Skip to main content

On Learning His Godson Has The “Language Gene” Defect FoxP2 - new poem by Todd Swift


On Learning His Godson Has The “Language Gene” Defect FoxP2

 

Unsinging songbird, love’s signals

talon you no tune. The little ring

 

inside your heart never breaks,

won’t know to start. Small wing,

 

refrain-robbed, your language genes

are a muted branching; unheard, seen –

 

bright bird, tongueless, young and wild.

Confusion of syllables, lack of spring

 

upon a surprising note, tender

or offering, means no reason

 

to hear, as no care extends,

hems you in, away from flight

 

of singing, that breaks day’s stems

when we are woken outright

 

from dreaming by fowl stylistics,

their unparliamentary delight

 

in knocking sleep with a beak’s baton,

a symphonic rapping of night’s lectern.

 

O my songbird, I will sing for you,

I have this sprightly chance, Alex,

 

to be the line that runs from your

winged injury to my uncle’s tongue.

 

I’ll swoop and dive, roar the glad

sound we wish all songbirds had,

 

and in your silence key

a dumb way to play your defect

 

to perfection, as if my lyric vocals

shared across the sky to nephew –

 

given as love spreads its feathering.

So our duet is true, even if only

 

unsolo by mechanical virtue;

we break anatomy’s musical bonds

 

unfiring links of dopamine or mind,

to find where upfiring sound can lie

 

beyond its locked places, song-flight

swanning up as kissing makes union

 

and larks bend the sky in a risen two

so notes over notes fall out to ascend.
 
 
Todd Swift, summer 2014
copyright.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

IQ AND THE POETS - ARE YOU SMART?

When you open your mouth to speak, are you smart?  A funny question from a great song, but also, a good one, when it comes to poets, and poetry. We tend to have a very ambiguous view of intelligence in poetry, one that I'd say is dysfunctional.  Basically, it goes like this: once you are safely dead, it no longer matters how smart you were.  For instance, Auden was smarter than Yeats , but most would still say Yeats is the finer poet; Eliot is clearly highly intelligent, but how much of Larkin 's work required a high IQ?  Meanwhile, poets while alive tend to be celebrated if they are deemed intelligent: Anne Carson, Geoffrey Hill , and Jorie Graham , are all, clearly, very intelligent people, aside from their work as poets.  But who reads Marianne Moore now, or Robert Lowell , smart poets? Or, Pound ?  How smart could Pound be with his madcap views? Less intelligent poets are often more popular.  John Betjeman was not a very smart poet, per se....

Poetry vs. Literature

Poetry is, of course, a part of literature. But, increasingly, over the 20th century, it has become marginalised - and, famously, has less of an audience than "before". I think that, when one considers the sort of criticism levelled against Seamus Heaney and "mainstream poetry", by poet-critics like Jeffrey Side , one ought to see the wider context for poetry in the "Anglo-Saxon" world. This phrase was used by one of the UK's leading literary cultural figures, in a private conversation recently, when they spoke eloquently about the supremacy of "Anglo-Saxon novels" and their impressive command of narrative. My heart sank as I listened, for what became clear to me, in a flash, is that nothing has changed since Victorian England (for some in the literary establishment). Britain (now allied to America) and the English language with its marvellous fiction machine, still rule the waves. I personally find this an uncomfortable position - but when ...

"I have crossed oceans of time to find you..."

In terms of great films about, and of, love, we have Vertigo, In The Mood for Love , and Casablanca , Doctor Zhivago , An Officer and a Gentleman , at the apex; as well as odder, more troubling versions, such as Sophie's Choice and  Silence of the Lambs .  I think my favourite remains Bram Stoker's Dracula , with the great immortal line "I have crossed oceans of time to find you...".