Evening star., 1938-07-17
By Mary.Carfer Roberts.

s ANTHOLOGIES go, this is a
n good one. 1t seems to accom-
"A plish two ends very neatly
4 \ it demonstrates the meaning
Of the word modern" as applied to
verse In the sense of a school and
not merely OF time and, within that
school, 1t gives q reasonably full
sampliAg Of the various levels. In
cidentaly, it contains some good poet
ry, too. It contains some poems which
may very well be included in an
thologies Of the future compiled to
hold the worlds great verse with .
complete ignoring Of periods. But in
general these inclusions must be ia
ken to be incidental. The most in
teresting thing about the volume Is
its intelligent demonstration Of the
modern poetic movement.
The term modern movement
must, however, be interpreted broadly
The volume contains the work of Amy
Lowell, Carl Sandburg, John Mase-
field and Edgar Lee Masters-for ex-
ample-all of them figures today more
or less out of the past, pioneers in
modernism, to be sure, but by now
historic. From these early iconoclastS
the work comes down to the very re-
cent present, to such writer's Of the
moment as Archibald Macleish, Wal
lace Stevens, Frederic Prokosch and
Josephine johnson, to name a few.
There are of course bakers dozen
of poetic movements" in the span of
time represented. 1t has been one Of
the editors purposes, apparently, to
take some of the work of each.
Actually, he has divided his book
into four sections. The first, he says,
takes in the work of the forerunners
OF the contemporary school; the
second, that of the poets who derive
their inspiration from the people and
the soil, in rebellion for the rights OF
both; the third, that of the symbol
list movement. The fourth section Is
described rather vaguely as bringing
together "the matter Of section II
and the manner OF section III" and OF
being "a new synthesis (social-sym-
bolism, we might call it,"
1t is probable, however, that these
divisions will have less meaning to
readers than to the editor. What Will
impress the reader, going through the
volume, will be the presentation in
progressive form of the poetry OF our
language since the poetry OF our
language became known as modern.
Almost year by year that progress is
shown in this book. The reviewer Is
free to admit that as far as she Is
concerned it is progress leading no
where.
Yes-nowhere. The fine poems OF
the book are fine poems, mt to be &C
counted so in any time. The rest. in
teresting though it may be as DEM
onstration, Is modern" rather than
poetic, Not that there is a necessary
contradiction in the terms. But that
when any poem falls short OF per-
lection for what it is, then 1t cannot
be considered as poem at all ana
must needs be taken up as "symp-
tom" or as the representative work
of some time or school or IN some
other artificial manner. Poetry itself
As timeless. It was 50 when "Omer
smote is bloomin Tyre" and 1t Is so
today. and always will be. world WITH
out end. But If only those poets ca
pable of producing timeless WORK
wrote. then the output OF verse would
he reduced in a most startling man
ner. There is, of course, place 1or
the rest. They belong in periods
insofar as this modern progress, as
set forth in the present volume Is
x,,scentible to general description, IL
can perhaps best be described as on-
scure, The editor comments on i's
obscurity in his introduction, anu
offers the explanation that Two cnar-
acteristics of postwar verse nave
stood between the poets and healthy
audience: a philosophy of isolation ana
a private language" This is true
enough, and the reviewer would sim
plv add to it that the great iatltuoe
allowed the modern verse writer IN the
matter of form is an even greater con-
tributory cause.
For, beginning with philosophy
of isolation and a private language
your modern poet has no requirements
to meet in the matter Of saying his say
and getting it done, and may WANDER
happily on and on with no critic dar-
ing to say him nay, his philosophy
getting visibly more isolated by the
line and his language becoming SO
very private that, by the time he gives
out in exhaustion, his meaning, II ne
had one, is hopelessly hidden and
readers first concern on finishing WILL
be to 20 back in amazement and try,
laboriously, and in sleuth-like fasMon'
to follow the burden Of his gasplng
song q second time-which hardly
seems the effect properly to be made
by most direct form OF writing wnlcn
exists.
There Is q difference, it should be
said, between subtlety and obscurlty.
6ubtlety lies in the poets thought, and
some profoundly subtle poetic ideas
have been expressed with perfect ade-
uuacy In ttnkling couplets. Obscurity,
on the other hand, is in the presenta-
ton, and, oddly enough, many of the
themes expressed 50 darkly by our
moderns are cliches of such perfect
conventionality that it Is more than
doubtful that they would bear the
clear light of arbitrary form. This
Is true of much ''proletarian'' verse,
In particular, for the idea that some
men are rich and others poor-or, II
you prefer that there is injustice in the
worlds obviously without sufficient
Interest of itself to make it noticeable
when put by mediocre craftsmen in
shall we say-the public language.
Save in the hands of master, it must
needs be shrouded in the gloomiest
phrases and the smokiest imagery to
give it visibility, as it were. Verse after
verse in the present collection has this
Notwithstanding incoherence for its
chief quality; yet it must be said that
the editors selections have been sound
and that, for what they represent. the
selected poems are Of high standing.
4 A. - s~l~