We’re deep into Walter J. Miller’s classic dystopian novel, so welcome to our discussion of this middle section, one in which characters believe they’re on the verge of a “renaissance” and are coming out of a dark age. Conversation touches on the thematic uses of light and the function of the monks as a conscience as well as memory. Happy listening!
Spoiler alert!!!! Don’t read until you finish the book!!!
But I have to add a few last thoughts on the Poet now that I’ve finished reading...
The Poet becomes a saint??? Really??? So other than this just being absolutely hilarious, is there some message that I’m missing here? His eyeball becoming a relic made me laugh so hard, my husband thought I was losing my mind.
The only work of the Poet’s we have is a satirical dialogue in verse between agnostics arguing that “the existence of God can’t be proven by natural reason alone.” Why then would the Church choose to canonize the Poet if his only work is a satire about two agnostics arguing about the reasons man can’t prove the existence of God? I feel like I am missing something here (other than the obvious punchline).
I think when Zerchi is reading the Poet it mentions that he’s sort of a folk saint - not officially canonized by the Holy See. Given that the Poet gave his life to save refugees, it makes sense that he would become a folk hero of sorts amongst the commoners.
Oh yes, it would definitely be funnier. But it’s still pretty funny that the people considered him a saint anyway, even without the official canonization!
My intuition says it's worth pondering the fact that he is a poet. Poetry doesn't quite fit in either camp: faith or reason. It's its own thing, another way of knowing, not necessarily rational but not necessarily seeing with the eyes of faith. I like that he gets pushed aside to make way for the thon.
We don't actually see any of the poetry he writes, do we? What's the point of having a poet in the story when we don't get his poetry? But I do get the sense that he's been hanging around for quite a while and that Dom Paulo isn't exactly sorry to have an excuse to kick him out. Why is it signifiant that he is a poet? In a way he represents the Renaissance of art and culture in the same way Thon Taddeo represents the rebirth of science. There didn't seem to be room for poets in the post apocalyptic world of Part I. But this is an age in which a person could be a poet.
In what ways are the things he does somehow symbolic or objective correlatives of the act of being a poet? Does poetry, like the poet's eye, act as a removable conscience? Does poetry, like the eye, help us to see clearly, but at a remove? What is the correlation between being a poet and being a fool, as Thon Taddeo calls him in the scene when he speaks out all the uncomfortable truths? Shakespeare's fools often speak in poetry, right? Does a poet have a kind of prophetic role?
Why is the poet at the monastery in the first place? Is he just freeloading off the monks? Is it significant that he seems to be the only other person besides Dom Paolo who talks with Benjamin?
Is his gambling with Benjamin and winning his goat significant? He talks about the goat being a scapegoat.
What about the Poet's funny bit where he enacts temptation with the bottle of wine? What's that about?
I think your link to Shakespeare is right on target. Like Shakespeare, Miller doesn’t bother to give the Poet a name. He functions much in the same way as the Gravediggers in Hamlet, or the murderers in Richard II who are unnamed as well, but if I had to pick one he most reminds me of, I would have to go with the Fool (or maybe he is called the Jester--I can’t remember off the top of my head--sorry) in King Lear. He speaks truth to power, laying out in the open the Taddeo’s guards’ drawings of the abbey, and he provides comic relief.
The eye represents his moral compass. He always removes his glass eye before drinking or doing something immoral, or when “he wanted to play stupid,” according to Dom Paulo. He is a mirror for Thon Taddeo (and Hannegan) who both only exercise their morals when convenient. Thon Taddeo ignores his brother’s political schemes for his intellectual aspirations, and Hannegan murders Marcus Apollo for political expediency. Like the Poet popping his eye in and out, they turn their consciences on and off like flipping a light switch.
I am not entirely sure about the full significance of our never seeing any actual poetry from the Poet, but I suspect Miller is not done with him just yet. Like we don’t learn the full import of the significance of the first book ending with the death of Brother Francis until later in Book II, I’m guessing that at some point in Book III, we will learn why Book II ends with the death of the Poet. But I could be completely off base here.
Spoiler alert!!!! Don’t read until you finish the book!!!
But I have to add a few last thoughts on the Poet now that I’ve finished reading...
The Poet becomes a saint??? Really??? So other than this just being absolutely hilarious, is there some message that I’m missing here? His eyeball becoming a relic made me laugh so hard, my husband thought I was losing my mind.
The only work of the Poet’s we have is a satirical dialogue in verse between agnostics arguing that “the existence of God can’t be proven by natural reason alone.” Why then would the Church choose to canonize the Poet if his only work is a satire about two agnostics arguing about the reasons man can’t prove the existence of God? I feel like I am missing something here (other than the obvious punchline).
I think when Zerchi is reading the Poet it mentions that he’s sort of a folk saint - not officially canonized by the Holy See. Given that the Poet gave his life to save refugees, it makes sense that he would become a folk hero of sorts amongst the commoners.
Oh! Did I misread that? (Already sent mine back to the library) Folk hero--yes. Saint--no. But as a Saint, you must admit, it would be funnier...
Oh yes, it would definitely be funnier. But it’s still pretty funny that the people considered him a saint anyway, even without the official canonization!
What to make of the Poet?
I have more questions than answers.
My intuition says it's worth pondering the fact that he is a poet. Poetry doesn't quite fit in either camp: faith or reason. It's its own thing, another way of knowing, not necessarily rational but not necessarily seeing with the eyes of faith. I like that he gets pushed aside to make way for the thon.
We don't actually see any of the poetry he writes, do we? What's the point of having a poet in the story when we don't get his poetry? But I do get the sense that he's been hanging around for quite a while and that Dom Paulo isn't exactly sorry to have an excuse to kick him out. Why is it signifiant that he is a poet? In a way he represents the Renaissance of art and culture in the same way Thon Taddeo represents the rebirth of science. There didn't seem to be room for poets in the post apocalyptic world of Part I. But this is an age in which a person could be a poet.
In what ways are the things he does somehow symbolic or objective correlatives of the act of being a poet? Does poetry, like the poet's eye, act as a removable conscience? Does poetry, like the eye, help us to see clearly, but at a remove? What is the correlation between being a poet and being a fool, as Thon Taddeo calls him in the scene when he speaks out all the uncomfortable truths? Shakespeare's fools often speak in poetry, right? Does a poet have a kind of prophetic role?
Why is the poet at the monastery in the first place? Is he just freeloading off the monks? Is it significant that he seems to be the only other person besides Dom Paolo who talks with Benjamin?
Is his gambling with Benjamin and winning his goat significant? He talks about the goat being a scapegoat.
What about the Poet's funny bit where he enacts temptation with the bottle of wine? What's that about?
So my thoughts on the poet...
I think your link to Shakespeare is right on target. Like Shakespeare, Miller doesn’t bother to give the Poet a name. He functions much in the same way as the Gravediggers in Hamlet, or the murderers in Richard II who are unnamed as well, but if I had to pick one he most reminds me of, I would have to go with the Fool (or maybe he is called the Jester--I can’t remember off the top of my head--sorry) in King Lear. He speaks truth to power, laying out in the open the Taddeo’s guards’ drawings of the abbey, and he provides comic relief.
The eye represents his moral compass. He always removes his glass eye before drinking or doing something immoral, or when “he wanted to play stupid,” according to Dom Paulo. He is a mirror for Thon Taddeo (and Hannegan) who both only exercise their morals when convenient. Thon Taddeo ignores his brother’s political schemes for his intellectual aspirations, and Hannegan murders Marcus Apollo for political expediency. Like the Poet popping his eye in and out, they turn their consciences on and off like flipping a light switch.
I am not entirely sure about the full significance of our never seeing any actual poetry from the Poet, but I suspect Miller is not done with him just yet. Like we don’t learn the full import of the significance of the first book ending with the death of Brother Francis until later in Book II, I’m guessing that at some point in Book III, we will learn why Book II ends with the death of the Poet. But I could be completely off base here.