There are so many different voices in the poems we read this week. Even one poet can take on multiple voices, which I notices especially in LaTasha N. Nevada Diggs' work. She is so fluidly able to blend language and slang and meaning and turn it all on its head. I think the question of 'what are their instruments' can have so many interpretations. Sometimes it made me think of the sounds and vowels in a poem, sometimes the typeface, sometimes the words themselves.
In No Moon in LA by Anthony A. Lee I think Light is an instrument. " Taco Bell on the left blinked red, gold, green the 7-Eleven next door gave out its halo glow through the glass." These are the lights that define the space the speaker is in. There is no moon in LA according to the title, but there are these bits of artificial light. Which is at once very human and very not. I also noticed a repeating patterning of G, B, and T sounds which are another instrument the voice uses. I also love how all the sentences seem to run together with no definite stop, this could also be an instrument of the voice in the poem, though I tend to think of punctuation and spacing choices as an instrument of the poet, it is these choices that create a voice. In terms of difference I see this poem as trying to break down how difference is viewed and how people who are different are dismissed.
When it comes to Dinosaurs in the Hood by Danez Smith I have heard this performed by someone and they did it in the voice of a little girl filled with hope and wonder and creativity. So reading it now I cannot get that voice out of my head and I think it heavily affects the way I interpret the poem. A way I see this poem as viewing difference is the ideas of how white people would create this movie about a Black boy and a dinosaur and how a Black person would do it. This difference illuminates how white artists view Black people and create these images of difference and movies based in voyeurism of the Black body. I think the voice of this poem, for me being a small girl, or child, is so powerful because that is who this movie would be for.
I love the idea that light itself is an instrument. It makes me think about "shedding light" on something - in some ways, it's exposing something and giving a voice. If a light is shined on something, others are able to see it and/or have less of a choice not to. If the only light shone on something is artificial, do people see it as well or differently? Are they able to rethink typical perceptions (as perhaps the speaker does with the man he encounters)? Not sure if that particular interpretation of "light as an instrument" fully maps onto "No Moon in LA" in particular, but could be a cool idea to play with.
ReplyDeleteRabbit ears on what Sarah said about light as an instrument. It's what made me open the comments section and want to write in response to you. What an insightful perception that helped me view the poem from a new perspective. Your memory of someone else's reading and interpretation of Dinosaurs in the Hood had a similar effect. It caused me to "see" the poem from a child's point-of-view. This allowed the poem to be filled with awe and took some of the sting of white "voyeurism" out of it. Thank you for new views of these poems.
ReplyDeleteGreat post, Rose, and you do go deep with the craft of the pome (hallelujah) I particularly like the points about Lee's use of light and the patterns of repetition in his stanzas. YAY
ReplyDeletee