四个诗人
周末读了两个诗人：Robert Frost和Walt Whitman。500页的Frost读了一半，昨晚又把Whitman的《Song of myself》读了一遍。两个诗人都读得很匆忙，本来只是打算先浏览一遍，再仔细研究，知道这样重要的诗人不是一遍两遍能够真正读懂的。其实是刚读完John Berryman的两本诗集（一本诗选和《The dream songs》），想换换口味。
John Berryman的两本诗集读得很辛苦，仍然觉得他缺少莎翁级别诗人的力度，有表达的愿望和勇气，也有足够的素养，但是却少点思考能力，达不到Stevens的澄明之境，更达不到莎翁和Whitman的自然境界（当然，莎翁跟Withman的区别是很明显的）。但是Berryman也有很多值得学习的地方，他的《Eleven Adresses to the Lord》有一种邪气的优雅气质，很见功底。他不是不敢弃绝，有时候尖锐得令人称快，The Dream Songs 311就是一例
famisht henry ate everything in sight
After his ancient fast. His fasting was voluntary,
Self-imposed.
He specially liked hunks of decent bread
Sopped in olive-oil &cut raw onion,
Specially.
Hunger was constitutional with him,
women, cigarettes,liquor,need need need
until he went to pieces.
The pieces sat up& wrote. They did not heed
their piecedom but kept very quietly on
among the chaos.
An old old mistress recently rang up,
Here in Ireland, to see how Henry was:
how was he? Delighted!
He thought she was 3000 miles away,
Safe with her children in New York: she’s coming at five:
We’ll welcome her!
既然已经明白了生活只是pieces又何苦要等待300里外的old old mistress？也许这是Berryman的谦卑之处，或者高傲？高傲地与上帝争辩，即使是带讽刺意味的争辩。但是殊不知即使带讽刺意味的争辩也是一种承认与妥协。不如Whitman的超越。
Frost是最容易读得一个，当然易读并不意味着易懂。他的几首经典作品曾在一些选集里读到过，比如著名的“Out, Out—”。最让我感动的还是他对底层劳动人民生活的描写，他写一个一无是处的老农民死前的情景，写一个农民为了自己眼中的尊严差点被埋在稻草堆里，他写一个农民在暴风雪夜回家的情景。这些故事大多数都是用最简单的对话来表达，对话者也是最底层的人们。他的语言比Whitman粗糙的多，更比不上Stevens。我想这是一种绝对的刻意，或者更准确的说是一种自觉地风格追求。这种语言风格追求跟Wordsworth的全然不同，Wordsworth是为了追求语言的纯粹，Frost却是为了故事与感情的表达，更多的是为了文体。没看到Frost照片之前以为他会有点农民的质朴和土气，看到诗集的封面却大跌眼镜，标准的英国绅士形象（虽然他是老美），看来人真的不可貌相。在我看来他跟Stevens稍微有点可比之处（相对于Berryman和Whitman来说）在于他们的表达都趋于客观，很明显地表现在他们对于自然的态度（其实诗人与自然的关系是永恒的命题，每个诗人都可以从这点来考验）。Stevens在Notes Toward A Supreme Fiction的It Must be abstract一章第五节写到：
85 The lion roars at the enraging desert,
86 Reddens the sand with his red-colored noise,
87 Defies red emptiness to evolve his match,
88 Master by foot and jaws and by the mane,
89 Most supple challenger. The elephant
90 Breaches the darkness of Ceylon with blares,
91 The glitter-goes on surfaces of tanks,
92 Shattering velvetest far-away. The bear,
93 The ponderous cinnamon, snarls in his mountain
94 At summer thunder and sleeps through winter snow.
95 But you, ephebe, look from your attic window,
96 Your mansard with a rented piano. You lie
97 In silence upon your bed. You clutch the corner
98 Of the pillow in your hand. You writhe and press
99 A bitter utterance from your writhing, dumb,
100 Yet voluble dumb violence. You look
101 Across the roofs as sigil and as ward
102 And in your centre mark them and are cowed ...
103 These are the heroic children whom time breeds
104 Against the first idea---to lash the lion,
105 Caparison elephants, teach bears to juggle.
自然对于他来说是the first idea的反应，是必须返回又必须超越的一层。对于Frost来说完全没有这种曲折。虽然不像Whitman一样热情甚至疯狂地拥抱自然母亲，但是他跟自然的关系更加平和更加“自然”。
前面提到过Berryman和Whitman有些微的共通之处，那就是诗歌语言更加关注于自我。Stevens不是不主观，而是他的哲学文学观不允许他像Whitman那样毫无顾忌地抒发自我。我想Frost对于自我的态度与其对自然的态度有点像。但是Berryman和Whitman对于自我的态度差别是显而易见的。我想他们两人对于相互的作品肯定是无法容忍的。如果Harold Bloom来评论这两人，肯定会找出很多两人的诗节来对比，然后指出Berryman受Whitman的“影响的焦虑”是如何的深刻。我现在还没有那样的功底。更大的可能是Bloom觉得Berryman和Whitman根本不是一个层次的诗人，不屑于对比。相比来说我还是更愿意读Berryman,因为Whitman的力量太大，对于阅读的智力和体力是很严峻的考验。
John Berryman的两本诗集读得很辛苦，仍然觉得他缺少莎翁级别诗人的力度，有表达的愿望和勇气，也有足够的素养，但是却少点思考能力，达不到Stevens的澄明之境，更达不到莎翁和Whitman的自然境界（当然，莎翁跟Withman的区别是很明显的）。但是Berryman也有很多值得学习的地方，他的《Eleven Adresses to the Lord》有一种邪气的优雅气质，很见功底。他不是不敢弃绝，有时候尖锐得令人称快，The Dream Songs 311就是一例
famisht henry ate everything in sight
After his ancient fast. His fasting was voluntary,
Self-imposed.
He specially liked hunks of decent bread
Sopped in olive-oil &cut raw onion,
Specially.
Hunger was constitutional with him,
women, cigarettes,liquor,need need need
until he went to pieces.
The pieces sat up& wrote. They did not heed
their piecedom but kept very quietly on
among the chaos.
An old old mistress recently rang up,
Here in Ireland, to see how Henry was:
how was he? Delighted!
He thought she was 3000 miles away,
Safe with her children in New York: she’s coming at five:
We’ll welcome her!
既然已经明白了生活只是pieces又何苦要等待300里外的old old mistress？也许这是Berryman的谦卑之处，或者高傲？高傲地与上帝争辩，即使是带讽刺意味的争辩。但是殊不知即使带讽刺意味的争辩也是一种承认与妥协。不如Whitman的超越。
Frost是最容易读得一个，当然易读并不意味着易懂。他的几首经典作品曾在一些选集里读到过，比如著名的“Out, Out—”。最让我感动的还是他对底层劳动人民生活的描写，他写一个一无是处的老农民死前的情景，写一个农民为了自己眼中的尊严差点被埋在稻草堆里，他写一个农民在暴风雪夜回家的情景。这些故事大多数都是用最简单的对话来表达，对话者也是最底层的人们。他的语言比Whitman粗糙的多，更比不上Stevens。我想这是一种绝对的刻意，或者更准确的说是一种自觉地风格追求。这种语言风格追求跟Wordsworth的全然不同，Wordsworth是为了追求语言的纯粹，Frost却是为了故事与感情的表达，更多的是为了文体。没看到Frost照片之前以为他会有点农民的质朴和土气，看到诗集的封面却大跌眼镜，标准的英国绅士形象（虽然他是老美），看来人真的不可貌相。在我看来他跟Stevens稍微有点可比之处（相对于Berryman和Whitman来说）在于他们的表达都趋于客观，很明显地表现在他们对于自然的态度（其实诗人与自然的关系是永恒的命题，每个诗人都可以从这点来考验）。Stevens在Notes Toward A Supreme Fiction的It Must be abstract一章第五节写到：
85 The lion roars at the enraging desert,
86 Reddens the sand with his red-colored noise,
87 Defies red emptiness to evolve his match,
88 Master by foot and jaws and by the mane,
89 Most supple challenger. The elephant
90 Breaches the darkness of Ceylon with blares,
91 The glitter-goes on surfaces of tanks,
92 Shattering velvetest far-away. The bear,
93 The ponderous cinnamon, snarls in his mountain
94 At summer thunder and sleeps through winter snow.
95 But you, ephebe, look from your attic window,
96 Your mansard with a rented piano. You lie
97 In silence upon your bed. You clutch the corner
98 Of the pillow in your hand. You writhe and press
99 A bitter utterance from your writhing, dumb,
100 Yet voluble dumb violence. You look
101 Across the roofs as sigil and as ward
102 And in your centre mark them and are cowed ...
103 These are the heroic children whom time breeds
104 Against the first idea---to lash the lion,
105 Caparison elephants, teach bears to juggle.
自然对于他来说是the first idea的反应，是必须返回又必须超越的一层。对于Frost来说完全没有这种曲折。虽然不像Whitman一样热情甚至疯狂地拥抱自然母亲，但是他跟自然的关系更加平和更加“自然”。
前面提到过Berryman和Whitman有些微的共通之处，那就是诗歌语言更加关注于自我。Stevens不是不主观，而是他的哲学文学观不允许他像Whitman那样毫无顾忌地抒发自我。我想Frost对于自我的态度与其对自然的态度有点像。但是Berryman和Whitman对于自我的态度差别是显而易见的。我想他们两人对于相互的作品肯定是无法容忍的。如果Harold Bloom来评论这两人，肯定会找出很多两人的诗节来对比，然后指出Berryman受Whitman的“影响的焦虑”是如何的深刻。我现在还没有那样的功底。更大的可能是Bloom觉得Berryman和Whitman根本不是一个层次的诗人，不屑于对比。相比来说我还是更愿意读Berryman,因为Whitman的力量太大，对于阅读的智力和体力是很严峻的考验。
还没人赞这篇日记
