Representing Absence
Aloha. I am scheduled to present next week on "Representing Absence"
and have been scribbling notes longhand. As the non-poet political
science person in the seminar, I thought I'd share my reasons why I
wanted to present on this text.
The title intrigued me. The idea of absence plays an important
methodological role in my dissertation work. I use discourse analysis
(though probably in some different ways from literary theorists) and
contrapuntal approaches to seek out what resides in a "text" -- which,
in my research, happens to be a town and interviews -- but is not
visible in full view. A few feminist theorists have spoken of this idea
as looking for what is hidden in plain sight.
I like how that theoretical/methodolical idea shows up in this book of
poetry.
Reading the text for the first time through, I found myself marking
passages and lines that interested me, as well as simply reading and
enjoying the poems' flow. On my second read-through, it felt as though
the poet's "courage'" to speak of absence politically grew deliberately
stronger as the reader progressed linearally through the poems. Themes
of nationality and patriotism, as well as institutionality, seemed to
grow more pronounced. In the process, the use of words grows more
sparse, and as the big gaps (white space) in the latter pages might
suggest, words ultimately disappear. Thus, in speaking up, speaking
subversively, one's presence is erased.
There's a wonderfully ironic voice in this text, as well. The poet's
use of "cultural gifts," for instance, speaks to that.
I'll have more to say next week. Hopefully, this is helpful now. And
hopefully I'm not missing the point altogether. If I am, please help.
Himanee