Gilding the Pieces: LA-CROIX-MA-FILLE.

Fan Tail 450
The old Impington Windmill at Histon, Cambs, 1967.

Histon is the small village near Cambridge where Christopher Woodman began to restore an old windmill in the 1960s. The ‘fan-tail’ which you see here drives a series of cogs and shafts that turn the whole top of the mill so the wind-blades always face the wind. This meant that when Christopher Woodman looked out of his window from the Miller’s Cottage each morning, having completed that part of the restoration, he was never quite sure where he was as the world changed all its coordinates when the wind shifted directions in the night.

.
PARTINGS & RESTORATIONS

……………………………………………………………………..updated May 12th, 2022
To start with, I have very few friends who read poetry and even fewer who read the poetry I write. This is partly because at two very important junctures in my life I quit poetry altogether, and as a poet I have no past.

The first time I quit was in my teens when I stopped writing because I knew my poetry was fake. Even at sixteen I was aware that I wrote poetry because I wanted to be a poet, and would cobble together anything and call it a poem for that reason. CW Yearbook 1957Indeed, I was aware that I was putting on a mask in order to hide my own struggle with myself, not to express it — I couldn’t tell anybody that but knew it myself. That’s one of the reasons I’m still so interested in W.B.Yeats who was an out-of-touch adolescent with similar obsessions all his life. On the other hand, right from the start Yeats built on an ancient mythology that had everything to say in itself however much he fudged it, and of course he was also a genius in so many other ways. I posed as Yeats did but with a great deal less skill and with no effective schtick of my own at all. I pretended to be Shelley, for example, and even nourished the fantasy that my boy’s boarding school was the school that imprisoned 19 year old Percy Bysshe’s 16 year old Harriet! But all the same I did get a superb education there and, perhaps even more importantly, the experience of waking up among the magical New Hampshire lakes and forests for five of my most sensitive years.

I also arrived with a beautiful soprano voice, and from the age of 11 sang solos in the St. Paul’s School boy’s choir, Handel to Mendelssohn. I did it for that long because my voice remained clear as a bell until I was all of 15, no less. And of course I was just getting ready to quit poetry at the same time that my voice was finally changing, and little did I realize what all that would mean for the latter part of my life!

To finish up the First Parting, then, I fell in love with the girl in the red silk dress at 17, married her at 20, and had my first child as a sophomore at Columbia in 1960, just 5 days after I turned 21. I loved my young wife to distraction too but lost her not so long after I married her, just one single fraught decade out of 8, and lost her in much the same way as both the hero and the author lost Yvonne de Galais in Le Grand Meaulnes, that most important of all tropes.

At a séance in New Haven, Conn., 1962.

It was thus that women trumped poetry in my life, and in a sense still do. But I’m not in any way a threat to anybody, not even to myself, nor have I ever been ‘any of the above’ what is more promiscuous. On the contrary, I’ve been much too fond of my wives even when the marriages failed, and they were long ones, an inspired 10+ years each. That always made it especially hard to let them go and, like Alain-Fournier, to my detriment I didn’t.

Women have always been it in my poetry as well — as it was for the Troubadors, for Dante and Petrarch, for Goethe and Coleridge to John Fowles and his mentor, Alain-Fournier. On the other hand, this pedigree has had less to do with my personal relationships with the women I have loved than with what might be called my ‘magical thinking.’ Indeed, it lies at the core of my inner life as a seriously engaged Buddhist/Christian/Animist who remains both an undeveloped enfant terrible and an old hurt soul to this day. As silly as all that may sound, I wouldn’t be me without any of it!

And just to mention that I’m now in the 28th year of a marriage with a very real, dynamic, professional woman, Homprang Chaleekanha, and if you want to know more about that sort of love relationship you should read the last of my 3 books, Fig Leaf Sutras: a Memoir in Poems, 1990-2020 (I just hope you will be able to get hold of it soon. Indeed, it’s out there everywhere right now, fishing with the very brightest feathers and most succulent bait it can manage.)

The Second Parting was not with writing poetry but with studying the history of it as a graduate student at King’s College, Cambridge. C.S.Lewis accepted my research proposal based on the reading of Edmund Spenser’s The Faerie Queene I had developed under Professor Harry Berger at Yale, and C.S.Lewis was my Supervisor until he passed away leaving me just with the title of my thesis, “Polyphonic Narrative in Elizabethan Literature” — which remains to this day the origin of my style, my imagery, and my modus vivendi both as a poet and as a person.

That Second Parting happened just four years after my brother Tony’s accident in 1965, and was certainly hastened by it. In the interval I had won a Research Fellowship at Christ’s College and at the same time become Chairman of the Cambridge University Buddhist Society, a delicate balancing act if there ever was one. And what I did after that shocked everybody, even myself — I resigned my Fellowship at Christ’s, sold my beloved windmill, packed up my beautiful wife and by then 3 little girls, and went off to Scotland with a Tibetan Lama. But the really devastating event in that Second Parting was the moment when my beautiful wife, aka ‘the girl in the red silk dress,’ departed with another of the Lama’s disciples, and I found myself alone with 3 small children and a whole lot of relics — memories, images, artifacts, whatever you want to call them — all of which are still covered in the gold leaf that has always sanctified my turbulent, topsy-turvy past.

Indeed, “La-Croix-Ma-Fille” used to be called “Gold Leaf on the Waters” but has now moved on to a title that’s more like life as mine actually is. And how I hope you will be able to get hold of “LA-CROIX-MA-FiILLE in the very near future as it’s so winsome and so longs to be read. It’s out trolling at the moment too, and my fingers ache with so much crossing.

Christopher

A BRIEF RESPITE.

Sandpit Antique 400
Tea break at the Old Windmill with Sophia & Delia in the sandpit.

Christopher Woodman restored the old ‘Impington Windmill’ in the village of Histon while living in the Miller’s Cottage at the base of the mill in the 1960s — those are wooden cog-wheels that he’s sitting on which he intended to restore as well. He had already rebuilt the whole fan-tail porch in hard wood and recovered the dome-like cap as well with lap-strake cedar. Fortunately there were blacksmiths in Cambridgeshire at the time who still knew how to find and/or recast the broken iron parts of the machinery just as his writing attempts to relocate and sometimes to recast the missing parts of himself and his life. Much of that was also involved in his 400pps Cambridge thesis, “Polyphonic Narrative in Elizabethan Literature,” which was not liked at all by any.

1910

This is an old photo of the ‘Impington Windmill’ in 1910 with young women in white bonnets picking strawberries for the Chivers jam factory in the nearby village. If you look closely you can see two figures standing on the fantail. There are also two horse-drawn wagons, and the overseer is wearing a suit and fine hat. This is very much the worlds of both Tess of the d’Urbervilles (1891) and Le Grand Meaulnes (1913), remnants of both of which were still there in rural England and France when Christopher Woodman arrived just 50 years later. The miller’s cottage where he lived with his wife and children is visible just to the left of the mill, indeed his third and youngest daughter, Unity, was born in the cottage in 1967.

1

THIS IS THE END OF THE THIRD SHORT PREFACE.

.

YOU WOULD BE WELCOME TO LEAVE A COMMENT BELOW.

………+………+………+………+………+………+………+………

If you would like more background on LA-CROIX-MA-FILLE you can click on the title.

[The next two ***Major Threads***,  FOR THOSE LIKE GALILEO and  IN PRAISE OF THE STILL UNWEIGHED: OFF THE RECORD AT 80are ‘Password Protected’ because they include a number of unpublished poems which are in books under consideration.]

[The next Open Thread is NOT HAT, WHAT’S UNDER THE HAT ON THE ROCK.]

Protected: WHY I WROTE HOW BAD IS THE DEVIL

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

A Letter To Tom about “Rhyme”


Tony Woodman and me at the Gran Prix of Czechoslovakia, Brno, 1963

Dear Tom……………………………………………………[November 22nd, 2009]
My hunch is that your emphasis on “rhyme” in your previous article is going to be misunderstood. I think it will give those who don’t want to hear you at all the excuse not to read you, and may weaken your argument even for those that are willing to give what you say a try.

Let me say this first: I’m a curious critic because I’m so sophisticated yet so naive and trusting — I know so much (or at least ought to, considering the length of my education) and yet am so obviously an innocent. I deliberately didn’t say ‘ill-informed’ there, because what I do know I know quite well, and my eyes are always wide-open. It’s just that I’ve only been engaged with the history of ‘Modern Poetry’ since I started writing it in 1990, and I was already 50 by then. I’ve never sat in a Modern Poetry lecture, for example, never participated in a Writing Workshop, and only rarely attended a Poetry Reading. I’ve got Gawain and the Green Knight, all of Chaucer, The Faerie Queene, George Herbert, Christopher Smart, John Clare and Emily Dickinson on my shelves here in Chiang Mai, but very few literary-critical texts written after Wimsatt & Brooks.

The fact is I only came up against ‘Modernism’ when I realized that the 10 precious packets I had sent to a much-respected University Poetry Series between 1994 and 2006 were probably never opened, and that my 8 packets to yet another up-and-coming Press hadn’t deterred its editor from sending me a form letter purporting to be a personal critique of my work. The letter, almost identical copies of which have subsequently emerged, suggested that for a certain sum the editor would help me to improve my book and that I could then resubmit it to his/her competition. I remember that moment very well — I was at my desk with my cheque book in hand when I was first alerted to the existence of Foetry.com which had already started to investigate the letters. When I then complained about my own letter on Poets & Writers (Nov 2006), I was scolded by a well-known critic for my limited understanding of publishing poetry in America today, while the very same judges who had abused me were praised for their hard work and integrity.

That was hard for me — and still is.

But the critic who attacked me on P & W was partly right, of course — even at 66 I was uppity and ignorant, and was nowhere near ready to concede that the situation I found myself in was ‘normal’ what is more ethically acceptable or conducive to the development of good poetry in me or anyone else in America. And the next thing I knew I found myself banned on-line for discussing my disquiet, first by the P&W blog, then by the AoAP blog, and finally by the Poetry Foundation’s new and wonderful Blog Harriet — not a very promising start to my new career, and particularly not at 69.

So what can you call me, then, and how can my input be more useful?

Hardly a “noble savage,” as my style is too perfect even if my content is analphabet. Yet I am a peasant in poetry when you compare me with somebody like David Lehman, for example, what is more Stephen Burt — and indeed, one of the reasons I got put “on moderation” at Blog:Harriet so early was that I annoyed a lot of people who knew a whole lot more than I did about the poetry business, and wanted me to be more practical, respectful, and compliant. Because after all, who was I to strew the nice Harriet ground with metaphors that exploded with such devastating effect, even taking out the management? And my cow pat hammer, that was the last straw [open the ‘Comments,’ then ‘Show More Comments,” then scroll down to July 6th, 2009, “Footnote for Posterity”]. And I was fired a few days later.

What I do have (and this is all about that word “rhyme,” of course, Tom) is my Rip Van Winkle status, a contemporary poet back from the dead. Because my anomaly is that I was so highly educated in the History of Literature (Columbia, Yale, King’s College, Cambridge, summa cum laude, phi beta kappa, Dino Bigongiari Prize for Italian Studies, Woodrow Wilson at Yale, Kellett Fellow at King’s [after Lionel Trilling and Norman Podhoretz but before David Lehman], C.S.Lewis & G.G.Hough as my Supervisors for my work on Edmund Spenser, Tutor for George Steiner at Churchill, Research Fellow at Christ’s) — yet I never got formally educated in Modern Poetry, not once. So I go straight from the ’30s in which I was born and jump straight to the ’90s in which I got published by Marilyn Hacker in The Kenyon Review — sans mentor, sans prize, sans compromise! Indeed, I will be forever grateful to Marilyn Hacker — and to the likes of James Laughlin (only just legible on his old Remington), Theodore & Renee Weiss (I was one of the last QR Finalists, and I still have his notes in pencil), Joseph Parisi ( who read my long poem, Works & Days,  3 times!), and Alice Quinn (who suggested The Kenyon Review for my Connemara Trousers). They made not just my day but my life!

Yes, a “noble non-starter,” I might be called, playing on that P & W critic’s “loser.” Or a “noble non-accredited accomplisher” perhaps.   Because the irony is that in the end my publishing credits have turned out to be not bad at all, considering my age and when I started.

So back to  “rhyme,” then, Tom. I’m sure you know exactly what you mean by the word, and you do know the literary-historical details like the back of your hand. But what you don’t know first hand is the snobbery that lies behind the creation of Modernism, the revulsion with which those early 20th century poets around Pound and Hilda Dolittle rejected the late 19th century mush so loved by those who had just emerged from the crude working class.  Because Edgar Guest/Hallmark-type “rhyme” was not the side of the verse they specifically despised, but rather the feel-good sentimentality which went along with the satisfaction you got when you at last sat down to ‘dinner’ together around a ‘table’ or ‘read’ together  in the ‘parlor’ — which factory workers were still not going to do in Britain or America for some time to come. On the other hand, after 1916 “A Heap O’Livin” sold over a million copies — which opens up a huge social and educational grey area in the History of American Poetry, one which is not yet quite out of the bag like what actually happened when my ancestors put in to Plymouth.

That’s what I know about more than most of you who are reading this and interested in our struggle. Because I was brought up in the 19th century, and I was a snob and “mush” made me feel unclean too, so I know the feeling only too well. I spent my early years in Gladstone, New Jersey, after all, the so-called “Gold Coast,” and in my American childhood I never sat down with a worker, or a so-called ‘person of color,’ or a Catholic who wasn’t a descendant of Diamond Jim Brady (my mother’s family in Boston in the 20s didn’t socialize with the Kennedys, who were Irish like the servants, and my mother was terribly distressed when I named my second daughter “Delia Hilary Orlando Woodman,” (Irish plus a name which could be mistaken for someone of Italian descent???).

And to our great credit, but goodness knows why, we ran, my two brothers and I — my younger brother, Loring, westward to the Gros Ventre in Wyoming, myself eastward across the Atlantic to Cambridge and then on up to remote Eskdalemuir, and Tony just really really fast (he was the first American to have a big success in Gran Prix motorcycle racing in Europe until he broke his back in the Northwest 200 in Ireland in 1965). And how I ran, and kept bees, and fiddled around with Trungpa Rimpoche, and sailed, but mostly just fell in love with my wonderfully wrong women — and little by little I sloughed off that good taste and sense of superiority which went along with the family silver (I still have a trunkful somewhere, and enough 18th century willow pattern china to serve you all at once, though goodness knows where that is as well) — and here I am now writing to you like the fool…

No, it’s not the rhyme, Tom — it’s the snobbery of a new intellectual class that is still not too secure and needs to put a lot of distance between itself and the upper working-class poetry that makes sense when you finally arrive on the first rung of the new upwardly mobile America.

And should the ‘petit bourgeois poetry’ of the 19th and early 20th centuries be re-evaluated, then, should that forgotten corpus be restored to grace? Hardly, but the alternative “Make it New” movement at the opposite extreme must be re-assessed as ‘petit-bourgeois poetry’s’ shadow, in the Jungian sense, so that those aspects of our western poetry tradition that got debased and/or hidden by ‘Modernism’ can be brought out into the open and liberated — like feeling, like music, like value and meaning and even, when its applicable, like rhyme. Indeed, all the underpinnings of Modernism must be fearlessly re-examined, and it’s tendency to sew new clothes for the emperor ruthlessly exposed, as we’re doing — and how the courtiers do kick and howl!

That’s our theme, of course, and it’s a big one, and one for which I think I’m well-equipped even with just a small cow pat as a hammer in my hand.

Christopher
Read the rest of this entry »