Pages

Monday, April 13, 2015

Byron's Upside-Down Apocalypse

Brughel, The Tower of Babel

Jacques-Louis David’s The Death of Socrates

There are already a few posts about “Darkness,” but it’s been a rough and very weird day wherein many students, myself included, were locked in dark windowless places during one of the most beautiful light-filled days of the semester. So perhaps this is especially relevant and too close to home at the moment.

Coming off the fanciful dream-imaginings and flirtations with Death involved in reading Keats, I was struck in reading Byron’s “Darkness,” which so ominously begins: “I had a dream, which was not at a dream” (1). Keats’ romantic vision of a waking dream end, albeit his own individual ending, is immediately swept away with the speaker of this poem proclaiming: “All earth was but one thought — and that was death, / Immediate and inglorious” (42-43). Any poem-painting of an end-times even broaching on the baroque seems impossible here. This is not Jacques-Louis David’s depiction of the death of Socrates, but instead a Babel painting by Brueghel, elaborate, surely, though muted and ominous in its twisting lines and lack of human figures.

And this is different than most end-times stories. The lion and the lamb lay down, sort of: “The wildest brutes / Came tame and tremulous; and vipers crawl’d / And twined themselves among the multitude, / Hissing, but stingless — they were slain for food” (34-37). The paradoxes multiple but remain less than startling and “stingless.”

My favorite lines involve the upside-down mountain of the volcano, which becomes a place of refuge instead of Pompey-horror: “Happy were those who dwelt within the eye / Of the volcanoes, and their mountain-torch: / A fearful hope was all the world contain’d” (16-18). In the end, not only does everything somehow become its opposite, but what once represented doom transforms into a “fearful hope.”

This poem also provoked the question, for me, regarding how one writes about nothingness. Or a fantastical space – the future, the death of the universe – as non-fantastical, i.e. the “chaos of hard clay”? (72). Another work that I think does this trick especially well is Cormac McCarthy’s novel The Road, where nothing really happens in a desolate atom-bombed landscape for hundreds of pages, and yet an artwork is produced. It is a dream suspended dreamless, all hard stuff lumped at the bottom.

I don’t have much else to comment on this poem at the moment, but I appreciated the other posts on it and I look forward to Kathleen’s presentation tomorrow! I liked Addie’s idea of Byron “captur[ing] the end of humanity by honing in on the small characteristics that make us human,” even though I read the poem as distinctly humanless. Perhaps this is a more hopeful reading of the poem; something that makes “Darkness” light.

2 comments:

  1. Reading your post gave me the sense that this poem is in a way...I want to say scientific. It includes so many aspects of nature that are not observed for beauty but rather are identified with their functions and they described with the preciseness almost of a text book. This post made the comment in class today seem to make some sense that this poem was first connected to the volcano by a textbook.

    ReplyDelete
  2. You bring up a lot of questions I contemplated as well. The question of whether artwork can exist in "nothingness" is a fascinating one. Part of the reason I think that "Darkness" works is because it makes the apocalypse enjoyable - one almost delights in seeing the light of the world flushed out. This sets up a weird dichotomy between subject and the feeling it creates, which I think Byron in fact deploys regularly (he is touching upon matters such as incest in "Manfred"). He chooses topics that should horrify us, and yet the process of watching the Earth slllooowwwllly die or Manfred sllllloooowwwlllly reach the decision of dying makes it so that the tragic events are ultimately cathartic. Byron is a poet who loves to create discomfort, there is no better way to create discomfort than to make the audience enjoy watching the downfall of humanity.

    ReplyDelete