Thoughts on being born in response to “Riverflesh” by David Marriott
Reading this poem
through the first time, I was struck by the collage of images it created in my
mind. It was like looking at an abstract painting and trying to determine which
parts were the body and which parts were the environment. The title: “Riverflesh”
compounds the body with the environment, and this continues in descriptions of “eyes
as a desert” and “whose grin unfolds like dark butterfly wings in the
wilderness.” After reading it through a few more times, I decided that the
compounding of the human body and nature was not meant to be de-coded. The
river, the snow, the unworldly swamps: they may all correlate to different
parts of the human body but what made this interesting was not that I could puzzle
out exactly which bit matched which. It was interesting because this was a way
of describing the world and thinking about physicality in a different way than
what I’m used to.
After the
line: “let him embrace my unmade being”, I started to read this poem from the
perspective of a baby in the womb. To a fetus, the body of the mother is the
whole world, and their relationship with physical space (if they have one, as
this poem suggests) is unique. I thought a line in the second stanza of part I
illustrated this well: “After she conceives the earth will burst and her yellow
eye will baffle the corridor as she fastens the veils of dawn”. I read this as
what a fetus would see when being born. The world outside the mother appears at
the opening of the birth canal, the yellow eye is the sun, and it baffles. If
we could remember being born, how would we make sense of it? How could we
conceive of our entire world being inside another? Somehow, we did, we’re all
here now.
Other questions that Riverflesh brought up for me were around the idea of being
unwanted. There is no indication in this poem that this baby feels wanted. The lines:
“The materials a nightmare, not my fault” and “The wronged child not in words
but in desire” were particularly heartbreaking. That the child has to remind
us, itself, it’s parents, that being born was “not my fault” suggests that it
has felt at some point that it was. “This experience has made me unnatural,
where he goes, he knows that I will follow,” ends part I, and is reminiscent of
the predatory feeling in part III: “he hunts me through the ice; the wreck of
snow melting us to nothing as day breaks onto storm.” This poem has many
violent moments: a wracked spine, bloody knees, an open rib, fever-drenched
bestial fear, extracted enamel, ripped seam, bride snatching, hematomas, a
monster devoured by his brother, workers swallowing misery and lead, to name a
few. These moments of physical violence make me consider how this poem might
explore how someone thinks about their own personhood when they were not only
unwanted, but brought into a violent world through violent means.
Part II stood out
to me for several reasons. One is that it’s shorter than parts I and III, it’s
in six two-line stanzas instead of two twenty-line stanzas or two six-line and
two five-line stanzas. The lines themselves are also shorter, and there is no ‘I’,
instead there is a ‘we’: “because we parented the creature, here ruin is the
sign.” I read this part from the perspective of the parents, and I was struck
by how short it was. It didn’t create the same kaleidoscope of images that
parts I and III did. Maybe because the experience of being born is not
considered as often as the experience of giving birth, so the baby’s
perspective was given more color. Part II felt distant, as everything the baby
experienced goes “Spoken but unheard”. If the baby expressed any or all of its
thoughts, they were not interpreted by the parents, they just heard screaming: “these
black, mourning sounds unsleeve the cauls as fetus-gifts.”
I leave this poem
thinking about how the unknown experience of being conceived and being born linger
with us. Part III ends saying: “the creature is my echo and my future. But I am
his nightfall, his abandoned grief, and my scarred surface never heals.” How
might the trauma of being born affect our lives?
I found your statement, "I decided that the compounding of the human body and nature was not meant to be de-coded" to be a poignant one. I think when reading we often focus on how we "think" things should be pieced together rather than how they "are" put together. I think you do a great job of reminding us that construction of language, in this case the conjoining of body and nature, is a kind of world building that some may not be used to. It opens up possibilities for exploring our own conceptions of what separates body and nature, and may challenge us to see the fibrous tissues that connect body and nature from different angles.
ReplyDeleteNice, Maggie. It’s clear that you didn’t force meaning into what you read but allowed the words, the lines and the images mingle to produce this analysis. I appreciate your addressing the lines and their length and the rhythm produced in the couplets as opposed to the long sequence first stanza. Well done, elmaz
ReplyDelete