L.S. Dembo, in “Louis Zukofsky: Objectivist Poetics and the Quest for Form,” provides an explanation of the objectivists during the modernist period and how their poetic philosophies was also a “quest for form.”
Dembo opens with a brief summary on the Objectivists poets, focusing mainly on Louis Zukofsky and his place within, or at the edge of, the objectivist label. Dembo argues that “many of the poems, implicitly or explicitly, record the efforts to achieve ideal ‘objectivist’ perception and to discover the form that will turn sensations and impressions into poetry” (74). Dembo then gives an analysis of Zukofsky’s opening essay in the objectivist issue of Poetry. The two virtues of poetry were objectification and sincerity. Dembo tries to provide an explanation of these two terms as Zukofsky does. Dembo states Zukofsky defines sincerity as “thinking with the things as they exist” (75). Dembo then explains that the image was no longer enough; the poet had to find the real in its entirety. This would occur in poetry when “the most direct contact” occurred as a physiological response. This response is “free of sentiment and other distortions of the generalizing mind” (76). He also discusses “nominalistic poetry,” which is the “synthesis of real detail” or poetry that is simplistic.
Dembo draws on Rene Taupin’s understanding of this type of poetry, and describes its value as having “‘energies and active manifestations of the subject’” (76). The form, then, appears as a naturally occurring part of word combinations that appear from sincerity. Thus the forms appear to “suggest themselves” and are manifested from the energies of the words (77). Dembo draws upon Zukofsky’s analysis of Rezikoff’s poem “Aphrodite Urania as an example of effective sincerity. The poem is only one line: “The ceaseless weaving of the uneven water” (77). Zukofsky states that each word possesses an energy that reflects the content of the words as well as the shape or movement. This focus on word energies reveals the sincerity of the language used and how it works to create the form.
Dembo then explains Zukofsky’s “objectification” and how it affects the form used within a poem. Dembo states that this virtue occurs “when a complete structure is actually realized and not merely suggested” (77). There is then a sense of “rested totality” that creates an “apprehension satisfied completely as to the appearance of the art form as an object” (77). Zukofsky’s analysis of Reznikoff’s poem “Hellenist” reveals he has no stake in the theme of the poem and is instead interested in the structure created from the words’ rhythms and syllables “to which the mind does not wish to add; nor does it, any more than when it contemplates a definite object by itself” (78). Thus, objectification is when a structure’s wholeness is observed within the poem and nothing more need be added and nothing more need be removed.
The objectivist term is derived from “an objective.” This objective is provided in Zukofsky’s manifesto and focuses on optics, military use, and use extended to poetry. Hence, “the poet is concerned with particulars (sincerity) and their direction (objectification)” (79). Therefore, Dembo concludes that true poetry is when words act on different particulars and these words can extend beyond current connotations and reach into the present (and thus, into the future) to reach a universal influence and depth (79). Dembo emphasizes the differences between Zukofsky’s and Pound’s poetics, but also states that the required lyrical qualities of words was a foundational aspect of both. Dembo states that “poetry was therefore ‘nothing else but the completed action of writing words set to music” (80). Dembo then transitions to a different section where he selects certain poems of Zukofsky and provides close reading analysis of particular stanzas. This analysis provides insight into the different models and perceptions of sincerity and objectification within poetry. Towards his conclusion, Dembo begins to, finally, return to the idea of the quest for form. He states, “The quest for form carried with it, as I have suggested, an attempt to perceive in a particular way; that is, with the ‘clear physical eye’” (94). Focusing on the particularities within Zukofsky’s poems, Dembo illuminates the many ways in which Zukofsky strives for sincerity and objectification. He concludes by stating that Zukofsky should have the weight of a major poet within the modernist canon.
Questions: Where would you say you see sincerity and objectification in Zukofsky’s peoms? In Reznikioff’s? Other objectivist poets? How would you describe sincerity and objectification? Are these virtues still present in poetry being written now?
I had read this article too before my blog post, though decided on a more contemporary article that was way, way less palatable. I found this article to be rather informative on Zukofsky’s forms, which are oftentimes seemingly and maddeningly disjointed. Dembo’s explanation of Zukofsky being far more interested in the effect of his poetics (especially in his later poems), as opposed to the content therein, made his poems, for me, make a lot more sense. Dembo certainly did an excellent job applying the “sincerity” and “objectivism” concepts that Zukofsky himself defined to Zukofsky’s poems. I believe it was also in this article that Dembo pointed out with amusement that Zukofsky suggested Reznikoff’s “Aphrodite Urania” did not need a title, as the one-line poem was capable as standing on its own in terms of its sincerity.
Great summary.