Moyngh Sullivn 'I Am Not Yet Delivered The Poetry Blnid Pst': Slkeld Blnid Slkeld ws n Irish poet, essyist, drmtist, trnsltor, ctress, publisher who lived worked between 1880 1959.2 She ws n enterprising resourceful womn who set up her own press, her poetry ws published in severl volumes from 1930s to 1950s. She wrote mny prose pieces, book reviews, essys tht were published in The Dublin Irel Tody, Irish Writing, Poetry Irel, The Bell. Slkeld's erly work grew out Revivl whilst her lter work ws considerbly more formlly experimentl thoroughly cognisnt estic intellectul movements both Europen Americn modernism. She trnslted Akhmtov, Bruisov, Blok, Pushkin from Russin, substntilly reviewed modernist poetry, Ezr Pound in prticulr. Slkeld's inclusion in ny definition n Irish cnon to dte hs been nominl rr thn substntive, she is perhps better known s mor Cecil Ffrench Slkeld, Irish modernist rtist, s grmor to Betrice, Brendn Behn's wife, thn for her own work. This is in spite fct tht Slkeld's poetry received glowing contemporneous reviews, tht she hd ccess to mens production to culturl pltform unvilble to mny her femle contemporries. A 1934 review Hello Eternity3 describes her work s n 'entirely new flower to pper on tht rodside Anglo Irish literture, s such, to be cherished if it drws trveller little side from min highwy ntionl trdition it my, for tht very reson, bring him peculir refreshment wyside scent bloom'.4 Evidently, however, her work hs not been cherished history it hs insted remined wyside flower lost on rodside ntionl trdition. This clls to mind Nul Ni Dhomnill's observtion tht Irish women poets' contribution to logos is not seen, but is rr considered decortive uxiliry, s 'wllpper begonis'.5 In light Ni Dhomhnill's commentry on current reception women's writing, terms in which Slkeld's work were originlly ppluded remin interest re significnce for ny current reconsidertion not only her poetry, but lso why it continues to be without plce in minstrem Irish literry Argubly, trdition. in trdition tht ws pinfully divided in erly prts 182
THE POETRY OF BLANAID SALKELD twentieth century, ny writer who ws neir revivlist nor modernist proper ws wkwrdly positioned regrdless gender. But it is not simply being positioned uncomfortbly between two tht hs prevented Slkeld's work from fitting into ny model Irish literry history Irish literry identity with which we re fmilir. Criticl models hve evolved tht cn ccommodte underst wht ws originlly dvertised s mutully incomptible positions ntionlism modernism, s for instnce in recent redings resurrections work Brin Cfey, Thoms McGreevey, Denis Devlin.6 Models for orizing how gender complictes this reltionship yet furr re evolving, but despite exemplry feminist scholrship pst few decdes, se models hve yet to be hiled s fellow trvellers on ' min highwy ntionl trdition'. Slkeld's work represents n xis on which modernism, ntionlism, feminism were ( still re) unsettled, her contemporneous reviewers struggled with this, shuttling bck forth between describing her work s 'feminine' when it seemed to be more in line with sort ptriotic pstorl lyric mode tht chrcterized much Revivl writing, s msculine when it pproched unconventions modernism. In sme review tht noted 'peculir refreshment' her work, she is credited with plesing unconsciousness regrding her femleness her ntionlity tht sves her from 'shrill' feministic (sic) 'ntionl' spect: The whole chrm beuty this book lies in fct tht it expresses something universl bout womnhood. Its freedom from shrillness emciptory dolescence, enhnces its vlue not only from feministic, but lso virtue time plce, from ntionl point view, mking it, in its entire unconsciousness need for eir feministic or ntionl propg cuses.7 vluble piece true estic propg for both Slkeld's work is pproved becuse it ppers to embrce quietism 'true estic propg' thus to exemplify truth tht should be self-evident, but not self-rticulting. Here, implied universl truth womnhood is tht womn is most truly mturely womn when embodying unconscious, refusing performnce self-conscious reflection or self-presenttion. In this ccount, estic vlue Slkeld's writing lies in how well it pproches condition untic, tht is, unconscious, womn; in being 'unmistkbly richly woven inexplicit stuff womn's rection to life'.8 Her work succeeds in se terms becuse it hs 'definitely feminine spect', but (thnkfully) voids flling 'into 183
IRISH UNIVERSITY REVIEW very snres feminine expression'.9 In or words, its potency is not seen to be result ny skilful mnipultion lnguge to ccommodte vision, but rr depends on fortunte impres sionistic ccident. Given tht overt self-consciousness self-commentry metphysiclly distinguished modernist writing from its lyricl predecessors, this review lso positions work Slkeld outside modernist prctices poetry. Furrmore, lthough it ppers to clim estic truth for her work on bsis tht it resists this spect modernism, review shres with modernist procedures criticl mnoeuvre with regrd to gender. The most influentil proponents interntionl modernism orized tht both intellect intent mlgmting imgintion needed for production excellent modernist rtefcts were msculine. This is clerly evident in W.B. Yets's gendered understing his own trnsition from erly lyricism to his self-styled br modernist writing. He remrked tht his 'work h[d] got more msculine. It hs more slt in it', contrsted this to his erlier work where re hd been 'n exggertion sentiment sentimentl beuty which [he hs] come to think unmnly'.10 The gendering modernist intellect s msculine is lso illustrted in John Crowe Rnsom's essy 'The Womn Poet', in which his observtions bout Edn St Vincent Milly re understood to extend cross her sex. Rnsom describes ' limittion Miss Milly's poetry thus: If I must express this in word, I still feel obliged to sy it is her lck intellectul interest. It is tht which mle reder misses in her poetry, even though he my cknowledge unticity interest which is re. I used conventionl symbol, which I hope ws not objectionble, when I phrsed this lck hers: deficiency in msculinity.11 This over-compenstory msculiniztion 'intellect' mle modernists is in prt symptom suspicion in which literry men were held, for ir 'msculinity' ws questionble, s 'men letters'. Ford Mdox Ford cknowledged tht literry London regrded mn letters s 'something less thn mn',12 tht such mn is 't lest effeminte if not decent kind eunuch'.13 This over compenstory hyper-msculinism, defence ginst previling ideology wr hero, reverbertes in criticl vocbulry tht hs grown up round modernist post-modernist writing. This vocbulry revolves round scertining level poet's control, courge, self-wreness, intent, bility to synsize diverse ten opposing metphysicl estic prctices 184
THE POETRY OF BLANAID SALKELD conventions, ll which re tested mesuring extent to which form, or body, poem is tight, ngulr, spre, hrd, well mnged: s such n implicit strd where msculinist mstery pssive or feminized form hs been estblished tht continues to consider its own gendering ttributes functions unimportnt. The reception Slkeld's work refore ws not simply cught on xis Revivl modernism, but lso ws is ffected gendering Revivl s feminized, modern, s msculine, furr complicted msculiniztion voice intellect feminiztion form or body text. The criticl success Slkeld's erly writing ws sme tenor s tht enjoyed Mrinne Moore: both women's work ws singled out s 'exceptionl' mong women, feminine without betrying itself s hving been written 'self-conscious' womn. By contrst criticl reception tht Slkeld's work received in 1950s ppers, on first reding, to be mrkedly different to tht which it received in 1930s, but in fct both types criticism operte upon sme underlying logic: tht self-conscious expression compromises womn's 'true womnhood'. The 1934 review Hello Eternity believed her poetry's excellence to be result its being woven into her 'womnhood', wheres Slkeld's 1954 volume, Experiment in Error, ws prised for voidnce ny such misfortune through emphsizing her possession self-conscious intellect dequte to mintining poetic hrdness. This is evident in Perse Hutchinson's review it: A relly st sonnet is, lmost definition (in English nywy) relly bd poem. Sonnets must be tough spry. Stness must be fr kept wy from word go; orwise, hrder ide, which it ws hoped, would mke up for or counterpoint st, is likely to be postponed till fifteenth line. This no doubt, is one reson why Blnid Slkeld is so successful with so fond sonnet form... The finl impression is n unusul most compctness, un-mediterrnen clip thrust.14 He goes on to prise 'precision' tht 'ttends frequent reltion between titles imgery', notes tht lthough her poems hve 'no derth bstrct words, concrete but dry imge lwys comes in'.15 Hutchinson's sentiments re echoed reviewer Experiment in Error for The Dublin who clls it 'most climtic Blnid Slkeld's writings to dte' chrcterized 'metphysicl wrestling, wry humour, self-wreness highly developed kind'.16 The reviewer lso comments tht Hello Eternity17 'showed this writer to hve vibrnt lyricl sense, controlled metphysicl turn mind'.18 The sme review notes tht 'echoes, somehow, continue, fter one hs put book down', this, 185
IRISH UNIVERSITY REVIEW reviewer tkes s 'good sign' tht indeed Slkeld's 'ltest poetry will endure'.19 This review ttempted to set up trjectory from pst into present for Slkeld's work, chrting journey from erly stirrings lyricl control into full self-conscious mstery form. This mpping her poetic journey did not however succeed in securing her n enduring, or indeed ny, plce in ntionl cnon, for it prtkes vlue system tht respects msculinized ttributes s sign estic excellence. A womn's writing, when esticlly evluted in terms extent to which it conforms to or resists ny previling ideology feminine, will necessrily be under-red in trdition tht mystifies redefines womn ccording to its own needs. The reviewer clled her ' born poet',20 but Slkeld's speker in 'Limbo'21 describes herself s 'not yet delivered pst',22 s if prophesizing tht, given gendered terms governing criticl discourses, her work could not be bird into plce in ntionl cnon. This is tntlizing invittion for contemporry critic to prctice some midwifery bring Slkeld's poetic consciousness into representtive being. However, re re number problems ttching to recovery uncknowledged work writers from pst, most vexing which is issue existing frmeworks into which y do not comfortbly fit. The sme perplexed dynmic between msculinity, femininity, ntionlism, modernism tht previled in Slkeld's time continues tody, in terms situting women's writing, both pst present, in reltion to min body Irish studies, twenty-first century's version 'min highwy literry trdition'. Delivery cn only be fcilitted scrutinizing, ltering, terms tht govern this trdition tody. The Ingenuity Trdition The structure influence tht predominntly underwrites western minstrem literry trditions relies on oedipl model. This mens structuring chronology trcing mpping influence necessrily csts women into n object position within model trnsmission between fr son. In this prdigm, womn, wher she be mor or dughter, ssures subjectivity son's fr's presence. Becuse one only representtive plce is given to both mor dughter, which Luce Irigry describes s ' plce mor',23 seprtion tht llows intergenertionl symbolic recognition or cnnot tke plce. Intergenertionl reltions between frs sons, or even mors sons, function s metphors specific nrrtives politicl literry history, but mor-dughter reltionship is not fmilir to us s metphor for ny collective fiction historicl or ntionl identity. This is depicted in Evn Bol's poem 'The Lost L'. It enumertes 'll nmes 186
THE POETRY OF BLANAID SALKELD [she] knows for lost l:/ Irel. Absence. Dughter/24 drwing ttention to collpse mor into Irel, mor into dughter wherein possibility mor-dughter symboliztion is lost. Argubly, feminist literry historiogrphy hs been primrily involved in recovery lost object tht represents mor dughter compound, thus is in dnger replicting logic oedipl model, which privileges mode intergenertionl trnsmission tht ctully needs bsence womn-to-womn intergenertionlity for its own continuing. This necessry retrievl hs ten been clled upon to justify itself in terms work's relevnce s n ntecedent ccording to vlues lredy estblished in self promoting trdition. However, ccepting terms lredy set s mens which lost work my be vlidted disllows potentil such work hs to lter model trdition lredy in plce. The ttempt to find fitting foremors thus unwittingly prtkes in model trdition tht forecloses possibility symboliztion women s more thn objects, for it serches for phllic model within chronologicl 'trdition' tht privileges liner understing influence. Mrgret Kelleher drws ttention to this tendency in her essy 'Writing Irish Women's Literry History': Asserting legitimcy for present from or presences bsences pst is very common in Irish context; mny recent retrievls lesser-known Irish women writers re presented in se terms. Similrly, metphors diving into wrecks, recovering tresures lost Atlntis, trdition submerged but intct, recur ll too frequently; s Thru Lolit hve shrply observed, 'notions loss exclusion re lwys underwritten drem wholeness or ' completeness' where lost or excluded object cn be recognized when it is found, restored to plce from which it ws missed'. This drem completeness my led us perilously close to ssumption tht for every gp in literry record re is body literry experience denied potentilly recoverble.25 By considering work previous writers s intct objects, such criticism continues to red work s n object to invoke model tht needs its object use for itself. In clssicl oedipl tringle, womn represents, in her sttus s n 'object', 'bsence' tht gurntees presence ors, thus to focus on object sttus womn's writing is, in psychonlyticl terms t lest, to continue to invest in derth discontinuities. Tht is, it is to continue to invest in dominnt model trdition tht lredy institutionlly encodes such discontinuities in support women's writing.26 187
IRISH UNIVERSITY REVIEW To tret womn's difference from object, criticl questions must not only be sked her work, but lso very trdition to which she represents n djunct. The difference womn cnnot be nswered, or properly sked, wrns Kelleher, unless vlues ccruing to her work within such trdition re ttended to: Wht re 'differences' women's writings remins in this regrd vlid, productive question, not lone in reltion to dynmics t work within literry text but lso, perhps even more so, in reltion to ' menings, vlues effects' which hve ccrued continue to ccrue to works uthored women.27 Argubly, primry vlue ttching to work writers such s Slkeld's in literry trdition s it sts is loss. The continued investment in trope loss functions to furr fllcy tht women's writing its topogrphy re inherently problemtic. In 'The Influence Absences: Evn Bol Silenced History Irish Women's Poetry', Anne Fogrty comments tht ' unwritten history Irish women's poetry from 1930's onwrds... even in bsenti... succeeds in csting shdow over shping lter pro nouncements bout thwrted nture femle literry trdition'.28 Crucilly n, in order to refute this belief bout 'thwrted nture femle literry trdition', we must sk how existing trdition criticl interprettionl modes thinking tht substntite it re intimtely connected. Semus Dene's Field Dy pmphlet, 'Heroic Styles: Trdition n Ide',29 identifies how opertions trdition itself become 'conditioning fctor' our interprettive prctices: In culture like ours, 'trdition' is not esily tken to be n estblished relity. We re conscious tht it is n invention, nrrtive which ingeniously finds wy connecting selected series historicl figures or mes in such wy tht pttern or plot reveled to us becomes conditioning fctor in our reding Literry works such s The Tower or Finnegns Wke.30 The ptterns plots this trdition hve become 'conditioning fctor' how we red literry works, to extent tht considerble body our criticl output concerns itself with exmintion Irish subject, Irish identity, s constructed understood in oedipl terms. In this pttern, womn's cn writerly subjectivity only be understood to conform to, or resist, plce mor, erning her eir footnote s 'well-behved' in trdition, or bd reputtion s its hunting Or, lost to cnonicl representtion. Thus, notion 188
THE POETRY OF BLANAID SALKELD subjectivity privileged oedipl model structures vision history trdition tht informs cnon-production trdition mking, recovery women's texts must lwys struggle with primcy this model in conditioning wys in which we red. This struggle is mde ll more difficult mens with which such trdition-mking 'nturlizes' itself disguises its own underlying structure. Dene's nlysis drws ttention to this identifying lck nmed speker nrrtive trdition: it 'ingeniously' finds wy to reproduce itself, through such connections. Its rel ingenuity is in its very disingenuousness, for, refusing to nme situte its speker it cn ppel to qulity myth structure nrrtive which resists nlysis its historicized contextulized speking subject. The only nrrtive position identified is tht trdition itself. The subject who tells it is obscured, nrrtive is itself ttributed gency,, s such, it tkes on uthority n ncestrl voice. Thus, trdition becomes (dis)ingenuously self-perpetuting through dehistoriciztion through ppel to myth. The utochthonic mnoeuvres this trdition re entirely in keeping with oedipl model it supports; self birthing fr-son dyd is powerfully woven into oedipl myth s Jen-Frngois Lyotrd notes in his provoctive discussion differences between repression foreclosure in 'Figure Foreclosed'.31 After ll, in oedipl model trnsmission, mor is only nme mor, for she does not herself regenerte; rr she is mtter through which son 'births himself in Agon with fr thus perpetuting myth new criticl Gret Mn, or modernist hero-son's originlity disjunctive genius. The mor is not simply repressed, but lso foreclosed, s she is nominlly importnt to version history tht privileges fr-son reltions.32 She is both 'within' 'without' this trdition: inside it s necessry mtter, footnote in mrgins, outside it in her seemingly unrepresentble difference from her use. object A model tht llowed for this oedipl rchetype (which does perform necessry psychic opertion, but is not only psychic necessity required for sociliztion) yet enlrged its terms so tht oedipl moment ws not fetishized s primry mode chieving identity, could provide for number key refigurtions shred symbolic spces. In psychonlyticl ccounts identity usully fvoured literry criticism, nmely clssicl Freudin Lcnin models, pre-oedipl period is fntsized s time when mor child exist in symbiotic stte only become differentited oedipl crisis, when mor gins symbolic significnce refter s (non-) phllic mor. An lterntive model would provide for reconsidertion pre-oedipl period s meningful 189
IRISH UNIVERSITY REVIEW historicizble, would thus llow for single symbolic spce for women to be replced with multiple symbolic occsions. This could bring into reliztion Irigry's vision more just society where 'women were not forever competing for ' unique plce occupied mor', where women could differentite mselves from mor, so tht women were not reduced to mternl function'.33 Furrmore, cknowledging tht pre-oediplly both mor child experience ech or s seprte relte in numerous subject object permuttions llows for displcing primcy Oedipus complex in estblishing historicizble identity. These myrid pre re oedipl reltionships not visible within oedipl ccounts identity, in much sme wy tht pre-oedipl pst 'modern Irel' is overshdowed iconogrphic figure phllic Mor Irel who hs populrly bird modern stte. By venturing into mists stte's pre-oedipl pst (which in psychonlyticl terms is contiguous to, s well s previous to, post-oedipl experience), literry historins rchivists cn set bout recovering writers not lredy seen s hving ny importnce or influence. This reversl usul chronology nxious influence would not be to ttempt, s Fogrty writes, to 'restore flse unity to Irish women's poetry nor to initite spurious, reconcilitory dilogue between vrious frgmented diverse fcets this history tht somehow trnscends its mny silences elisions'.34 Nor would it men recovering such work s intct objects. Insted it would be to suggest s Fogrty does tht ' oeuvre contemporry womn poet cn "ber witness" to rich heritge tht hs for so much twentieth century been uncknowledged'.35 Bering Witness Bol's much quoted lines tht 'women hve moved from being subjects objects Irish poetry to being uthors m',36 gesture towrds wht is needed to ber witness to such uncknowledged works: criticl on emphsis subjects objects. An ccent on complex subject-object reltionships is lredy much in evidence in recent scholrship, most notbly in model deployed Decln Kiberd's ground-breking work, Inventing Irel: The Literture Modern Ntion.37 The oreticl spect Kiberd's work tht consciously recognizes subject object positions involved in Oring stereotyping hs ttrcted little explicit ttention; despite this however, it hs implicitly formed oreticl bckbone considerble body recent criticism tht hs llowed for re-reding Irish uthored texts to revel ironies subversions tht promise libertion from 'objectified' positions. This mode reding 190
THE POETRY OF BLANAID SALKELD provides mens bering witness to subjects doubly inflected in pst present s object s subject. Indeed, it is this criticl wreness doubleness, being both subject object, tht Slkeld's work needs in order for its rich experimentlism to become pprent. However, to simply ber witness to ny inherent doubleness her work is in itself not sufficient. Like work mny women writers erly Revivl, when red in terms dominnt trdition, Slkeld's erly work seems to be sentimentlly nostlgic to resist encountering politicl difficulties dy through recourse to pstorl sublimtion rehersed in conventionl poetic forms. Accordingly, estic, gendered, vlues Slkeld's contemporneous review culture ment tht ironic possibilities her work were significntly overlooked.38 For instnce, poems 'Form'39 'Every Tight Trick'40 explore her reltion to poetic conventions histories her plce in m, or s cse my be, out m. This chrcteristic plyfulness becomes most obvious in her finl volume, Experiment in Error41 published in 1955. Experiment in Error represents powerful chllenge to modernist orthodoxy feminized form msculinized voice predicted on fetishized notion singulrity subject. Slkeld ws not unwre constructed condition forml gender roles. In foreword to trnsltions Ahkmtov published in The Dublin Slkeld drws ttention with some irony to Jnko Lvrin's ssumption tht no mn could hve written Akhmtov's poetry.42 Slkeld ws lso much preoccupied with form, in contrst to her 1934 reviewer's understing her, did lot more thn simply let it 'emerge',43 rr she prodiclly embodies it in Experiment in Error s n investigtion her own object positioning within min culture. The speker poems dully opertes both s object modernist poetics, s subject whose presence is dngerous to prctice very poetry tht she writes. The me reiterted throughout Experiment in Error is tht she 'shll go dul ll [her] life'.44 This dulity is first noticeble in wy in which she ffectiontely distnces herself from poetic culture in which she writes whilst still climing her plce s poet. In poem 'As For Me', published first in The Bell in 1951,45 reprinted in Experiment in Error in 1955, Slkeld ssumes n ironic, plyful posture in reltion to ellipticl, stylistic over-determintions high modernism, to debtes bout 'ntiqurins moderns' in Irish letters, to mysticism, to rchetypl criticism: Lpsed Ltinity hlf lucid Greek Here re helping, with common root Under us verse fr wy to shoot 191
IRISH UNIVERSITY REVIEW From prticulr, is ll we seek. This ge forswers, however fir it spek, The personl in rt, would dilute Atom in element, or court dispute With errnt ghosts modern ntique. A drem cn fling up words, scrce to be found In to dictionry point quest After buried tresure. Old men, y sy Sleep ill. They could well use ir thoughts till dy Sieving fr-come ss ir unrest For wonders. But, s for me, I sound.46 sleep The lines 'Old men, y sy/sleep ill' recll Yets's Responsibilities, this poem tesingly suggests tht such old men, preoccupied with ' futile tsk sieve [ing] fr-come ss ir unrest /for wonders', cnnot see possibilities outside ir own well-worn prdigm. The poem ends with speker sserting tht 's for me, I sleep sound', signlling her bility to drem into representtion mrvels vilble outside prmeters sieve. Here drem is presented s tre for discovering 'buried tresure' difference womn from object. The drem fter ll is where repressed contents re symbolized, words tht it cn fling up re 'scrce to be found/in dictionry', tht is, re not prt symbolic order s it sts. The literry self-consciousness with which she seeks form dequte to expressing 'scrce' words wonders is lost on her criticl biogrpher, Fred Johnson, who wrote 'it is difficult to determine wht rhythm, if ny, she hd in mind'.47 So lthough Slkeld fulfilled criteri tht 'rre-creture', poet critic, wrote pressionlly, Johnson sees her s lcking n imgintion intent enough to be nything or thn mteur, describing her poems s ' sensitive ttempts highly intelligent mteur'.48 As result, he misreds her experimentlism s slpdsh incompetence: She is usully committed to rhyme, but her sense rhythm is errtic. Even in trditionl highly restrictive form like sonnet, she seems to think tht ny ten higgledy-piggledy compose n cceptble line.49 syllbles This refusl to recognize n overrching purposeful mind mnging her work effectively ligns her with T.S. Eliot's definition mind ordinry mn, rr thn tht poet.50 Yet it is this very division itself, long with over-fetishized modernist imgintion, tht Slkeld's work refuses to endorse. Slkeld ironizes her own reltion to notion 'intent imgintion' in 'Interference': 192
THE POETRY OF BLANAID SALKELD Hush... Who now whistles me up from clever Torrent, this prelude to drk persusion Of ss My first pulse ssent Accorded, I m drwn with strong intent Free Flse purgtoril evsion... Into my destined hell. Come pin forever!51 This poem works on two levels in reltion to 'drk persusions ss', which represents not only deth, but lso birth into ss symbolic unknown spce outside oediplly configured symbolic order in which 'difference womn' is kept. The ss unknown is not only sought in future possible tense, but lso in foreclosed pst specificlly in pre-oedipl period which includes originl mteril birth from mor's body 'Limbo',52 tken from Experiment in Error, contrsts mternl, first birth with oedipl, second birth. The poem explores how in oediplly configured fntsies pre-oedipl symbiosis differences mor child re obscured. Such n economy mening hs only silence vilble for representing 'we': 'We stmmer into silence'.53 In prophetic stnz tht foreshdows 'better re-birth' Slkeld's work from 'pst', speker 'Limbo' speks s reversl prdoxicl sil Bol's 'The Muse Mor', who is 'ble to sing pst'.54 The speker wits midwifery tht will deliver her from pst, but tht will come to her from 'forwrd mists': I m no pilgrim pst who ber Dim in my blood Its essence lwys hid, witing re Better re-birth. So I must smile peer Into forwrd mists, hed fer. Retrce my steps who hve no time to wste I m not yet delivered pst. In some fr cvern mist curtin lifting I would essy to hold my All from drifting Off with flood.55 The lifting 'mist curtin' to ccess 'fr cvern' symbolizes return to ss, return to mteril birth, which lthough originl birth, must prdoxiclly be journeyed bck to, experienced s rebirth. Hence, culture tht represses its mteril origins in fvour myth linguistic origin will be reborn into knowledge pre-oedipl difference. The essence foreclosed differences pre-oedipl 'pst' which speker 'ber[s] Dim in [her] blood/', which is 'hid, witing re/better re-birth', is 193
IRISH UNIVERSITY REVIEW elucidted. The Timbo interlude before re-birth/dimly enjoyed'56 cn thus be enjoyed in full light representtion. Yet, this illumintion remins privte to speker s sun/son who provides light determines re-telling wht is seen through uspices Oedipus complex. Pre-oedipl twoness is replced dulity womn experiences fter oedipl birth, which is represented here s cesren birth: T ws divided, s shrp knife/henceforth I shll go dul ll my life.'57 However, only speker is wre tht she is lso s subject well s object, s culture t lrge views her through single lens her object use. In oedipl birth, only child is born into symbolic subjectivity, s mor's role in supporting presence child though her gurnteeing bsence becomes her identifying vlue.58 The poem n illustrtes how privileged son/sun tkes onto himself power giving mening: 'Colouring, discolouring, he shifts lters/from Violet sky, to gilt scroll on dull wters/59 The use speker's pronoun 'our' signls obscured uncknowledged lbouring mtter to incrnte such hero-poet. For it is only 'he', hero, who is ble to 'trnscend' to view in hevens, vision tht llows him to 'coin' content, to unticte his own story s cnonicl tle worth telling retelling: when our lbours cese He stres from hevens Antipodes, Coining content.60 In criticl culture where 'content' is determined oedipl son, n womn's dulity, however or elegntly brillintly it is expressed, cnnot be meningfully recognized. Hence, 'Limbo' lso represents historicl hitus in which poet's own work is lost, s uncknowledged pre-oedipl difference modern Irel. The criticl insufficiency reding her poetry, tht is result criticl economy between poet critic, medited through feminized body poem holds her work in limbo. This stte rrested expression is furr explored in 'Monotony': Summer is vrious over lke whin. You keep wy still from bttering rm Of my monotony. It seems, I m All one colour without, within. Eternl summer stels bck, with its din, Its glow, unchnged, down history. Doors slm On murders illicit births. The lmb Is clled to scrifice, old sin. While ll surfces every shire 194
THE POETRY OF BLANAID SALKELD Shift with fires shdows hour I've no chmeleon qulity no chnge Visits my stubborn smeness, to dernge My proper stiffness. Where shll I find power To overlep blind currents desire61 On first reding, this poem ppers to be bout wy in which depression renders everything sme, specificlly rective depression induced bsence n object desire, with which she is in dilogue. The speker s eternl feminine is described in terms uniformity immutbility: 'All one colour without, within'; 'Eternl, unchnged' ; 'I've no chmeleon qulity no chnge/visits my stubborn smeness.' 'It seems' here works s n invittion to red poem s 'or' drwing ttention to object sttus speker; speker is sme 'without, within', when literlized s primry object, but configurtive 'I m', is preceded qulified 'it seems', which nnounces split between subject object. She owns ech projections: 'my monotony', 'my stubborn smeness' 'my proper stiffness', but y do not configure her. A crucil distinction is set up between subjective T genitive 'my', bringing differences between subject object into representtion. Thus, she only 'seems' to conform to projections feminine 'proper stiffness' phllic mor. Despite knowledge tht such ttributes originte elsewhere, signlled use 'without', she still experiences m s disbling. The modifiction 'without' with 'within' signls tht se projections cn be introjected or internlized to extent tht y become prt how she experiences herself, thus n impediment to her being in world. The foreclosure womn is thus seen to exct rel psychic cost from women. The 'nturlness' womn being eir 'within' or 'without' is chllenged in following lines, which expose opertions t work in process foreclosure: Eternl summer stels bck, with its din, Its glow, unchnged, down history. Doors On murders illicit births. The lmb Is clled to scrifice, old sin. slm The retrospective glnce oedipl restructuring refuses differences historiciztion to mythicized pre-oedipl period: 'Eternl summer stels bck, with its din,/its glow, unchnged, down history/ This 'steling bck' history works here on two levels. In first instnce it 'slm doors' on representtion opertions Oedipus complex: 'Doors slm, on murders illicit births.'62 195
IRISH UNIVERSITY REVIEW These oediplly configured estics slm door on reveltion subtending mtricidl unconscious, n unconscious tht yet informs resurrectionl spects new criticl dogm trnscendence. In second plce 'steling bck' mens revision oedipl version: opening slmmed door to revel how birth or reliztion msculinist poetic mind through feminized body poem is illicit, s it depends on effective 'murder' her subjectivity. The experience representing nor's being t expense her own is expressed s prlytic monotony immutbility, occsioned kept in plce blind currents desire. These re very blind currents represented Tiresis in The Wstel,63 prototypicl modernist figure in whom womn's body is explicitly formlized rrnged in hierrchicl reltion to msculinized 'mind'. The query 'where shll I find power to overlep blind currents desire', expresses her need to trnscend monotony being this form. The use infinitive 'to overlep' expresses semi-completion trnscending condition form, to self conscious expression. The infinitive is verb tht expresses no tense, this is refore n ction cut f mid-ct. Moreover, overlep is reversl phrsl verb, to lep over, wherein usul contingent order verb 'lep' preposition 'over' in phrsl conjunction is reversed to form compound verb. Movement is thus frozen this compounded reversl usul chronology phrsl reltionship in 'overlep'. The poet, through use configuring subjective T m', trnsitionl 'it seems' begins to trnscend condition feminized form speking from 'without' form, but within poem, within nor understing form. Thus womn's perspective whose difference from form is 'murdered' in 'illicit births' modernist poet-hero is ctully included in form tht within modernist xiomtics is supposed to 'scrifice' her. This vocl 'trnscendence' form is rrested in 'overlep' cnnot be completed until such time s it cn lso be recognized from without poem tht is, reding economy ble to recognize expressions difference womn outside object use. Thus blind currents desire refer lso to blind currents nor's desire, nmely desire blind poetic visionry Tiresis his correltive idel critic for one nor. This blind desire overleps mtter poem, overlooks presence womn. The feminized body/ poem exists s object through which desired reltionship between idel critic poet is relized. Poetry trditions re built on bck this gonistic interchnge, explining why for most prt, women poets hve remined outside cnon, 196
THE POETRY OF BLANAID SALKELD s feminine s form opertes to erth such currents desire. Slkeld, s femle uthor wre doubleness her presence, disturbs this economy, but power tht she seeks to complete trnscendence form into voice, resides elsewhere, without herself, for 'to overlep' is lso prepositionl phrse modifying 'power', : No chnge Visits my stubborn smeness, to dernge My proper stiffness. And thus, in order for her to become subject, terms for reding her must supply 'without' to this rrested ct, so tht it cn be completed. Slkeld's poetic subjectivity cnnot fully trnscend condition form until criticl economy exists tht visits her work to 'dernge' her proper stiffness, relesing her from role phllic mor through introducing supposed mdness womn outside symbolic order trdition. The foreclosure which dems mdness 'without', stiffness 'within' womn is illustrted, thus keeping Slkeld's work true to modernist impulse to find form tht both sums summons up experience. It is properly 'poem mind' tht is, in Wllce Stevens's words, in ' ct finding/wht will suffice'.64 In this cse, poem is enctment experience being under-red. The poem this mind is in ct finding form sufficient to demonstrting how blindness Oedipus complex to its own gendering, renders its criticl prxis so insufficient to reding poem, tht it ctully rrests poet's ct to find wht will suffice. Finlly, verb 'overlep' mens both to omit to lep beyond wht one intends: to lep too fr. Until now, Slkeld's lep hs been step too fr for trdition tht needs her loss to do its own work; it is time, however, to deliver her from pst. The time is long overdue for Blnid Slkeld to enjoy representtionl compnionship with her fellow trvellers on 'min highwy ntionl trdition' revised restructured in light her own contribution to it. NOTES 1. Blnid Slkeld, Experiment in Error (Kent: The H Flower Press, 1955), p. 21. 2. Slkeld's work ws first brought to my ttention through Gerrdine Meney's reserch for The Field Dy Anthology Irish Writing Volumes IV V: Irish Women's Writing Trditions (Cork: Cork University Press, 2002). 3. Blnid Slkeld, Hello Eternity (London: J.M. Dent, 1933). 4. Review Hello Eternity, in The Dublin 9.3 Quly-September 1934), 80-1. 5. Medbh McGuckin Nul Ni Dhomhnill, 'Comhr, with Foreword Afterword Lur O'Connor', The Sourn Review, 31.3 (1995), 581-614, p. 599. 6. Modernism Irel: Poetry 1930s, edited Ptrici Coughln Alex 197
IRISH UNIVERSITY REVIEW Dvis (Cork: Cork University Press, 1995), constructs explores frmeworks, both in its editoril mission in individul essys, for rethinking writers considered problemtic with regrd to ntionl trdition in ntionl context. 7. The Dublin 9.3 (1934), 80-1. 8. The Dublin 9.3 (1934), 80-1. 9. The Dublin 9.3 (1934), 80-1. 10. Quoted in Dvid Perkins, A History Modern Poetry: Modernism After (Cmbridge: Belknp Press Hrvrd University Press, 1987), p. 581. 11. John Crowe Rnsom, The World's Body (New York London: Chrles Scribner, 1938), p. 98. 12. K.K. Ruthven, Ezr Pound s Literry Critic (London: Routiedge, 1990), p. 102. 13. In EA. Bell, Critic s Scientist: The Modernist Poetics Ezr Pound (London: Menthuen, 1981), p. 87. 14. Perse Hutchinson, Irish Writing, 34 (Spring 1956), 60-1, p. 60. 15. Hutchinson, p. 61. 16. The Dublin 31.1 (Jnury-Mrch 1956), 63-5, p. 63. 17. Slkeld, Hello Eternity (London: J.M. Dent, 1933). 18. The Dublin 31.1 (1956), p. 65. 19. The Dublin 31.1 (1956), p. 65. 20. The Dublin 31.1 (1956), p. 65. 21. Slkeld, Experiment, pp. 20-1. 22. Slkeld, Experiment, p. 21. 23. Mrgret Whitford, Luce Irigry: Philosophy in Feminine (London: Routiedge, 1991), p. 80. 24. Evn Bol, The Lost L (Mnchester: Crcnet, 1998), p. 38. 25. Mrgret Kelleher, 'Writing Irish Women's Literry History', Irish Studies Review, 9.1 (Spring 2001), 5-14, pp. 9-10. 26. Kelleher's essy drws ttention to wys in which such discontinuities configure institutionl ttitudes to women's writing through errtic funding d hoc provisions for specific posts dedicted to women's writing; see Kelleher, p. 11. 27. Kelleher, p. 11. 28. Anne Fogrty '"The Influence Absences": Evn Bol Silenced History Irish Women's Writing', Col Qurterly, 35.4 (December 1999), 256-275, p. 257. 29. Semus Dene, Heroic Styles: The Trdition n Ide, Field Dy Pmphlet No. 4 (Derry: Field Dy, 1984). 30. Dene, p. 6. 31. Jen-Frncois Lyotrd writes: The horsemen who founded city brought with m myth which Levi Struss incorportes into Oedipus story, becuse this frgment is essentil to ny understing it... The wrrior rce sprng from erth rmed rmoured, but without prents; were y not born. This is myth utochthony. It might be seen s representing predominnce mternl me, if it were true tht erth were universl substitute for mor. The truth is probbly reverse; importnt point is tht it excludes prentl dilectic. Here we hve myth in which fr-son reltionship simply disppers. If we replce this myth in its historicl culturl context, it is to tempting dd tht religious contribution invders from north disppers becuse it is no longer medited mternl reltionship, tht wht invders re expressing mens this myth is fct tht, unlike people y dominte, tht y re born mselves. We cn see in this configurtion n ersure femle element denil cstrtion, in or words foreclosure. And it is no ccident tht foreclosed returns to son Oedipus, Lius, son Lddcus, in truly hllucintory figure Jocst. Jen-Frncois Lyotrd, 'Figure Foreclosed', The Lyotrd Reder, edited Andrew Benjmin (Oxford: Bsil Blckwell, 1989), pp. 69-111, p. 76. 32. A recent exmple this is evident in film Gngs New York (Mrtin Scorsese, 198
THE POETRY OF BLANAID SALKELD 2002, US), which spires to condition foundtionl nrrtive Irish Americn New Yorkers. The plot involves young mn seeking revenge for his murdered fr, murdering his Anglo-identified killer, bringing bck to power gng led his Irish-identified fr. Effectively n two frs represent competing trditions, protgonist's mor never ppers nor is she mentioned. The only significnt femle role, plyed Cmeron Diz, serves purposes mediting body between protgonist murderer (who hd become surrogte fr), tht is, she opertes in 'plce mor'. 33. Mrgret Whitford, Luce Irigry: Philosophy in Feminine (London: Routledge, 1991), pp. 88-9. 34. Fogrty, p. 257. 35. Fogrty, p. 258. 36. Evn Bol, A Kind Scr (Dublin: Attic Press, 1989), p. 6. 37. Decln Kiberd, Inventing Irel: The Literture Modern Ntion (London: Vintge 1995). 38. The work complex interesting writers such s Kthrine Tynn, Ev Gore Booth, Nor Hopper, Ethn Crbery, Susn Lngstff Mitchell, Mry Devenport O'Neill, to mention but few, hs been under-red in similr wy becuse oppositionl gendering kind discussed throughout this essy. 39. Slkeld, The Dublin 23.3 (July-September 1948), p. 7. 40. Slkeld, The Dublin 24.3 (July-September 1949), p. 3. 41. Slkeld, Experiment in Error (Kent: The H Rower Press, 1955). 42. Slkeld, 'Ann Akhmtov', The Dublin 8.4 (October-December 1933), pp. 51-5. 43. 'It is not perfection form we look for or miss in m, but st emergence chnging mood brushed lightly in, in freshed (sic) coloured words.' See The Dublin 9.3 (July-September 1934), 80-81, p. 80. 44. Slkeld, Experiment, pp. 20-1. 45. Slkeld, 'As For Me', The Bell, 16.3 (December 1951), p. 16. 46. Slkeld, Experiment, p. 29. 47. Fred Johnson, Dictionry Irish Literture, editor-in-chief, Robert Hogn (London: Aldwych Press, 1996), p. 1080 ( entries in both 1979 1986 editions dictionry re sme). 48. Johnson, p. 1080. 49. Johnson, p. 1080. 50. In 'The Metphysicl Poets' Eliot wrote: 'A poet's mind... is constntly ml gmting disprte experience; ordinry mn's experience is chotic, irregulr, frgmentry. The ltter flls in love, or reds Spinoz se experiences hve nothing to do with ech or, or with noise typewriter or smell cooking; in mind poet se experiences re lwys forming new wholes.' See T.S. Eliot, Selected Prose, edited Frnk Kermode (London: Fber Fber, 1984), p. 64. 51. Slkeld, Experiment, p. 5. 52. Slkeld, Experiment, pp. 20-1. 53. Slkeld, Experiment, p. 20. 54. Evn Bol, Collected Poems (Mnchester: Crcnet, 1995), pp. 92-3. 55. Slkeld, Experiment, p. 21. 56. Slkeld, Experiment, p. 20. 57. Slkeld, Experiment, p. 20. 58. The privileging oedipl moment s primry birth into identity effectively endorses child's perspective notions singulr self consigns difference mor from her object use to symbolic wilderness. As Jessic Benjmin notes: 'Although oedipl chievement complementrity is supposed ory to represent mture cceptnce difference limits one or being only or it ctully hrbours unconscious nrcissistic omnipotence being " one only"'. See Benjmin, Like Objects, Love Subjects: Essys on Recognition Sexul Difference (New Hven: Yle University Press, 1995), p. 105. Benjmin continues: 'Once we hve recognised finesse in 199
IRISH UNIVERSITY REVIEW oedipl mnoeuvre, point is not to imgine position completely independent oedipl complimentrity, which is no more possible thn to eliminte ll omnipotence. The point is rr to expose it to myths which it gives rise. To chllenge conceled omnipotence in heterosexul structure its principle exclusivity invidious comprison is not to brogte difference or to institute defensive notions being everything. It is rr, to integrte pre oedipl identifictions boys with mor girls with fr s identifictions with difference, which sufficiently modify sense loss, envy, concomitnt repudition' (p. 105). 59. Slkeld, Experiment, p. 20. 60. Slkeld, Experiment, p. 20. 61. Slkeld, Experiment, p. 11. 62. Slkeld, Experiment, p. 11. 63. T.S. Eliot, The Wstel Or Poems (New York: Hrvest, 1962), pp. 27-46. 64. Wllce Stevens, The Collected Poems 1955), p. 239. Wllce Stevens (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 200