Cinzia Mozzato Representations of Central and Eastern Europe in Contemporary British Poetry CONTENTS
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
1 Cinzia Mozzato Representations of Central and Eastern Europe in Contemporary British Poetry CONTENTS INTRODUCTION p.3 I Whither Britannia? 1. The British socio-political context fom the eighties to the noughts p.11 2. Grating expectations: dystopic metanarratives and the return of the repressed p.30 3. The post-Wall age and its ambivalence p.40 II Under Western Eyes: British poetry and the question of Central-Eastern Europe 1. The twofold legacy of the seventies p.55 2. British writers and editors against the „Splendid Isolation‟ p. 65 3. Fables of Freedom p.77 III James Fenton 1. Travelling and writing: doubts of a former radical p.88 2. War and the memory of war: Europe‟s invisible walls p.97 3. Time-shifts, narrative disruption, and the outsider perspective in „A German Requiem‟ p.102 IV Tony Harrison 1. Memory, politics and imagination: radicalism in Tony Harrison‟s early work p. 126 2. Anglo-German attitudes: Dresden and „The Gaze of the Gorgon‟ p. 140 3. „…what kind of progress is without victims‟: Northern England and post-Wall scenarios in Prometheus p. 155 2 V George Szirtes and Ken Smith 1. History and Central-Eastern Europe in George Szirtes and Ken Smith p.186 2. Towards the post-1989 context: Western „order‟ vs. Eastern „disorder‟ p.196 3. The „dimension of the present moment‟ and Hungary‟s past in George Szirtes‟ Bridge Passages p.212 4. Crossing borders in Ken Smith‟s The Heart, the Border and Wild Root p.231 Appendix: biographical sketches p.250 Bibliography p.258 3 INTRODUCTION To the morality of a Western reader an account of these meetings would wear perhaps the sinister character of old legendary tales where the Enemy of Mankind is represented holding subtle mendacious dialogues with some tempted soul. It is not my part to protest. Let me but remark that the Evil One [...] is yet, on a larger, modern view, allowed to be not quite so black as he used to be painted.1 The upsurge of British political verse in the wake of the Gulf War and eventually the 9/11 crisis has rekindled debate on the poet‟s ability to „perform acts of the imagination when faced with barbarism‟.2 In a newly polarized world, British poets have apparently relinquished their insular retrenchment to diagnose the „folie de grandeur/ of late capitalism‟,3 condemning the extreme individualism and aggressiveness inherent in the Western worldview. Emergent, militant poets cling increasingly to Owen‟s „pity of war‟ and reject the „good, brave causes of the older generation, whose expectations have apparently all been dashed by Thatcherism. Whatever its ideological substance, Thatcher‟s deregulation has promoted „ideas – about education, welfare, legal process and basic equality – which [two decades ago] would have seemed to most people not simply disputable but frankly immoral.‟ 4 It is therefore not surprising that anti-war protest should become the paradigm of moral commitment. However, this increasing focus on renewed radicalism often results in a tendency to dismiss poetic trends which, in fact, preceded and paved the way for „protest‟: as soon as the antagonism of the Thatcher and post-Thatcher years lost its flavour and urgency, there was a tendency to regard the „committed‟ strain of poetry as non-radical, impaired by internal fragmentation and by lukewarm exposure. Yet, when the question, „where now for political culture?‟ was raised by Poetry Review, writers invoked the diagnostic imagination of W.H. Auden rather than the British 1 Joseph Conrad, Under Western Eyes ([1911] London: Penguin, 2007), p. 252. 2 Andrew Motion, „Afterword‟ to 101 Poems against War, ed. by Michael Hollins and Paul Keegan (Faber & Faber, 2003), pp. 135-7, p.137. 3 Michael Hofmann, „Nighthawks‟, in Acrimony (London: Faber & Faber, 1986), p. 30. 4 Sean O‟Brien, The Deregulated Muse: Essays on Contemporary British and Irish Poetry (Newcastle upon Tyne: Bloodaxe, 1998), p. 9. 4 version of the sixties anti-war protest, thus stimulating new perspectives on less immediately overt forms of poetic dissent. While considering recent developments on the British scene, the present study foregrounds an obliquely radical aspect of the poetic trend which first came into prominence during the Thatcher years and developed in the following decade, represented by a group of writers born between 1937 and 1948: Tony Harrison, Ken Smith, James Fenton and George Szirtes. It was these poets who voiced the need for „individual commitment‟ Jon Silkin had articulated early in the seventies, appealing to the „inner emigration‟ of the increasingly popular Eastern European poets. A tendency to drop „islanded‟ attitudes, Silkin argued, was under way in the U.K., as writers veered towards the „socially committed, causing some moves towards the discursive‟.5 The kind of engagement Silkin urged upon poets living „in a free world‟ was leavened by the Thatcher age, when many hitherto marginal stances achieved unprecedented coordination, ushering in critical views on the Western identity. Rather than in overt political denunciation, antagonism resulted then in controversial re-readings of post-war reconstruction, in the bridging of the public/private chasm and in the condemnation of social atomisation, visible respectively in the early work of Fenton and Harrison, in Szirtes‟ outsider stance and in Ken Smith‟s angry lyricism. The contribution of Fenton, Harrison, Szirtes and Smith to the „State of the Nation‟ question was paralleled by their international vocation, and, surprisingly enough, by a European vocation which ran against the political self-comprehension of the Thatcher and post-Thatcher age and which led them to explore part of the former Eastern bloc. This peculiar trajectory might originate in a shared sensitivity sharpened by the historical legacy which was being handed down on them, and which gives the lie to well-rooted images of a „depthless, dehistoricized English mainstream‟.6 5 Jon Silkin, „Introduction‟ to Poetry of the Committed Individual (Harmondswoth: Penguin and Gollancz, 1973), pp. 17-32, p. 26. 6 Elmer Andrews, „“Some Sweet Disorder”:The Poetry of Subversion‟ in British Poetry from the 1950s to the 1990s: Politics and Art, ed. by Gary Day and Brian Docherty (London: Macmillan, 1997), pp. 118-142, p.118. 5 In the first chapter, we will thus attempt to locate a variety of poetic dissent which absorbed and responded to the idiosyncrasies of the Thatcher age and its immediate aftermath. The indirection Fenton, Harrison, Smith and Szirtes share might be read against the backdrop of Thatcherism and the political drift towards „authoritarian populism‟7 which was structured upon few, consistently pursued, ideological directions. These poets‟ subtle insistence on their generation‟s crushed expectations challenged the radicalism of Thatcher‟s political thought and lingo („There is no such thing as Society‟), which allowed the Conservative government to absorb the vacuum left by the crumbling of the liberal-democratic post-war framework. Of course, it took some time before the countless blanks in the history of the Western „system of order‟ came to the surface, and when they did, retrospection was partially hindered by the emergence of new „enemies‟ of democracy, less known than the former Other, the Soviet bloc of the Cold War years, had been. The recent focus on the language of politics might be seen as the outcome of this re-configuration. As Harold Pinter has rightly stressed, it is extremely urgent for writers to grasp the Orwellian ambiguity through which the counterfactual language of politics becomes an instrument of coercion in the liberal world. Indeed, the transition of the most militant of the four poets considered, Tony Harrison, from the public scene of the eighties and early nineties to the protest of the late nineties is indicative of new challenges posed by „the hollow structures [...], the stale, but immensely successful, rhetoric of politics‟. 8 The increasing appeal to Orwell over recent years elicits, however, further considerations. Crucial to Orwell‟s ongoing fortune is actually his foresight into a world characterised by the construction of an enemy as the condition for justifying the existing system of order. This line of argument stimulates readers to consider how the vacuum created by the disappearance of the „Other‟ in the years that immediately preceded and followed 1989 (the „post-Wall‟ age) created a unique space of discussion about Western „freedom‟. Crucial to it was, above all, the structural questioning of the „ambivalent‟ post-Enlightenment metanarrative, „the etiological myth [...] and 7 Stuart Hall, „The Great Moving Right Show‟, Marxism Today (January 1979), 14-20, p.15. 8 Harold Pinter, Various Voices: Poetry, Prose, Politics 1948-1998 (London: Faber & Faber,1998). p.188. 6 morally elevating story of humanity emerging from pre-social barbarity‟ inherent in both Western and Eastern European modernity.9 For Fenton, Harrison, Szirtes and Smith, this space resulted in an unprecedented interest in the former Other. This was not, however, „far Russia‟ – the Cold War „Other‟ by definition, and Konrad‟s referent in the epigraph above – but the Central and Eastern European regions, seen as a distinctive province of Europe rather than as the Western outpost of the former enemy. Surprisingly enough, the communist experience was not as central to the British poets‟ understanding of the „other half of Europe‟ as was their concern with its history, and the memory which a forty-year division had occluded. Several factors, both generally cultural and strictly poetic, might account for their treatment of the question of „Central-Eastern Europe‟. Ambivalence in the treatment of the former Other surfaced primarily in relation to a cluster of memories which the Cold War framework could, already in the early eighties, no longer contain and which 1989 definitely let loose: as Tony Judt maintains, „the first post-war Europe was built upon deliberate mis-memory, [whereas] since 1989 reunited Europe has been constructed [...] upon a compensatory surplus of memory.‟10 This declination of ambivalence keys to the work of poets who remapped the former „Other‟, first of all, onto their experience and onto a shared geography of memory.