April 28, 2004

DISCOURSE WITH CARE.

A Man may make a Remark –
In itself – a quiet thing
That may furnish the Fuse unto a Spark
In dormant nature – lain –

Let us divide – with skill –
Let us discourse – with care –
Powder exists in Charcoal –
Before it exists in Fire –

– Emily Dickinson
913 (1865)

Via the Eudæmonist.

Posted by languagehat at April 28, 2004 10:56 AM
Comments

I know, it's a pain, isn't it? I do this all the time. I try to tell myself that my foot just won't fit into my mouth, but somehow it always ends up there.
sigh It's my lot to go through life misunderstood. I never mean any harm by anything I say but somehow the words just come out wrong. I must remember to keep my feet on the ground in future.
Ho hum.

Posted by: Eliza at April 28, 2004 01:23 PM

But Eliza, everybody loves you! Just keep dancing and let the feet fall where they will.

Posted by: language hat at April 28, 2004 02:26 PM

Having spend a long time researching the history of gunpowder I was struck by the poet's imagery involving what was at the time the only known explosive. Gunpowder indeed contains charcoal (in a mixture with sulfur and saltpeter). The ingedients were individually harmless; mixed they became explosive.

My book is called Gunpowder: Alchemy, Bombards & Pyrotechnics.

Posted by: Jack Kelly at April 28, 2004 02:42 PM

Fascinating. I think Dickinson was interested in delayed effects, and in finding images for them; #913 reminds me of #1261, in that both have to do with dormancy (and "discoursing with care"):

A Word dropped careless on a Page
May stimulate an eye
When folded in perpetual seam
The Wrinkled Maker lie

Infection in the sentence breeds
We may inhale Despair
At distances of Centuries
From the Malaria -

Posted by: Amanda at April 28, 2004 05:20 PM

That's quite a poem. And the rhyme of despair and malaria is daring even for Dickinson.

Posted by: language hat at April 28, 2004 07:27 PM

Am I also to infer that Page rhymes with seam?

Posted by: PF at April 28, 2004 07:30 PM

No, we're dealing with rhymes on the 2 and 4 here.

Posted by: language hat at April 28, 2004 08:55 PM

Why is that poets strive to make lines 2 and 4 rhyme while leaving lines 1 and 3 un-rhymed? It must be a quest for closure. Does anyone know of an English poem where, in each stanza, lines 1 and 3 rhyme but lines 2 and 4 don't?

Posted by: Alexei at April 29, 2004 02:33 AM

My bad hats. Is my face red.

Posted by: PF at April 29, 2004 12:09 PM

I’m scouring through my poetry book;
A happy girl I’d be
To find after a careful look
Rhymes for lines three and one.

Alas none do I find so I
Am posting this small ditty,
So that at least you’ll all see why
Lines two and four sound better.

Posted by: Eliza at April 29, 2004 01:05 PM

That's how one of the most original and, perhaps, indecent 20th century Russian poems is structured.

Posted by: Alexei at April 30, 2004 06:11 AM

I don't know what happened to the link: http://noskoff.lib.ru/akuzm010.html#l220

Posted by: Alexei at April 30, 2004 06:12 AM

Excellent example! (It's a poem by the notoriously indecent Kuzmin.)

Posted by: language hat at April 30, 2004 07:54 AM