points
out the irony in that we were fighting a war on two fronts: the Influenza
Epidemic at home, and World War I overseas. No one was safe, whether they were
fighting overseas or were in the “safety” of their own homes, everyone was at
risk. Voigt aims to give voice to those who were suffering at home, worrying
about their sons who were away at war, and about their sons, daughters, wives,
brothers, sisters, neighbors, and fathers who could, at any moment, basically
drop dead.
I can usually enjoy reading direct,
powerful poems, but in the case of Kyrie, I thought that these poems
were relatively boring and far too direct. They left nothing to the imagination
and scarcely left me with any kind of thought-provoking message. To me, it
seemed as though they were relatively purposeless except for simply
exemplifying what it was that people felt and the situations that many times
they were in during the Influenza. It felt more as though I was reading
personal accounts from a textbook than sonnets attempting to convey the
personal experiences of those who lived during that time.
That said, there were certain aspects
of her poetry that I noticed and enjoyed. Voigt’s use of repetition was very
well placed and introduced a more powerful feel to the sonnets she used it in.
Similarly, I found her use of pattern in and throughout her sonnets to be very
impactful and effective, in comparison to the rest of her rather boring work. I
liked the way in which she spaced out her various poems which followed the
lives of specific people (ie the doctor and soldier). My personal favorite was
the story of the soldier writing home to his loved one, Mattie. I thought that
his messages to her left a greater impact on me than all of her other poems
combined.
The poem in Kyrie which
resonated with me the most, was on page 56, where Voigt wrote:
Nothing fluttered, or sighed
against her spine
Or coiled, recoiled in a fitful
sleep
Fist in a sack, but her breasts
knew
What her body made, and in her mind
She saw two legs, two arms, two
plates of bone
Where the damp tulle wings had
been. Whatever it was,
She bled it out.
More snow fell,
Into the deep ravine, the lesser
gullies
The doctor patted her arm: she was
young, strong,
Soon there would be another. But there
wasn’t:
Just the one dream, the one scar.
In this poem, Voigt insinuated what had happened to readers,
but she did not directly tell her readers, or leave them with something they
already knew. She left readers with a sad feeling, and almost a new understanding
of what it is like to miscarry a child and be unable to have another. Because
this poem was crushed between many poems about loss of family in war and from
the Influenza, this one stood out as a natural, unstoppable loss, which could
not be helped or saved.
I'm surprised that you did not enjoy the poems because I loved them. I've probably enjoyed Kyrie the most out of all the collection of poems we've read so far- precisely for the reason that you disliked them- that they were wonderfully direct. I believe that poetry should have a certain degree of obscurity to it- and I usually enjoy poems that make its reader work a little bit to uncover that hidden meaning, because the feeling of having understood a poem through all the metaphors and allusions is immensely satisfying- however, every once in a while, its nice, and almost refreshing to read something where the one doesn't have to make that effort-- because at the end of the day, what's important is that the poem conveys a feeling- makes its readers feel something. I think that's what Voigt was going for when she wrote the poems in Kyrie. Perhaps the whole point of the poems is to not leave the reader with any "thought provoking message"- because when something like war and disease is claiming lives, when there is pointless chaos, there is usually not a lot of thought- there is just an overwhelming feeling of helplessness. The thought comes afterwards- when the process of recovery starts. And Kyrie isn't about the recovery from the epidemic or the war- its about the experiences of the people during that time- so the fact that it simply evokes the same feelings as those people felt- and as you said, doesn't do much more than that- makes the poems more true to that experience.
ReplyDeleteI do agree that some parts of "Kyrie" are too direct and boring. For example on page 23, a man buries his wife and "Within the hour the awful cough began, | gurgling between coughs, and the fever spiked, | as his wife's had done." Voigt is showing us what happened, but in a really plain way. The line, "as his wife's had done" can be eliminated, because it is obvious. She also describes his sickness as having a cough and fever-- a description that Voigt could have described much more intensely. A description like this could be found in a textbook.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I think these poems generally offer a completely different insight than a textbook would. Often history is taught in a way that evokes no emotion from me. The writing is very objective and flows in a logical sequence. In this sense, “Kyrie” is completely different. It makes history much more frantic, personal, vivid, and real.
I agree with Smriti that these poems do not need to leave a thought provoking message, because they are recounting an occurrence in history. It is information, like textbooks are, but illustrated by personal stories instead.
I agree with you that the poems seemed too boring, and at times so direct it really did not leave much for the reader to wonder about. But then again, few of the did not feel like that to me, specially the sonnets on 17, 19 and 24, especially 24 which seemed to go well with 48. This last pair illustrated how much foreshadowing there was is Voigt's poems which after a few readings, I really started to appreciate them. So yes, at first I didn't really like them but they did take a while to grow on me until I could finally really appreciate them.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you on the poem on page 56. It does seem natural compared to the others, and for me, it seemed to be one that should be emotional, but really, to me, wasn't. Well, I mean that I felt the emotion but only because I knew what she was talking about, but Voigt in this poem and like in her other poems, never really wrote about how we, the readers, should feel.