Haas makes a very broad argument in his short, scattered poem. He argues that trees are too complex for their description to be put into words. Based on his stanza of suggestions as to what a tree is, Haas is confused. His argument is broad because he is unsure of exactly what is main point is. He seems annoyed by people who can describe a tree in a short phrase, because they are far too complex. I did not understand why Haas focused an entire stanza on what some may say an adequate description of a tree may be. This poem demonstrates that words cannot always form a successful argument; however, an image would not be any more powerful. The ability to arrange words in a descriptive pattern that makes sense to the average reader is a talent. After reading this poem, Haas lacks this skill.
Towards the end of his poem, Haas incorporates italics, almost to prove that he does have writing skill. I believe Haas recognizes that his poem can be read as a little scatterbrained, so he attempts to cover his mistakes by including a thought provoking phrase. By forcing the reader to analyze his argument, Haas makes his broad point much stronger. I believe he means to say that if a tree could speak, it would expect everyone to see the deeper beauty in a tree. A dance is not straight-forward, it allows for thought and reflection. A tree deserves the same respect, as Haas tries to convey.
Thank you Megan for the intelligent, thoughtful post. Hey, have you bought about if Haas writes no after certain stanzas for a reason. I say this because maybe he is trying to say not only does it dance, but it also capitalizes and does other things. To be honest I agree with your analysis, but i am forced to play devils advocate, i thought it was very good.
ReplyDeleteI like the notion that Brendan asserts here -- that the tree capitalizes -- on what possibly? -- on the viewer's attention? on the readers? Afterall, we are all contemplating what the tree did. Something, I think.
ReplyDeleteConsidering that I am rather confused as to how this poem makes any sort of general point about how language and words and punctuation work, my comments may be a bit scattered themselves.
ReplyDeleteAnyhow, thank you for the genuinely intelligent and thoughtful post :) Have you, however, thought about the possibility that Haas is not confused in entirety, but more so ambivalent towards the viability of and appropriate uses for variations in language? In the third stanza it may seem as if he is completely confused at first, but if we read on, he says that "It is good for poetry to sometimes disenchant us . . .dance with me dancer. Oh I will" Perhaps these sentences contributed significantly to your conclusions. Perhaps, however, they signify less of a confusion and more of Haas's nonchalant perspective on language's various forms and multiple abilities to offend, hearten, encourage, etc. Also, have you thought about the stanza mentioning "the leaf [fluttering], turning in the wind because that motion in the heat of August protects its cells from drying out"? Have you thought about how this could possibly be a metaphor for a the concrete form of a book? What could Haas be implying about a book and its contents (those of which include language)? Perhaps you might try thinking more analytically regarding imagery in your next posting.
What I really admire about your writing here is that you recognize the significance if the italicized line and are able to thoughtfully explore its components for Haas's purpose.