First off, the point of departure for
this post is the premise that no part of language should be off-limits or banned for poets.
Writing is tough enough without forsaking a chunk of the toolbox.
However, there are a few lexical
elements that seem fraught with danger. One obvious example is adverbs, which CW
tutors are notoriously wary of their students employing. I actually (sic) love them!
Another is the use of abstract nouns,
which feel far more troublesome to my mind. Why? Well, because they can mean so
many things to so many individuals, social groups and nationalities, even
within a single language. Let’s take the example of freedom. Its
connotations would be hugely different for a Remainer or a Brexiteer, for
instance! When a poet uses this word, they lose control over the effects that
their choice of language may have on the reader.
And of course, once we get into the art
of translation, this problem deepens even further. For example, la
democracia in Spanish necessarily becomes democracy in English. But
its baggage for a Spaniard who lived through la transición a la democracia
(following Franco’s dictatorship) is very different from its multitude of
meanings for certain English speakers from specific points in the political spectrum
(need I say more?!). This is one key reason why translating an abstract-heavy
poem is a huge ask.
So where am I headed? Towards two main
conclusions. The first is that I’m very uncomfortable with poems packed with
abstract nouns that all lead to so many potential ramifications beyond the poet’s
own interpretations of them. And secondly, there’s definitely an opportunity
for poets to play with those very issues within a poem, though I do feel the
focus is best placed on exploring a limited set of abstracts in one go. Too
many, and the reader inevitably becomes disorientated.
But that’s enough of my opinions. What
about yours? What’s your approach to the use of abstract nouns in contemporary
poetry…?
