Immersed in botanical insight, these poems embark upon an archetypal journey of introspection and awakening, transforming language in a show of poetic alchemy. Separating spirituality from dogma, and fusing contemporary and archaic traditions, Minneapolis poet Sarah Fox explores the nature of creation, healing, and human connection, illuminating both rituals of community and communication in her accomplished debut.
This is a pretty abstract collection of poems, in the sense that poems rarely seem to develop the same thought all the way through, preferring instead to collect various, I don't know, strophes? and playing them against one another. The stanzas and lines even, then, are prone to sudden dislocations and changes, which does make them exciting in that way, but also kind of hard to take as a whole collection. The lines are lyric, though not always in especially fresh ways-- like, there's music here but not much to me that was quotable? I didn't hate this, but I also wasn't especially moved or captivated by it.
Birds appear in this poem pretty often, though rarely in the way that seems tied to a particular species-- these are the birds of poems, not the birds of your backyard. There's a run of poems in the second half about babies, real and miscarried, that develops a kind of gravity, but again, it's hard to know if they are real babies or only the babies of poems. A couple series in here, notably poems that are "Field Notes of an Advance Scout." Occasional allusions to other poems that make regular appearances in sophomore seminars (like Wallace Stevens). Maybe others, too, that I just didn't recognize:)
I first saw poems by Sarah Fox on Jerome Rothenberg's blog, POEMS AND POETICS and was very moved (http://poemsandpoetics.blogspot.com/2...). I found the poems in BECAUSE WHY were a lot lighter than the poems from the POEMS AND POETICS blog. They came off as thematic madlibs about topics like relationships at a party, trees, dead babies, etc. Words and symbols connected to each other within each poem but the stream of the syntax was loose. Some sentences were dense with surreal details and other sentences were left incomplete. One poem even inserted lines seemingly for the reader to fill in their own words. The collection was engrossing but the meaning was obtuse (maybe open and free-spirited?) and difficult to follow.
Better read all in one sitting I think. Wasn't "getting it" at all at first, but the latter part I totally got in a I think I had a dream that was this exact context kind of way.