Poetry versus Prose

Referring back to my diagnostic essay again (it’s the perfect representation of what I thought of poetry at the beginning of the semester), I said that poems were more advantageous to use in the past and only persisted to today because of the association with it to art. Poems are shorter and easier to memorize and duplicate than prose, but are less useful with the introduction of printing press. Eventually, poetry will die out and prose will take its place.

Then comes Williams and his baby Frankenstein Spring and All, which contains both prose and poetry.

“Is what I have written prose?” (140).

By the standard of how you yourself define prose? Yes Williams, yes it is.

As he puts it, “Prose, relieved of extraneous, unrelated values must return to its only purpose; to clarify to enlighten the understanding” (140). In contrast, “Poetry is something quite different. Poetry has to do with the crystallization of the imagination—the perfection of new forms as addition to nature—Prose may follow to enlighten but poetry--” (140).

Williams defines many things explicitly: what imagination is, what poetry is, what prose is. He is trying to prove his point as clearly as possible. He is telling the reader what he’s thinking—and how they should think—without personal interpretation of his text—without imagination. Then comes the seemingly random poems and their images, which, by themselves, can almost mean anything.

WHAT!? “What in God’s name do you mean? Is this what you call poetry? Poetry that interpreted our deepest promptings, poetry that inspired… you moderns!” (88). That’s right, damn you moderns! Just when things are clear and good to go, why do you must make things more confusing? I want to have one clear answer to each thing, to stop speculating and accept things as they are. I want to be told to cry at someone else’s suffering, to laugh when everyone else is laughing, and to applaud on game shows when the applaud sign flashes.

There are already enough choices in life, can’t I get a break? I should consider joining a cult.

Yes, not everyone wants to use the sense of imagination. Most people are probably more comfortable being told what to do. Williams challenges this, and expects some negative feedback from the traditionalists. But unlike Eliot, Williams actually states his point in his prose then feeds his poems into the readers’ imaginations.

In a sense, then, Williams is both lecturing and holding a forum of discussion. He wants the readers to understand what it is he’s trying to say, but not contradicting himself by limiting them to a single train of thought.

Could he have done it poetry alone? Maybe, but it would be as long as the Aeneid. He can have a poet that “Kill! Kill! The English, the Irish, the French, the Germans, the Italians (especially them) and the rest” (90), escape from the seduction of Moore to found his kingdom of imagination, and travel to the land of the dead to visit Edgar Allan Poe. Surely, that would be something to see.