“Political
Meeting,” A.M. Klein
Reviewed
by Patrick McEvoy-Halston
- - - -
-
The
Other Crowd
August
2003
(Outside, in the dark, the street is body-tall,
flowered with faces intent on the scarecrow thing
that shouts to thousands the echoing
of their own wishes.) The Orator has risen!
(15-18)
We might be inclined to interpret the dedication to
Camillien Houde, in A.M. Klein’s “Political Meeting,” as a genuine gesture of
Klein’s respect for Houde’s oratorical skills, but it may also be a gesture of
sympathy for a man ensnared. For
within the bracketed lines is content which calls into question the orator’s
belief that he “has them” (11), that he commands “the” “crowd” (9). While the orator has “[an]other voice”
(33), within these lines is another crowd, a very different crowd, seemingly,
from the one “[with]in the hall” (14).
We meet a “street” crowd, not a kowed “country” (20) crowd. We find this crowd not caught “in
snares” (9), but “intent” on the speaker, intending to use him as a “thing,” as
a tool, to service its own desires.
If the bracketed material was not included in the poem
there would be little in it that casts doubt on the orator’s dominion over his
audience. The poem would relate
how an orator, “kith and kin” (29) with his folksy crowd, moves his gullible,
guidable audience to thoughts of race war. When he moves from “sling[ing] slang” and “wink[ing]
folklore” (36) to “[c]almly” “speak[ing] of war” (38), the orator shows that
from the beginning of his oration he had had a war-plan in mind. He is a plotting and masterful
manipulator, and his audience is manageable, malleable stuff—we learn from the
poem’s opening lines that “they [a]wait” (2) in “folding seats” “on [a] [. . .]
school platform” (1), the “chairman’s” arrival and “praise” (2). However, Klein’s inclusion of the
bracketed lines ensures some uncertainty exists as to who really was in control
of whom at this political meeting.
The brackets help suggest that whatever the nature of the
material they enclose, it does not quite fit with the rest of the text. (And, indeed, in this poem, it
doesn’t.) We might normally
construe bracketed material, optional reading, but for two reasons we might not
do so here: One, we were told that
the chairman’s charm depends on him being “full of asides and wit” (12); and
two, we know that the poem is about
transformations and elevations, including the “rise” of the “Orator!”
Our first reaction to learning of the “thousands”
“[o]utside” is likely to assume that they are an extension of the crowd found
within the hall. We might assume
that these thousands serve, by suddenly suggesting the expansive breadth of the
orator’s appeal, to cinch the orator’s transformation from ordinary “chairman”
to awesome “Orator” at the end of line 18. But the text works against our likely instinctive desire to
conflate the two crowds together.
Because one is “[o]utside,” the other inside, because one is “in the
dark,” the other bathed in “yellow [. . .] light” (7), because one is
associated with “streets,” and the other with “school platforms,” the two
crowds—hardly “kith and kin”—cannot easily be merged. Any crowd found “[with]in the dark” would be menacing—a
street crowd, particularly so. And
though the “inside” crowd ravaged a “ritual bird” (9), they do little but slavishly
“[w]orship and love” (19) their “country uncle” (20). This “street” crowd, on the other hand, at a distance from
the orator—and harder to imagine as as intimately involved with his “shouts” as
the crowd within the hall is with his “asides”—seems more malevolent than
malleable, more studious than servile, and more a potential heavy
counter-weight to his influence than an easily “pin[ned]” (26) lightweight
“oppon[ent] (26).
“[T]he street is body-tall”; it is a weight which might as
easily overwhelm as enhance the orator/prophet’s “building” (13) oratorical
mass. When we discover the
semantic and rhythmic “echoing” of the “street” crowds’ “flowered
faces” in the “country uncle’s” “sunflower seeds” (26), our sense
that both harmony and dissonance exists in the relationship between the orator
and this crowd is enhanced. We
suspect that it is what will be made of this
crowd which matters, but we question what the orator can make of it. We cannot be certain whether the
street’s “flowered faces” are more likely to blossom or wilt in the presence of
a repellent “scarecrow thing.”
Characterized as composed of “flowered faces,” as opposed to say, crowed
countenances, this crowd still attends to the scarecrow thing with some of the
same studious “intent” that surely facilitated the orator’s masterful
manipulation of those within the hall.
So while the orator has his “tricks” (21), the street crowd might be
eyeing its puppet: How certain can
we be that someone who services the desires of others, who “echo[es] /
[. . .] [their] own wishes” is in any sense, or at any time, their
master?
The “body-odour of race” (39) is what the orator summons
at the end of the poem, not from those who “wait[ed]” in the hall but from
those outside who comprise “[t]he whole street” (37). In retrospect, the repetition of “ou’s” in the bracketed
lines (“Outside,” “shouts,” “thousands”) identify this
temporary confine as the summoning circle of the poem’s penultimate
visitation: the invisible odour. No surprise, however, is the summoning
of body odour—the inevitable by-product of body heat—from this corporeal street
mass. No real “trick” (21),
either. And so while there is no
question left at the end of the poem as to whether the orator’s rhetoric was
inflammatory, we are left uncertain as to what transpired. Did the orator use the crowd? If so, which crowd? If the crowd inside the hall was directed
towards thoughts of war, is it possible that the street crowd, at least, used
the “seed peddler” to bring to the surface their own deeply seeded racist
thoughts?
Perhaps in “Political Meeting” Klein was bringing to the
surface a “grim” (38) possible truth many of us still hesitate to
consider. No doubt, even with the
comparative ambiguity of the nature of the flowered/street crowd’s relationship
to the orator, the potency of the orator’s power is conveyed in the poem. Almost certainly, the poem was born out
of a modernist’s desire for, and fears of, the arrival of central leaders who
might unite a fractured society together.
But perhaps contained in its “shadow[s]” (38) is the terrifying
realization that the Houdes and Hitlers of the world arise from the wishes of
legions of “willing executioners” (Goldhagen).
Works
Cited
Goldhagen, Daniel. Hitler’s
Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust.
New York: Knopf, 1996. Print.
Klein, A. M. “Political Meeting.” 15 Canadian
Poets × 3. Ed. Gary Geddes.
Don
Mills:
Oxford UP, 2001. 41-42. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment