Ill-baked republic high castled in the round,
the stage is set for tragic skirmishes between
rising power-hungry tribunes and gray-head
aristocrats. How soon the prattling plebeians
forget the scars your imperial service earned you!
Dare they now so soon demand demonstrations of
humble fealty, that you be made to prance around
for them like some sick and swaggering pony,
to seduce them of their tawdry, volatile ballots?
But are you so haughty that these seething skies
have gone transparent before your warlike eyes,
which now fail to apprise how hunger churns the
unspoken, recondite climate? You misread the
oracle in the sheep's bowels, the flights of crows
beyond the fields, an interpretive miscarriage of
your own changing times: anger itself's become
the true meat that calls the peasant mouth to water;
anger over disparities long since presumed the
noble born's just due. Aristocracy, through no
misstep of your own, has grown synonymous with
tyranny, but this new dictum you can't quite work
your mind around, can you, Caius Martius?
The meteorology of republican politics is an infant
science, vagaries of loyalties adherent to no
apparent pattern, honoring no familiar convention.
The words are muttered with obvious passion, but
coherent significance remains elusive, and you
write it off to lower-class foolery. But secret
Powers are afoot, well-versed in how to stir the pot
of Citizenry; how well they plot, these grinning
marionettes whom you despise and dismiss, their
hollow heads not now so straw-stuft as you long
presumed; they're conspiring cautiously calculative,
pulling new pragmatisms near into their breasts
with close, whispered counsel. They wit well how
they may hope to plunge their puppeteers down
into the pit. What's become of the truism that
the belly must purvey and sustain first the princely
head lest all be slaughtered? But: see! Now the
master's mastered! And is that not the way it
should be in any rising republican democracy?
Heads must be made to roll.
Ravisher of ringed cities, monolithic penetrator
of curving battlements, beware: the very milk
which suckled you to strength cannot but bid you
treason yourself and reason with these lesser
mortals a way back into their hearts, tainted
with the low grit and grime of local realism, to
coil there like some cursed worm after love from
holy Rome, which so recently without pity or justice
cast you out. You have no city now, you traitor,
you banished thing flung backwards to a narrowing
appendix, a tight cul-de-sac in time, where your
bloody wounds, so esteemed by your hungry dam,
must now be put on base public display through the
rapturous streets of Antium, whether you would or no.
20090607
Deserue Corne Gratis?
Copyright © 2009 Ernest Bloom.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You've been reading 'Coriolanus' again, I see :).
ReplyDelete"Prattling plebeians." Is this an allusion to the part where Caius Martius thinks the plebeians aren't worthy of having any grain?
"You misread the oracle in the sheep's bowels." Brilliant. Love it.
"Now the master's mastered." Witty.
yes; ongoing contemplation of coriolanus. i wanted to do something a little meatier than my last few pieces. this inspired (mostly) by the essay 'coriolanus and the expansion of city liberties' by leah s marcus. coming to understand coriolanus as a political portrait in which the actions of its characters are by and large distant reflections of less relevance: if true, a pretty significantly subtle form of writing. the act of eating/starving/cannibalism is even more central to the symbolism than the psychodrama of mother and son; mother=rome. . . .etc.
ReplyDeleteHmm, I haven't read Coriolanus sadly although judging by your poem I should. There is some ambiguity, here, regarding who is right and who is wrong-whether it is the 'master' scornful of his people or the people scornful of their master. On the one hand- it seems right that an incapable ruler should be dethroned and on the other- if the ruler be a head and the rest- the body then cutting off the body seems detrimental for the rest. I think I should side with the option of replacing the head but then- are the masses competent enough to choose a proper ruler/government? Hamlet comes to mind where we see the consequences of an ill-minded, murderous king succeeding the throne.
ReplyDeleteI like the consistency of Ancient Rome references throughout the poem and I must say, there is a vivid razor-sharp wit that works rather well. The fact that the estimate of the 'characters'/sides are left(at least so far as I see) to the reader is a trait of Shakespeare as well, which I find quite fitting.
coriolanus is difficult, i think, and i'm not thoroughly convinced of my opinion of it yet. i have multiple opinions about it, and i'm not settled on how to interpret the thing. i have an arkangel audio recording that is pretty good; yesterday tried to watch an ambrose video of it (the complete dramatic works of ws series) which was utterly intolerable. when we think of shakespeare we often think of it being heavy on character psychology. this ain't that: if you come at it that way, you're almost certain to be bored to tears. these are not characters with depth: the underlying politics has depth and is the real 'character' of this play. i'm not sure i could recommend coriolanus to anyone; it's like a tough exercise in calculus.
ReplyDeleteagain, it is not always necessary to take a side. sometimes (most times?) all sides are equally valid, and that itself is the drama of the thing.