Poetry: learning to learn by doing

Press, 29 June 1985, Page 20

Poetry: learning to learn by doing

Take a Risk, Trust Your Language, Make a Poem. By Michael P. Harlow. Christchurch Teachers’ College, 1985. 82 pp. $12.95. (Reviewed by Tom Weston) Language is generally taken for granted. To many people it is merely a tool, useful for reading the newspaper or following road signs. Even so, and despite this very familiarity, there is no guarantee that any one person will then appreciate the written arts, especially that of poetry. As with the visual, or aural arts (and probably more so), some sort of context is necessary—a degree of knowledge or skill does not go astray. The vexed question has always been how to provide this context—exactly how do you “teach” poetry? Some readers will remember an indigestible school diet of the English Romantics. For many this will have been a wasted exercise—not because of any inherent fault in the subject matter, but because of the method adopted: in the words of the cliche, don’t run before you walk. Exaggerated perhaps, but the point is that teaching by “prescription” (Harlow’s word) is generally less productive than teaching by “provocation”. Get the student doing it for the fun of it, rather than drearily learning lines by rote. Provide the context and then encourage confidence in the use of language. Surprisingly, even this might seem a heresy to a younger generation of English teachers who have merely substituted Dylan Thomas or T. S. Eliot for Wordsworth (but otherwise continued the prescriptive rites.) Michael Harlow’s text book (I use the term advisedly) draws from overseas experience which concentrated on teaching poetry by getting pupils to write it. There is little emphasis on analysis or a study of set forms. Poetry begins in words, and the idea is to string these together into whatever each pupil conceives a poem to be. There is no right or wrong way—everything is right. Pound said “make it new”; Harlow says, “make it fun.” The book is attractively produced with an arresting cover and vibrant (though occasionally too artful)

graphics. For this reason alone it should appeal. A considerable effort has been made to reach over and attract. The author tells us his ideas are well tested and, indeed, examples of student writing are included in the book. It seems obvious that this sort of approach can work. There are three sections. In the first, the author concentrates on words as units in the poem. The student is encouraged to look at the familiar (such as the telephone book or the newspaper racing results) and then draw out the poem. This approach sees words as part of a system of signs, and one word is as good as another. Even stones can be used as a source material (rubbing, scraping, etc.). In this particular case, Harlow’s earlier collaboration with composer Kit Powell is apparent. The second section makes the difficult transition from word to poem. While the first part of the book emphasised the collecting together of words—write fast, Harlow said—the final form was not too important. In this second section, however, Harlow must convince the student that his “keep it fun” approach is still valid. He seeks to demystify the poem at the same time as introducing all the complex processes, that go into one. Part of this exercise entails an examination of the works of several poets. Particular highlights are Wallace Stevens’s “Thirteen Ways of Looking at a Blackbird” and Alan

Loney’s “Of Flowers.” There are other good poems here, too, and interesting exercises are suggested. The third section studies the growth of one poem, seen here in 10 separate stills. The poem in question is Michael Harlow’s “Operation Identification” (from “Vlamincks Tie,” 1985). These 10 cross-sections show both the first and last stages of the exercise together with a selected eight in between. Each stage in the process has a commentary. The message is cleartrust your intuition. Generally, then, a successful text. My only complaint would be one of brevity. Are there enough exercises, enough provocations? Michael Harlow would answer yes, saying he has taught using this system and it does work. But his are experienced hands, and I wonder whether less experienced, or less committed, teachers have enough to go on. I would also like to see some sort of pointers provided for students who might like to go beyond these initial stages and make their own investigation into poetry. There is considerable potential here. I hope the book is well used, and that successes or failures are duly reported back to its author. Such constructive criticism could eventually lead to a fuller second edition. Anything that develops a greater interest in language, and thus poetry, is worth pursuing. Michael Harlow has made an important, and substantial, step in this direction.