I had been seeking out Prévert’s Paroles for the past several years, but I never found it on the shelves of any of my favorite used bookstores. Occasionally, out of desperation, I might purchase a book on Amazon, but that is rare and typically only the case if it is a book that I intend to read for work (i.e., there is some sort of deadline by which I need to read a particular book) or my to-read shelf is running low on choices. But, as neither of these scenarios was the case, I simply did what I often do when seeking out a book (or for that matter an album or film): I waited until I found the book; or perhaps until the book found me, as I feel has sometimes been the case. Anyhow, I finally came across this one in the small poetry section of my new favorite used bookstore and did not hesitate for a moment to buy it, adding it to my handful of Russian classics.
I hesitated even less to read the book, and here's why: (1) I had waited a few years to find it, so it deserved to be pushed up in the to-read queue; (2) I feel that I have read considerably less poetry this year than I have in the past; (3) It is part of the City Lights Pocket Poets Series and any work that is part of that series is likely in some way – great or small – to speak to me and to re-instill in me a way of seeing the world again anew, for “the sad whip of reality” (to borrow a phrase from this book) always seems to beat out of us this way of looking at the world with fresh, innocent eyes; (4) The work is translated by Lawrence Ferlinghetti and even if something is lost in translation (as is always the case) I’d rather it be lost through a poet I greatly admire, like Ferlinghetti, rather than anyone else, for being familiar with his poetry and his worldviews I feel that I can trust him to deliver me some stunning truths and images, which are at least close to Prévert’s intention; (5) When glancing at the book I was thrilled with having the French text parallel to Ferlinghetti’s English translation; and (6) I already admired Prévert, as a humanist and a film writer (of one of the great works of cinema, Les Enfants du Paradis, nonetheless), even if I had not previously been all that well acquainted with his work as a poet.
As I drove away from the bookstore, the very poetic cover art drew me in. The book whispered for me to open it. So when I was stopped at a red light I cracked it open and started reading the translator’s note. And I was drawn in completely:
I first came upon the poetry of Jacques Prévert written on a paper tablecloth in St. Brieuc in 1944. This so romantic, sentimental circumstance is no doubt at the root of my effort to perpetrate Prévert upon England and America. Bits and pieces of Prévert’s poetry have been published in anthologies and periodicals in English, and I have surveyed most of them with a watering eye. Generally, he has suffered atrociously from constipated translation and trivial choice of poems. And the poem on the paper tablecloth is perhaps as typical of the way Prévert got around in France in the mid-forties as it is of his poetry itself – a poetry (his worst critics will tell you) which is perfectly suited to paper tablecloths, and existing always on as fine a line between sentiment and sentimentality as any that Charlie Chaplin ever teetered on.
What Prévert means to us is naturally quite a different thing than what he has meant to the French. Many of the poems in PAROLES grew out of World War II and the Occupation of France, and it is plain that ‘paroles’ means both Words and Passwords. Prévert spoke particularly to the French youth immediately after the War, especially those who grew up during the Occupation and felt totally estranged from Church and State. . . . . At his best he simply shows you something and lets you draw your own conclusions. At his worst he draws them for you with too maudlin a touch. . . .
I had these images by way of Ferlinghetti in my head before I embarked on Prévert and I read the intro and re-read it at least three times, thrilled with phrases like “constipated translation” (particularly as I’ve been very interested lately in the art of translation, reading many articles over the past few weeks on the translators of Tolstoy) and later with passages like “Man is destined for joy but there’s a permanent conspiracy against it. Prévert always denounces the conspiracy.”
Indeed there is a marvelous humanism found in these poems and there is also merit to the claims made by some critics that Prévert is a “Surrealist clown” and “the Picasso of modern French poetry” (though Ferlinghetti argues that these critics’ reasons for making such claims are often ‘superficial’). Prévert’s surrealism comes through in so many poems, but perhaps none so much as “To Paint the Portrait of a Bird” or “Picasso’s Promenade.” True, Prévert’s poems can sometimes seem a bit clownish and, other times, overly sentimental, but at his best he made me laugh, wonder, imagine and, most importantly, feel.
There were too many favorite poems and phrases in this collection to list them all here, but I was particularly fond of “Pater Noster,” “Flowers and Wreathes,” “Vincent’s Lament” and “Picasso’s Magic Lantern” (which contained some of the poet's richest imagery). His imagery sprang to life in my mind and I was absolutely delighted with many of these images, albeit as delivered to me through Ferlinghetti’s hand. Some of my favorites include the following: “old men with closed faces”; “the sad whip of reality”; “A tall plumber/Dressed for sunday on monday”; “The line of chance lost and found broken and straightened/bedecked in the blue rags of necessity”; “A railroad ticket with all its baggage”; “the crimson couch of jealousy”; “A spider’s life suspended on a thread”; “The insomnia of a white doll with broken balance and its big glass eyes open forever and ever”; “The obsessive presence of a key hidden under a doormat”, etc., etc.
There was a wonderful dreamlike quality to so many of these poems, but there was also sadness, the sadness of a way of life that was dying if not already dead, the sadness of an object lost that one tries desperately to find again.
I don’t know how well Ferlinghetti captured the actual poetry of Prévert, but I enjoyed it – it certainly did not feel the least like “constipated translation.” I think there is a truth to the statement that Ferlinghetti makes at the end of his translator’s note: “A poem can be finished, a translation only abandoned. . . . We tend to forget that English is not a romance language. . . .”
There were times when I would compare aloud the words of Prévert to those of Ferlinghetti (translating Prévert) and I occasionally did stop and think to myself, “It doesn’t have the same feel, the same roll off the tongue quality and rhythm.” And in closing I will just point out one such case, the aptly titled, “Chanson”/”Song.”
Quel jour sommes-nous
Nous sommes tous les jours
Mon amie
Nous sommes toute la vie
Mon amour
Nous nous aimons et nous vivons
Nous vivons et nous nous aimons
Et nous ne savons pas ce que c’est que la vie
Et nous ne savons pas ce que c’est que le jour
Et nous ne savons pas ce que c’est que l’amour.
What day is it
It’s everyday
My friend
It’s all of life
My love
We love each other and we live
We live and we love each other
And do not know what this life is
And do not know what this day is
And do not know what this love is.
It’s still marvelous, but it does not have quite the same feel. Maybe one day I can improve my French enough so that I can read it as it should be read, but if not I will probably return to Ferlinghetti’s interpretation of Prévert again somewhere down the road.