Consciousness, Literature and the Arts

 

Archive

 

Volume 17 Number 2, August 2016

___________________________________________________________________

 

White, Gillian. Lyric Shame: The ‘Lyric’ Subject of Contemporary American Poetry. Cambridge, Mass & London: Harvard University Press, 2014. Pp.350. ISBN 978-0-674-73439-5 Hardback, £33.95.

 

Reviewed by

 

Rıza Öztürk

M K University, Türkiye

 

Together with the basic literary critical theories ever considered and treated in the history of literary criticism, White’s effort in linking her reading approach with that of the Freudian psychoanalysis, feministic and particularly that of the shame-based affect with regards to the queer theory treated by Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick (Vincent, 2012) is an important and original contribution she has introduced to the world of lyric reading theories in her book Lyric Shame. She underlines the relation between shame theory, identity, and subjectivity. Here, the implication of the questions “who you are” and “what you do” is underlined (Vincent, 2012, p.625). Personal identity should not be a reason to feel shame. Moreover, the queer identity is sometimes used as synonym for “gay” and “lesbian” identity. No one should be responsible for whom they are but for what they do or they think they have done (p.626). So what we do and who we are distinction is very important. We should be responsible fro all we decide and perform in life. If what we do in life is a mistake, so then, we must put the blame on ourselves. In such cases the expression of our inner self becomes worthless.

The appeal of the personal inner self-expression as an aesthetic value changes from reader to reader. This is the point where White thinks to be very critical for the generation of the aesthetic value in the minds of the reader. That is why, White’s lyric shame reading approach most successfully asks for a particular care to be paid when considering the lyric poetry reading. This perspective introduces a careful and humanitarian reading strategy that opens way to generation of sympathy and empathy in the reader’s mind. This is not a strategy of ignoring the reader and crediting the lyric composer. This is a sound and objective strategy which provides the reader with an objective way of reading as well as helping him/her to have access to a high quality of lyric aesthetic. So, in accord with their natural structures, we can consider lyric and shame elements as natural human skills. If we tend to interfere and change the development of their nature, we can very easily kill the very special taste and authentic meaning they are gifted with. That is the question particularly brought to the fore in the development of the argument of Lyric Shame.

Techniquely speaking, what is the origin of shame? Shame as human emotion is not less diverse and important in depth of meaning than “selfishness” on which Richard Dawkins (1976) has built his world-wide famous “Selfish Gene Theory.” Here, Dawkins introduces the importance and unavoidability of integrating science and humanities in the world of science. Moreover, Pattison’s (2000) influential and important study on shame proposes a big number of definitions of shame. In regards to the origin of human shame emotion he argues that “shame is rooted in genetically determined basic physiological affect responses” (p.43). As a sosyological element he finds shame as “an acute, painful, inarticulable experience” (p.50). He also argues that “shame as a phenomenon has a substantial roots, functions, implications and effets” (p.52).  As it is implied in Pattison’s definitions; on one hand, shame is a powerful triggering emotion that develops a sound human awareness which opens ways to recognition of universal ethic codes. On the other, as a synonym of hamartia it leads to tragedy (as it is in Lear, Oedipus, and Hamlet etc.) Considering Novallis’ ‘character is fate’ we can say that shame is a human skill; a key factor that determines the blueprint of the person’s fate.

So, next, what is the origin of lyric? In the Introduction of The Lyric Theory Reader, Jackson (2014) argues that lyric “is a term derived from ancient Greek to designate a song accompanied by the lyre, its association with musical performance persists today in a popular “song lyric” with instrumental accompaniment, … Often a poem is considered lyric when it represents an utterance in the first person, an expression of personal feeling.” (p. 1) In regards with the origin of lyric Dissanayake (2001) argues that; “along with the vital abilities to cry and to suckle, human neonates are born with remarkable capacities that predispose them for social interaction with others” (p.85). Considering Dissanayake’s argument, we can find the human cry as the synonym of lyric utterances. So, then why do we cry?  As a matter of fact all types of biologic organisms have mechanisms to reflect their cry for the need of something or for the fear to avoid the predators to survive. No matter whether human or animal all biological entities need protection and bettering themselves. The human cry is gifted with stimuli (cognitive awareness) while the animals with an instinctive awareness. A bird and a child both cry to eat or to be protected. This is the principle of safety to survive. The cry is the voice, the song, the lyric.

Unification of different technical elements of different critical approaches helps White develop an integrated paradigm of lyric poetry reading. Her trying to broaden understanding and appreciation on behalf of the poet reminds her awareness about the traditional stance. The treatment of diction, imagery and particular utterances shows her tendency to treatments of The New Critics. Moreover, the natural centrality of the speaker/poet in lyric poetry has forced her automatically to consider The Freudian, Feminist and Queer theories. Critical stances are also needed to highlight the political, sociological and biographical elements represented in lyrics. Though contrary to the critical theories, centralization of the poet and The Reader Response theories are also a must for her to consider. While you talk about the speaker you cannot ignore the state of the reader. An argument on the state of the reader automatically leads to considerations of the Reader Response theory. Popular critical theories, movements of each age have taken up lyric with different perspectives. However, its reality of being the metaphor of human behavior remained ever since and will as long as human nature follows the system of survival and reproduction.

In Lyric Shame, illustration of the theoretical background is very compactly given in a long introductory section. The very beginning of its introduction starts with an appreciation of Elizabeth Bishop’s “Five Flights Up” poem. White draws attention to human consciousness mechanism comparing a dog and its owner’s manners in regard to shamefulness. She questions whether the mechanism of shame emotion is adaptive or not. It is adaptive; yet, it is instinctual in the animals, while it is conscious based mechanism in the human. White argues that “Bishop’s lines emphasize shame as an important mobile, inter subjective emotion, evident in the strange grammar it requires. Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick calls it ‘transformational grammar’ for ‘the absence of an explicit verb’ from ‘shame on you’ records the place in which an, I, in conferring shame, has effaced itself and its own agency” (p. 1-2).  Here, we see that White approaches the poem linguistically stating the nature of the dog’s behavior in comparison with that of the owner’s reaction. White builds her argument quoting Sedgwick’s linguistic definition to draw attention to the function of language and the reactions originated both in the dog and in human (owner). While shame means nothing for the dog, it triggers various emotions in the owner which leads him/her to ideas and reactions.

White’s integrative lyric approach applied in the development of her lyric examinations in four chapters helps her discover the very particular element that seems to have played role in the shapement of the poet and their lyrics. In chapter one, Elizabeth Bishop is considered alone. Content, structure and tone of her lyrics become very precious factors for the discovery of the elements of egoism and lyrics subjectivity. White considers Bishop as an important figure of the midcentury lyric poetry in America. The shame factor helps her discover the variety of poetic manners reflected in the American lyric culture. She discovers Bishop’s tendency to reflect a number of different issues which were influential at that time in her life. The elements of the modernist avant-garde, Freudian approach, modernity and the rest seem to have functioned in the construction of her lyric poetry. In accord with the shame theory White finds Bishop’s effort positive in aesthetic quality though it is difficult to read. The second chapter covers a treatment of Anne Sexton lyric poetry. Her dramatic personal life seems to have determined the nature and quality of her lyric poetry. Sexton is found as the “most shameful poet of the confessional mood” (White, p.38). The third chapter is considered to cover the appreciation of Bernadette Mayer’s lyric poetry. The first three chapters of the fourth ones illustrate the most important female poets of the 20th century of America who are considered to have the potential shame elements in their lyric poetry. The fourth and last chapter deals with four American male poets who actively composed lyric poetry from 1990 onwards. White expresses that she considered the lyrics of those four male American poets who credit her with the elements of shame as the earlier ones have done too. .

In the ‘Afterwards’ section, with a pessimistic tone, White expresses that lots of questions are still needed to be clarified. This shows that she wants others to notice the ‘lyric shame’ and the issue related with this to lead to a global consciousness to raise awareness in the human self. That is why, what she has focused on is a global serious issue for all humanity. She wants just to say one or two words at the end of the book about them to let others consider them if they want. She is conscious of the seriousness of the ‘lyric shame’ ambiguity and what this concept means for intellectual world. Here, she also draws attention to the American poetics, critical ideas with the eccentric, specific texts and movements that are only parts of their origination. Together with this ‘diversification of American poetries’, the expansion of American universities after World War II, anthology wars, the digital informational technologies and the like are serious factors which do not only spoil the nature of lyric poetic culture but also the elements of all sort of cultural aesthetic developments of American society in the 20th century.

White’s integrative lyric reading approach brings to the surface the idea that, lyric poetry is the expression of the personal color of the inner thoughts. There is no need to come against or very hotly argue the factuality of lyric poetry. It is, in a sense, the blueprint of the inner self which is very innocent and dear element for anyone whoever expresses it. Lyric poetry is so natural that it requires no reason to be supported and no effort to be interfered. It is an element to be discovered not to be invented. That is why, this book will and has to survive and serve readers of many different fields ranging from sociology to anthropology, literature, history, politics, cultural studies etc. I can name this book as a half documentary and half experimentalist critical literary source on 20th century American lyric culture.

Works cited

Dissanayake, Ellen (2001) Becoming Homo Aestheticus: Sources of Aesthetic Imagination in   Mother-Infant Interactions http://www.jstor.org/stable/3685506 Accessed:13/04/2013 06:

Jackson, Virginia and Yopie Prins ed. (2013) The Lyric Theory Reader A Critical Anthology. Johns Hopkins University Press.

Pattison, Stephen. (2000).  Shame: Theory, Therapy, Theology. Cambridge University Press.

Sorotzkin, Benzion (1985). The Quest for Perfection: Avoiding Guilt for Avoiding Shame. Psychotherapy, Vol. 22, (1985). Pp. 565-571.

Vincent, J. Keith (2012) “Shame Now: Ruth Ley’s Diagnoses the New Qeer Shame Culture,” Criticism: Vol.54:Iss. 4, Article.