On opening a new volume of poetry by a poet not previously read. First, I might not have just picked this off the shelf. I read about it somewhere and added the title to my TBR. I wouldn’t normally open a book of fiction or poetry and immediately read the introduction, foreword, or preface. But I did. I wouldn’t recommend it in this particular case. I’m sure the Introduction would have made a fine Afterword. Anyway, on with the show. My usual approach, standing in a bookstore, looking over a never heard of book of poetry is to read the table of contents to see if there is a poem from which the title of the book derives and to give that one a look, maybe even a close read. Then it’s back to the first poem in the book if the two aren’t one and the same. FYI: There is no poem titled “Rift Zone” in this collection. The opening poem in the collection is entitled “Preface: Pocket Geology”. It’s seductive in its own right. One of those what I call musically arranged pieces with lots of spaces in between phrases. In this case, we might see those spaces as the rift zone, or even zones, in the poem itself. I won’t take away your pleasure of a first encounter with it by saying any more about it nor quoting from it. As I began to read sequentially into the collection, I sort of breezed through the next two poems before encountering an eight-part piece strung over as many pages. I like long poems. This particular one took me unawares. I was barely getting used to the poet when I was asked to take the deep dive. I read it through. And I will go back to it. The next poem, fourth in the TOC, is the one the poet had unwittingly set out to trap me, to make me stop and read again and again and again. “Berkeley in the Nineties”. So many hooks. Spoiler alert. First two lines:
Too late for hippie heyday
& too young to be yuppies
If the title wasn’t enough to set the stage, those first two lines do a darned good job. Even more, they ask something of us. Who was I in the nineties? Because this is a generational poem. Not centered on boomers or millennials, but subsets. Hippies were a Sixties phenomenon, following hard on the beats. Yuppies is a term coined in the early 1980s to describe a 20s-to-30s-something subset. In the Nineties, then, too late and too young tells us this is likely a description of teenagers in what was still, across a large swath of itself, the continuing academic-scholastic setting of hippiedom.
Next up on my list of catch phrases (repeating at least once) is
There was no internet yet
What was a teenager to do? Some of that has already been revealed. I’m trying not to give it all away.
We learned
the meaning of the word hegemony
but thought the word itself was hegemonic.
Okay! When did you first acquire a word as telling and compelling as “hegemony”? As “hegemonic”? Antidisestablishmentarianism was the Word of the Day in the Fifties, and that was Spelling Bee competition stuff, we barely even attempted to understand it. But to think of the word “hegemony” as itself being “hegemonic”, that’s one giant leap for [Berkeley] teenage kind, yeah?
Words: revolution, revelation. Here they come:
Bruised peaches
were our kind of revolution. There was not internet yet
Revolution reaches back to “Too late for hippie heyday” but suggests a knowledge of revolution and hegemony within a constructed world view not yet influenced by search engines.
Bodies in space were revolution.
Part of the world of “Bruised peaches”. “Bruised peaches” and “Bodies in space”. Will there be more in the series, with Oxford commas, as it were, between capitalized entities? Follow me.
Chinos were not the revolution.
Trigonometry was not the revolution.
Caps yes; Oxford comma, no, because we’ve proposed the antithesis, “not the revolution” takes us into the world of the “yuppies” who these teenagers are too young, and, well, too hip, to be.
Reindeer lichen was the revolution.
Our new breasts in rain were revolution.
We craved transcendental revelations,
the radical and burning future:
We lobbied for condoms in the high school bathrooms
even though the bathrooms needed toilet paper—
Can we justify an Oxford comma despite the break? I apologize, but not fervently, for having thrust the closing lines into your head. But they are so relevant. So, accidentally, so revolutionarily, relevant.
I’ve read this poem, like, five times now. I’ll read it again. I’ll copy the whole thing into my commonplace book. It’s that marvelous and wonderful and even historical.
Is it representative? Yes. And no. Every poem in the collection didn’t grab me so thoroughly as did this one. But I wanted, and needed, to read many of the poems over and over and over.