I received an advanced copy of this book from NetGalley in exchange for an honest review:
Coming into this book with only familiarity as Atwood as a novelist, and a brief ponderance over her poetry from her collection, Dearly, I approached this largely unminded. More modern poetry has been less in my own inclination (I still think all lines should rhyme in some form or fashion), but I was interested to see how an author with such vivid and unique story-telling and worldbuilding capabilities could create in a more lyrical, contained writing form. My experience within Atwood’s world of poetry was less stellar than I might have presupposed.
Atwood has such a deep sense of poetry’s past and utilizes it evocatively to bring us into the folds of the pages of this book, and all those we’ve read before it. To wield knowledge is power, and to weave that power into creativity is, for the apt of words, poetry. To keep in the traditions that predate her own writings, but also break from such traditions is the means of making new poetry and making poetry new, and I enjoyed reading how Atwood played with the craft itself. She certainly catches me with some of my favorite poetical choices: I always grew excited to see the device of utilizing the title of the poem as, in essence and practice, its first line (“this is a photograph of me”), and I love the utilization of a block poem, as I find the utter overwhelming outpouring of words in what is typically a sparser, to the word form of writing precisely in the emotional mark of great poetry.
All poetry should be resounding, but some lines, I think, must simply hit harder than those that surround them. The best poems, in my opinion, force you to stop somewhere in their midst, make you close the volume, and look away from the absolute wreckage of emotion and devastation and beauty a single line within has wrought. Poetry should devastate as much as it delights; Atwood’s does.
The invocations of poems should be of the utmost importance, and sometimes Atwood tethers us with the first line (“man with a hook,” “the small cabin”), but more often, I felt as though I were ambling into the poem rather than walking through her words like sign postings on a trail, too easily straying from the path by my one musings and wanderings and inclinations to look elsewhere than where the viewpoints drew attention.
Modern poetry, I think, fears long lines, fears losing our attention and understanding if they ask us to read more than five words without a line break, or an implied punctuation. In reality, it makes me sick to read—literally, in that moving my eyes so much back and forth disorientates me, like rocking ever back and forth on a ship in storming waters. I loathe feeling ungrounded in a poem, with roots only four words deep. It breaks me up alongside the poem. That ruptured, seasick empathy should not be my takeaway feeling from nearly every verse.
I’m frightful to admit that I more often liked the idea of the poems, where I could see them going or growing or becoming, than I did where Atwood led us and what she made of it there. The potential outperformed the execution, and that was devastating each time to read. It is one thing to imagine oneself writing alongside the poet, but it was hard to feel oneself writing over her.
The collection was solid: in theming, organization, picks, ebbs and flows. But “solid” should be how you describe a tome, not a treasury of verse. And I must admit, I hate to see “hieroglyphics” used ever (“double persephone”), especially by such a learned woman.