Vow has a lot going for it -- its architecture of sliding sequence-panels, like a stage-set under construction, its rhetorical sophistication, its performative prosody -- but most of all the audaciousness with which it traipses all over John Berryman tropes, 'cuz really, who more than Berryman deserves a traipse? I thought most of it terrific, except, perhaps, for a certain lack of the significant, the telling, detail -- that probing for the split-psyche's weights and measures . . . "[If] I couldn't be her," Hazelton writes about her narrative alter-ego, sometimes referred to as "Rabbit," though she can range from Chandler's Carmen Sternwood (in the Chandler, of course, Carmen's a pornographic model) to the rape-victim of Emma Donoghue's Room, and whose several incarnations plot the suppressed account of a love affair, "I'd be a stranger | if I couldn't be loved | I couldn't haunt you like a house left open, | the beds unmade, | blur my edges until my face | grows obscure but my perfume remains, | smoky like a campsite abandoned | and the rain hissing the fire to sleep -- this is my anger at my own fear | of mercy."
In a passage like this the craft identifies too much with the skittish rabbit-role. The images come one after another. No one is good enough, analysand is probing. Herr-narrator wants one to editorialize over, but the psycho-analyst in the narrator should have remained silent. The treatment of elision in the sequences, the blank spaces, the silences, need to be within the line, too. (As they are in Berryman.) In general I want to argue against Hazelton in this manner -- Hazelton the poet, not with any one of her flamboyant, or plucky speakers.