a judder slams sudden clouds
Martyn Crucefix (b. 1956)
Beneath Tremendous Rain (1990) (nb his first collection)
On Whistler
Mountain (1994)
The first thing I want to say about Martyn Crucefix is that
he comes from Trowbridge, which makes him (so far as I’m concerned) the most
famous modern Trowbridgian, with the sole exception of Stephen Lee, that
comfortably upholstered snooker player with the cue-action. (Less recently,
Isaac Pitman, inventor of Pitman shorthand system, was a famous son...and George Grabbe lived there in his latter years). On my own side of the
county boundary, in Frome, we can lay claim to the Shoe-bomber and Jenson Button (alas, does his name already require the explanatory note "racing driver"?) and Jemma-Anne
Gunning, the topless Maenad rejected from Faliraki. Plus I think I'm right in claiming that Peter Redgrove first met Penelope Shuttle at the George Hotel. And perhaps Samuel Daniel, from nearby Beckington, can be chalked up to our credit in this imaginary competition between E. Somerset and W. Wiltshire.
Anyhow...
Boots
Rounded brown toe-caps
are the wet muzzles. . . of what?
They browse through puddles, mud
and grass. They’re at home with thistles,
nettle, thorn – the voice I imagine
is the leathery mooing of contented cattle.
You say, what do they talk about?
“Look around – there is plenty to love!”
And sure enough, every step
has left its token in the caterpillar track
of their soles: grit and dust,
a piece of grass, pale stones like pips
caught in teeth
at the end of a slap-up meal.
- - -
(...) the essence
of ‘bootness’ which is what I like.
Oh, with your padded leather backs,
grip, grip always my ankles high up.
Ride rough-shod under my human soles.
(“Shoe
Pieces. 2. Boots”, OWM)
We want a more direct experience of nature, and take our
boots out of the wardrobe. The boots enable us to get out onto Striding Edge;
but in a way they enable us by insulating us. The knobbly rocks are soothed. We
stand in a puddle and don’t get wet – it’s the boots that browse through the
puddle. So we personify the boots, partly in envy of their total involvement
with stuff, partly in a spirit of fantasy that lets us share the
involvement but without the discomforts.
The miles go by, and this raw desire for nature subsides;
the earth loses its colour, the ground loses its particularity and becomes
vast. Now we appreciate the function of good boots; the grip, the ride, the
walking they do for us. We no longer wish to cram our souls with stuff,
but to make camp. I think, the next time I clatter down a stream-bed at dusk, I
will find myself saying: Ride rough-shod under my human soles.
I have a distaste for these appropriations of cliché and groaning puns. (So it’s
unfortunate that both mainstream and innovative poets are addicted to them.)
But I’ll make an exception for this line. The “under” is nurturing, like a hull
or a womb. “Ride”, once a stable-word, now suggests a car chewing up distance
while the stereo thumps smoothly.
Accident
She leaves him, Johnson-powdered,
a dusty nude, squatting on her bed,
a little Buddha, pulling his toes.
The bathroom’s a fug where she kept
the gas-heater blasting because he
played for ages in inches of water.
Not vain (just the mirror’s well-placed),
she takes a look at herself in passing,
registers something remote and greyed
crossing beneath the condensation.
She pulls out the plug as a ripping
scream panics her back, expecting
bright blood, a disfiguring dive
to the floor, twisted limbs at least.
He still sits plumb on the bed,
reading his palms and wailing a high
continuous wound in the air
at his chubby fingers, their wrinkling.
(“Accident”,
OWM)
She sees him as a little man; her own perception is adult,
complicated by words and associations. She makes a judgment: fug. She
gets into a tangle with noticing she’s not vain and maybe that’s vain and if I
were vain would I feel what I really do feel, remote and greyed? At the sound
of the scream she expects what she really doesn’t expect, exaggerating the
images so that they seem less likely. In short, she’s altogether a normal
person. The child sees the metamorphosis of his hands, and is horrorstruck by
the enormous injury that he hasn’t even felt. He will learn to overcome his
direct experience of nature, sensibly, but lose it in the process.
Crucefix has written sound advice about giving readings:
train your voice, slow down, mix the intense with the relaxed, make ‘em lauqh
make ‘em cry. Some of this aesthetic has got into the composition-stage,
too. This is a poet who is conscious of an audience, who is aware of how his
poem will play.
I feel a resistance. Perhaps it is an absurd
competitiveness, a reluctance to admire someone whose career feels too
ironically close to mine. I question the contemporary ordinariness of his
persona, the conversational ease with which he says
I’d known him at school
This
seems so Gallic
These
days it’s turned by a tug on a rope
They’d
always out in the end
All
that’s irrefutable
is
the swift Mercedes coach
What
is remaining
of
your atmosphere is lost as you
adjust
to ours
By
day, she sold the real thing
from
buckets on the quay
Listen.
I will explain –
When
it’s finished, he’ll gladly talk,
how
he treasures his privilege.
as
if her weeding of error has finally
turned
trumps
I’d
never have believed the way we’d come
apart,
all but lost what I’d trusted in:
our
common blood, brother’s understanding.
In the slangy ellisions, “I’d” and “They’d”, there’s a
skating over the surface that makes these poems feel like addresses to the
audience, not urgent meditations that tax the poet himself. And they rarely
surprise. When Crucefix “does” El Caudillo, Shelley’s drowning, Wainwright (the
fellwalker), a Redgrovian fantasy (“Wasps”), a demotic bit of Chaucer,
elegies for the dead, semi-dramatic monologues, interlaced narratives such as “Rosetta”
and “On Whistler Mountain”... the poem’s achievement is always a bit
close to the expectation. Poems about paintings, about formative sexual
experience, about family history, foreign trips. Yes, I reflect ungratefully,
these are the kind of poems one does write.
Not that predictability precludes satisfaction. “Teacher”
(in OWM) is an intensely lustful poem (the teacher for a
female pupil) – the more clearly he sees her, the more his vision is distorted
with desire, and the poem ends with (what he uprightly suppresses, so the poem
maintains a certain jaunty comedy)
that hot, unpatrolled dormitory of
himself
where she did nothing but sleep and
please him.
Though at the outset the poem unnervingly recalls Don’t
stand so close to me, not to mention Yes sir, I can boogie, the
final effect is troublingly sad, and sexy, and funny. I should also do justice
to “Wasps” (in OWM). There is no fear in Redgrove’s poems; but
Crucefix makes you flinch:
Jointed twiggy legs hold me down
beneath a swivelling, oiled head
as uncommunicative as stone.
Its long abdomen is like a cob of
maize
I find velvety to the touch.
I do find the poems sustaining. Re-reading “El Caudillo” (in
BTR), for example, one locks on to the pines, the “thickening layers of
needles”, and a curious contrast between two kinds of cleanness. The be-suited
entourage return down the slope, “kicking up flares of pine needles before
them”, and get into the black cars, with their antiseptic “click and cough of
the doors”. One briefly imagines pine-needles on the floor of the car. The
image comes alive with expression – of the abstraction in which a business decision
is made, still influenced by the surroundings that are scarcely even observed,
though they were chosen by someone. The kicking expresses discomfort as well as
excitement, impatience; it is an adjustment to the decision now made, an
adjustment that is necessary whatever one’s feelings might have been
beforehand.
But I forget what I’m here for.
(“Midsummer at High
Laver”, BTR)
In this poem the poet makes a “self-conscious” visit to John
Locke’s place of burial, but the poem takes an unexpected course, distracted by
thoughts about ageing parents and by an irrigator. That’s often when the poems
begin to strike marvellous insights – it’s those scatterings, rather than the
poems as finished forms, that sustain me.
I watch the flailing mare’s-tail,
the jet-stream
spray of the irrigator beside the
church.
Its white angle above the potato
fields
seems to crumple to a vaporous
nothing, yet
a judder slams sudden clouds of
fizzing spray.
(mare’s-tail, an aquatic plant with plumy foliage, swaying
in slow streams – water-milfoil would have been an even better image, but
mare’s-tail has a more suggestive name, precluding the need for botany). This
spasmodic irrigator is an answer, of sorts, to talk of death and even to John
Locke. It is both beautiful and insane, a nurturer and a destroyer too. (The
water breaks up the soil, and of course its mannerisms are disconcertingly like
a machine-gun too.) It marks time passing and it doesn’t care. This irrigator
is a secular sermon. It’s because of the soothing contemplation of machines
that we don’t now need an after-life, perhaps. Electric wheelchairs and TV
schedules reassure the old. Soothing, and numbing too. We get stalled, in a
marvellous realization of the irrigator that carries on “doing its thing” after
the poet has walked back to his car and the poem has ended.
In this poem, technology plays a more important role than
appears at first. The abstracted motorist comes to a place of rubber thongs
supporting tree saplings and of florist’s creations around a fresh grave. It is
centuries away from Gray’s Elegy, as it should be.
In the long poem “On Whistler Mountain”
technology is everything. This is a brilliantly complex narrative. The poet
hears the news of his brother’s suicide; they went skiing in Whistler; a brutal
Amerindian tale of Blackbird; they were in Vancouver at New Year; flying home; his
brother’s involvement in Gulf War technology; as boys, they disinter a stone
angel in an old mason’s yard. Without warning the lines switch between narratives.
Then the poet starts to dream of an encounter with his dead brother, and the
narratives begin to inter-mix. Eventually we contemplate this:
We
stood beside
its pocky tarmac. Sunlight. A
grid-lock
of luxury saloons, jeeps, trucks,
stalled
fire engines, a bulldozer. Any set
of wheels seemed to have been rashly
commandeered to
drive into the red heart of a
firestorm,
fierce enough to scald the
windshield glass to gobs
of silicone. That there were
survivals
at all was a miracle: a new case
of White Flake laundry soap,
slightly burned.
A black bird face-down, is Donald
Duck turned up.
A glossy calendar – some daffodils,
thatch, white café tables, a tall
skyline...
The poem lurches off into other narratives for a line or
two, and returns:
Closer. Each of the cabs sheltered
black loads,
shapeless at first, the colour of
weathered
coal, the texture of a sooty coral.
Memory releasing, I recognized
what had been teeth – these grinning
because
the lower jaw and face-bottom had
been torn off.
In the flat bed of a stalled Nissan
truck,
this coal-shape went head-down,
hopeful ostrich,
its buttocks arrested in mid-air,
legs
blasted at mid-thigh, ending
abruptly
in a flutter of charcoal like the
film
of carbon it must have watched in a
childhood fire.
In the Ford ahead, a creature’s body
has been blown open, double-doors
onto
organs neatly packed, cooked to
ebony.
In a Renault van, a squat roughened
log.
A shell-wound like a knot-hole in
its chest.
This reads like a too-close-up vision of the Gulf War on the
ground. But (as in Golding’s Pincher Martin), the details are imagined
out of scraps from elsewhere. As the White Flake soap and Donald Duck and the
vehicles suggest, this is a North American gridlock. The jawless grin suggests
Blackbird’s torn-off beak, and perhaps the way that Chris killed himself. The
ostrich posture recalls the poet’s fears of wipe-out on the ski-slope; the
image of watching a fire recalls Louise on the night they heard the news; the
log is the totem-pole they saw in Vancouver,
and the shell-wound is a knot-hole in a carved figure. The intensity in the
writing, controlled by the quiet syntax, really comes out of the poet’s private
grief. It is avowedly a non-combatant’s poem, concerned with a war that, as
many felt and claimed, seemed peculiarly like a non-combatatant’s war – a
viewer’s war. Subsequent events have wrought further changes in the poem’s
meaning.
“On Whistler
Mountain” would like
to implicate the innocent in war’s atrocities, but we easily see that as a
spasm of grief. If everyone is guilty, the guilty are not named. The poem
remains troubling, innocence leaching away from orange ski-clips, New Year
kisses in Vancouver,
the Seattle Seahawks, satellite phones, museums...
*
A post written back in 2003. I would write it differently today, and apologise for the cheap shots.
Martyn's blog, a very different view of poetry than mine, but crafted, thoughtful and informative: https://martyncrucefix.com/martyns-blog-2/ .
You can read a couple of poems from On Whistler Mountain here:
https://martyncrucefix.com/publications/on-whistler-mountain/
https://martyncrucefix.com/publications/on-whistler-mountain/
Interesting to see him using the word "pitch" to describe a moth landing on a surface. Fresh in my mind from the recent weather, I'm always struck by Laura saying "the snow's pitching" (meaning, starting to settle). Perhaps it's a south-western expression because I never heard it in Sussex.
Labels: Martyn Crucefix
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home