This is quite remarkable. Truly sombre, in a way you never really see anything sombre any more. And moving. The death of Wislawa Szymborska passed over Baroque, not because it didn’t seem to matter but just for personal life-based reasons that prevented me being able to write anything that week. On the contrary it did matter. I was quite thrown by it, once again in spite of her age, 88. (There’s a generation of poets recently being felled in numbers, all in their mid-to-late eighties, whose passing turns out to be more of a shock than you’d think. Of course Logue was among these. You just imagine their spirit will carry them through, their necessariness. Every generation says this, maybe. Especially as we begin to find ourselves within sight of the finish line…) The sombre dignity of this event feels right and good.
Watching this tiny film clip of her funeral makes me aware again what a personal poet Szymborska seemed to be – not that her poetry is purely ‘personal’ (and indeed she herself tried to argue that they were ‘persona’, rather than simply ‘political’) but that her poems had that astonishing intimacy that the most surprising poems have, where you feel they’re like private letters to you. In this case, letters from an intensely sophisticated, intellectually honest woman.
There’s a wonderful quote from her in the Guardian, which I’ll leave you with:
“Everyone needs solitude, especially a person who is used to thinking about what she experiences. Solitude is very important in my work as a mode of inspiration, but isolation is not good in this respect. I am not writing poetry about isolation,” she said, going on to wonder why anyone would want to interview her. “For the last few years my favourite phrase has been ‘I don’t know’. I’ve reached the age of self-knowledge, so I don’t know anything. People who claim that they know something are responsible for most of the fuss in the world.”
{ 4 comments }
I haven’t got anything intelligent to say about Wislawa Szymborska, but I did want to say that the quote at the end of your piece rather chimed. I think it was the famous human rights lawyer Lord Lester QC who once said the definition of a liberal is someone who could accept that they might be wrong. Which, to me at least, sums it up rather tidily – especially if one thinks of how to define liberalism’s opposite, fundamentalism.
Incidentally it is some years since I visited the baroque corner of online Hackney, and now find it to be a fully fledged website – impressive! (if i may offer the compliment
)
Regards,
James
Now that quote has made me feel better! I find myself thinking and saying “I don’t know” and “er…” and “that’s something else I don’t know much about” a lot of late. I was worrying about it a bit… maybe I shouldn’t. Oh. I don’t know…
James! Wonderful to have you back. Glad you like the new site, and I will bookmark yours. Hurrah! How’s life in the Umpire household?
And Rachel, yes, it’s good isn’t it.
x
Cheers Katy. All well in the umpiring world, though with the two juniors (now aged 6 and 4 and both at school) not much time to catch one’s breath … I do manage to blog occasionally – usually legal stuff but shortly something on fatherhood too. Hopefully I will have a book coming out soon too, which is quite exciting – old fashioned publishing of course, but you may recall I am quite old fashioned in most respects … Good to see you have gone from strength to blogging strength