Silencio / Silence (a double poem)

tom.d.stiller · Post by **tom.d.stiller** » Sun Mar 06, 2005 4:56 am

Several weeks ago, when I was busy rediscovering Spanish poetry, a Spanish line suddenly came to my mind. I jotted down both the original and a translation. A few days later I started working on the lines, and two versions of a poem, one English, the other in Spanish co-evolved. Thus these are two original versions rather than one original and a translation.

You can imagine that the Spanish version was full of mistakes, and I had to cry for help. For this reason, and for a couple more, I dedicate this "poema doble" to Sandra, because she helped me eradicate the grammatical errors. For those mistakes that may have survived, of course, it's me to blame.

tom

Silencio

Todos los silencios son diferentes
y aun así todos transmiten
lo que las palabras no pueden transferir.

Todos los silencios son diferentes.
Algunos nacen de la indiferencia
algunos de la más profunda comprensión
algunos brotan de la muerte de la voz
mientras otros se saturan de vergüenza
o del dolor
o de la blanda desolación.

Todos los silencios son diferentes
pero el silencio que quiero traer
debería ser una diferencia silenciosa
que hace la diferencia.

Silence

all silences are different
and yet they all convey
what words cannot transfer.

all silences are different.
some are born from indifference
some from deepest understanding
some stem from the death of a voice
while others are seeped with shame
or pain
or tender desolation.

all silences are different
but the silence i want to bring
should be a silent difference
that makes a difference.

Sandra · Post by **Sandra** » Sun Mar 06, 2005 5:28 pm

I want to be the first to comment and to say thank you tom for this poem, beautiful indeed......I love it.

LaurieAK · Post by **LaurieAK** » Sun Mar 06, 2005 10:05 pm

Hi Tom~

It's interesting that you say these are two different poems and not a translation of one poem between the two.

Speaking ONLY English, I can only comment on the one...

I think the use of the word "transfer" in stanza 1 is very interesting. It could easily have been 'translate' especially given your dual poeming at the time. "Transfer" is the unspoken act and works perfectly in tune with silence as the theme.

In stanza 2, with the refrain of "different" dominating, i think the word, "indifference" could be changed to another word that means the exact same thing. I looked in my handy thesaurus and there are many to choose from

Your final stanza is a surprising turn. The speaker stops reporting and starts revealing their motive. One that is full of empathy and sweetness.

A lovely poem, Tom.

thanks for sharing!

L

lizzytysh · Post by **lizzytysh** » Mon Mar 07, 2005 4:50 pm

Dear Tom ~

Synchronicity abounds with regard to your beautiful poem here, brimming with meanings, all different; with some of the many meanings, still remaining in silence.

I was complimented by a woman, Robin Morgan, on Saturday for my "creative silence" ~ to the extent that she will be including it in her upcoming book ~ and I was struck by the truth of that phrase in the context of its usage.

I believe the placement of this poem was inspired in the spiritual realm, as an affirmation of my "creative silence."
Thank you so much for following Spirit.

Love,
Elizabeth

LaurieAK · Post by **LaurieAK** » Mon Mar 07, 2005 9:12 pm

Lizz-

Is this Robin Morgan the same ultra-extreme-feminist that accused Ted Hughes of murdering Sylvia Plath in the early 70's?

L

lizzytysh · Post by **lizzytysh** » Mon Mar 07, 2005 9:47 pm

Since she is an ultra-feminist; friends with Gloria Steinem and participated with the feminist leaders in the 70s, in the various demonstrations, etc.; friends with Jane Fonda; continues on the staff of Ms. magazine [after being in the Editor and various, later forms of that role]; et al ~ if it's not the same one [which it simply haaaaaaaas to be], then it's a Close Encounter of a Third Kind. Had I known of that issue, I'd have asked if her position has changed on her theory. The issues she's raising with regard to the current status of conditions in the U.S. in the various arenas seem more reasonable than ultra-extreme, however. I bought her autobiography, along with two books of poetry, and a compilation [including a section of her own] of other material, I'll see if her accusation is included, anywhere. The autobiography is the only one in which I'd expect to find it.

~ Lizzy

LaurieAK · Post by **LaurieAK** » Mon Mar 07, 2005 10:08 pm

Had I known of that issue, I'd have asked if her position has changed on her theory.

Liz- I know from past experience with you, the Plath/Hughes saga is not one that falls/fell within your realm of interest. So i can't imagine why you would be interested in trying to pin her down in regards to her beliefs in this matter.

I have lots of interest in Plath/Hughes and don't care what RM's view are now....

If there is a poem titled, "Arraignment" in what you purchased, I believe it says something about sexually mutilating Hughes. This is what i have read. It is not something i personally recollect reading first hand.

I really just wanted to know if this was one in the same. Thanks for the info.

L

Critic2 · Post by **Critic2** » Mon Mar 07, 2005 10:45 pm

lizzytysh · Post by **lizzytysh** » Tue Mar 08, 2005 2:15 am

[Not just yet, C2.]

Well, Laurie, it's not above or beneath me to ask a question of interest, on a fascinating theory, on someone else's behalf; whether or not it's a burning issue in their life or mine. Nor is it above or beneath me to have an instant interest of my very own, apart from previous knowledge or [intense] interest [since you've gotten something wrong, somewhere along the line, and I've actually read a couple articles on and poems of Sylvia's and was interested] in the persons involved. However, I actually found the prospect of sexual mutilation by, conjunct with murder of, an already-tortured poet to be an interesting conjecture. Completely on my own, I found that interesting. Had I been aware of it, I'd have surely inquired. I would have even passed on to you that anecdotal-response information, as to what she thinks about it now, over a quarter-of-a-century later.

If I find that "Arraignment" is a poem included, anywhere, I won't mention it to you, lest you think I've been deluded into thinking you give a schitt. Since I was in a party of six [one of whom was her] for an extended, off-the-clock, dinner and wine sharing, asking would have been quite comfortable and, if nothing else, would have made for some additional, interesting, dinner conversation.

You're welcome.

E

LaurieAK · Post by **LaurieAK** » Tue Mar 08, 2005 3:22 am

and I've actually read a couple articles on and poems of Sylvia's and was interested] in the persons involved.

A bit petulant, but okay, you've convinced me. Any future references you make when wining and dining with RM will not have been prompted by anything i have said here.

But, ummmm, Liz there alot to 'the story' and it is not pretty regarding RM.

You can put the claws back in.

toodles,
L
p.s. I believe it is 'shit.'

lizzytysh · Post by **lizzytysh** » Tue Mar 08, 2005 3:46 am

Generally speaking, my claws come out only in response to those of others. I'll resheathe them when I'm certain they won't be necessary. It's really such a pain going through the process. Particularly, since it originated on an editorial comment, prompted by something you mentioned.

Petulant? Making you aware of something you obviously already weren't, or at least weren't giving me the benefit of acknowledging? I wasn't trying to convince; rather to make you aware, or remind you, whichever the case.

There were no implications of sterlingness made by RM about herself, in either her workshop or her personal conversation. However, knowing bad press for the beast it is, I'll go with what I experience myself, and read in her autobiography, which she commented upon to me by saying, "People were shocked by what I was choosing to include, telling me, 'You really shouldn't be putting those things in there.'" So, as always, when I'm 'warned' with regard to another person, I'll find out for myself. I resonated with a number of things she said, and I liked her very much, regardless. That's good enough for me for a start. Self-exploration is a great way to go. Those uppity, controversial ones are interesting, anyway.

Not sure what the 'it' is, but I'll take your word for it that you think "it is 'shit'."

I did get a sense of your opinion of Robin, however, with your original reference of "the same ultra-extreme- . . . ".

"Any future references you make when wining and dining with RM will not have been prompted by anything i have said here."

I'm not sure on this. I'll decide when the time comes.

toodles

,
E

LaurieAK · Post by **LaurieAK** » Tue Mar 08, 2005 4:13 am

Lizz-
I cannot bear to read whatever it is you have written above.

Tom~~Sorry for bringing on nonsense to your poem's home.

L

lizzytysh · Post by **lizzytysh** » Tue Mar 08, 2005 4:17 am

That's fine, Laurie. I wouldn't want you to push yourself

.
[Don't tell anyone that I'm sure you did read it

. As you know, people like us tend to be rather curious

.]

Drat on that "edited" line. I didn't know you'd replied.

toodles,
E

tom.d.stiller · Post by **tom.d.stiller** » Sat Mar 12, 2005 10:19 am

Friends, friends, friends

Thank you for reading and speaking about the poem.

I'm not going to comment on claws and such stuff. Posting a poem is a bit like inviting people for a party. It's not up to the host to determine what the invitees talk about...

I'm not really acquainted with the Plath/Hughes/Morgan thingy, but since I'm always more curious than the proverbial dead cat, I'd like to read that "Arraignment". I can agree or disagree, then, instead of just being bemused.

Back to Silencio... One of the leitmotifs in the double poem is the sonic relationship between "transferir / transfer" and "diferentes / different". This is more obvious in the Spanish version, I think, but I tried to preserve as much of this as I could in the English lines.

I was - and in part I'm still - undecided about the first stanza (English version). I wanted to preserve the word "convey", but on the other hand I was tempted to imitate the merging, audible in the Spanish version, of "diferentes" and "transmitir" to "transferir".

Doing this the first stanza would be:

all silences are different
and yet they all transmit
what words cannot transfer.

What do you think?

Thank you again for your comments.

Cheers
tom

LaurieAK · Post by **LaurieAK** » Sun Mar 13, 2005 12:38 am

Hi tom-

Two unpleasant subjects (for me) collided. I don't expect anyone outside my realm to grasp my bitchiness of the moment. nuff said...

poetry:

I do not like the combination of:

all silences are different
and yet they all transmit
what words cannot transfer

.

It seems too mechanical in nature, to me.

The original:

all silences are different
and yet they all convey
what words cannot transfer.

This is representative of how I interpret what you are saying. But there is the problem. It is your poem

If the ONLY reason you are considering "transmit" is to be faithfull to the Spanish version....you need to decide if this is well placed.

I know. I am no help

later,
L