I found it hard to determine
whether or not Mallarme’s language, as seen in “A Throw of the Dice Will Never
Abolish Chance” and “Sonnet on X”, can truly be defined as the language of
nonsense. While, for Edward Lear and Lewis Carroll, one could clearly say that
the nonsense found in their work was derived from language, the nonsense found
in Mallarme’s work is much more subtle, and it can be found in a variety of
aspects of the text.
Whereas
a large portion of the nonsense in Lear and Carroll’s work can be found in
fantastic imagery and direct logical contradictions, Mallarme’s language usage
is much more concrete. As opposed to disproportionate noses and rabbits in waistcoats,
the imagery in “A Throw of the Dice” is very much grounded in realism, relying
heavily on the image of ships on the water, pens, and the titular throw of the
dice. However, in spite of the difference in imagery, the logical flow of the
story progression of the works discussed are very similar. While the imagery is
often very clear, the flow of events often makes it difficult to explain what
the poem is “about”.
However,
the majority of the nonsense in Mallarme’s work is not derived from the
language but rather the formatting of the poems. This is especially apparent in
“A Throw of the Dice” but can also be seen less prominently in “Sonnet on X”.
Mallarme’s formatting causes one to be thrown off whereas other nonsense
writers we have discussed have a tendency to stick to established poem formats
such as the limerick to “carry” the nonsensical content. Mallarme’s work is
very jarring for the everyday reader, and this greatly contributes to the
nonsense value of his work.
While
the language of Mallarme does have elements in common with other nonsense
writers such as Lear and Carroll, I would not say that his language is that of
nonsense. The nonsense to be found in his work is too nuanced to be attributed
to something as simple as language and instead is a composite of a variety of
literary elements.
On the whole, I do agree with Grayson's observation. It appears that Mallarme plays with placement structure of the words while Carroll and Lear play with the words themselves within the structure of sentences and poems.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I would also like to add that there is some nonsense in the words in their meaning, regardless of the placement of the words. While the vast spaces in the poem makes it difficult to string together, I believe the words don't have much meaning to them. Yes some phrases work with their adjacent phrases, but on the whole, the poem feels like one giant long run-on sentence. There is hardly any comprehensible segues from one long winded metaphor to the next. I would argue that another aspect of Mallarme's nonsense is the ability to string comprehensible words together, yet still maintaining a nonsensical way of thinking. At least that's how I feel about Mallerme as a whole, but I have to disclaim by saying I found this poem very difficult to understand at all.
On page 164 and 165, it starts by talking about a white chasm that glides like a wing and seamlessly transitions to the image of a sail on a ship. When you figure out the images in each section, there is little connection. I feel like the spacing, while contributes to the majority of the nonsense, I think it only distracts from another layer of nonsense from the seamless stream of consciousness.