 Emily and the Flower Chakras I Taste a Liquor Never Brewed by Emily Dickinson an Audiopoem and Essay Pt 1 and 2 | I taste a liquor never brewed -- |
Round One, Immortal Booze
Despite references to tankards and Scottish ‘drams’, this poem has nothing to do with alcohol. Likewise, ‘seraphs’ and ‘saint’s’ may be part of the Judeo-Christian meta-fabric, yet the core experience has many worldwide cultural correlatives suggesting the ‘elixir of immortality’. Thus I am going to look predominantly through an Indian lens using negation, the keynote of Vedic inquiry to interpret ideas in the poem through what they are not. In Sanskrit this is called the neti neti method -- ‘not this, not this’, the goal being to arrive at what ‘Is’.
Dickinson sets up her first riddle - that she has drunk an intoxicant ‘never brewed’. This isn’t your usual beery beverage of foaming ‘pearls’, nor a wine-vat distillation from the River Rhine. If “never brewed”, then what is it?
This first negative moves us to her second meta-option — being “an inebriate of air” and “debauchee of dew”, even more intense declarations of drunkenness. Again, such tropes are meant to trip us up. Neti neti. Not air, not water. This liquor is finer than the elements and drinking ‘it’ causes Emily to go “reeling through summer”, suggestive both of joyful dance and spinning in a stupor. How can this be when such intoxication comes “From inns of Molten Blue” — the ‘taverns’ of the sky? Again we’re presented paradox after paradox. Not this, not this.
The word ‘molten’ is a key, connoting lava. Heat alludes to ‘light’ whose source is the ‘Sun’. We are being led into a supra-conscious experience born of Light from the sky whose side-effect is intoxication. And those blue inns? They suggest ’the Heaven of many mansions'. In Indian philosophy it is observed that as blue permeates most of nature — the sky, ocean, rivers and lakes, it represents stability of mind and Cosmic Order. Hence Vishnu and His avatars Rama and Krishna who maintain the universe have blue skin.
Ambrosia was the nectar of immortality to the Greek gods. Amrita means the same in Sanskrit. Yoga philosophy teaches that one drop of this nectar dribbling from the pituitary gland down the throat in deep meditation is enough to conquer death. Inner light then floods and anahad (celestial) music announces Moksha, Liberation. The hallmark of this state is sublime intoxication.
The rest of the poem riddles the reader along, rough-handling nature’s blowsy nectar gatherers — bees who are ‘turned out’ by ‘’landlords” from the heavenly ‘inns’ and butterflies who leave their work. Both might also represent human beings of continuing development. These ‘inns’, are the meeting houses of the ‘Heavenly Hierarchy’, synonymous with that supra-consciousness bestowed on the rare few. In Indian cosmological parlance such planetary god-realms are known as lokas. Meanwhile, enjoying a high perceptual state, the poet is free to “drink but more’’ and even the angelic beings, the “seraphs” and saints” (neighbours) marvel at the "the little tippler” who, by the end of the poem is even able to “lean”, close and familiar to take support as an intimate friend, having realised within the self the awesome power of the Sun, meaning Brahman, the indefinable 'Isness' behind the universes.
Round Two 'Immortal Booze'
Anonymous writes:
Likening Emily's poem to riddles is a brilliant. I very much like your approach of "not this, not this" in order to get to what "is" especially your "not air, not water" deduction. Your heaven of many mansions seems also to work. The blue representing stability and order might be ironic here because she is speaking of reeling and drunkenness. You have a very" enlightening" and unique interpretation of this poem. You are right, her poem is not about alcohol but her drunkenness of life through metaphors of summer days of light and heat. I want to hear more of what you think it "is" at the end. And I wonder what you would say about what the poem "does"- how does it work?
Dear Anon,
Thanks for asking about the 'Is-factor' hinted at in my interpretation. Yes, i did run out of space, so thought it best to leave the discussion open. As you have asked, I will share more of my thoughts.
I have purposely avoided a post-modern analysis imposing a reductivist reading of ED's apparent human ego-state which speaks more to our age of doubt and need for empirical interpretation which I have read in some discussions at ModPo 2014 Also, by viewing the poem merely through the lens of modernist aesthetics there is a tendency to concentrate inordinately on 'form' rather than 'content'. I believe they go together. Aesthetic understanding alone, I believe, only achieves a basic level of functional interpretation and does not explore other possibilities the poet may be trying to represent which may enter the realm of philosophical speculation and belief. A great poet/poem is like the ice-berg with only the tip exposed. The depths remain. This is the reason poetry endures many readings compared with prose.
As for drunkenness and disorder, according to classical Hindu bhakti, Sikh and Sufi accounts of spiritual intoxication we are looking at a highly-ordered state of perceptual coherence. It's a paradox. From the perspective of our normal 10 percent brainpower, limited consciousness we think of dysfunction. However those experiencing expanded supra-conscious life (the seraphs and saints) exist in both a state of highest bliss (anand) while operating rationally within the world. "Heads in Heaven, feet on earth'. In the Bhagavad Gita this state is called 'Yoga' referring to the ability of 'think on a cosmic level, yet also perform day to day tasks with 'skill in action'. Yoga (comes from the Sanskrit root 'to yoke' the parts and integrate all the 'limbs') Perhaps consider such supra-awareness as the compound eye of a bee, which has hundreds of individual eyes (known as ommatidia) aligned with one another other, yet each with its own lens and each looking in a different direction, yet also able to operate as one visionary unit at the same time. A supra-conscious individual literally 'sees' through every pore in their body and does not identify with their human form while still living and operating through it. There is no disorder or 'drunken behaviour' where disorder is suggestive of dullness and sensory impairment. "Before enlightenment chop wood and carry water, after enlightenment chop wood and carry water.)
As for the 'how' of the poem, using the 'neti-neti' riddle approach each stanza distinguishes between 4 stages of understanding 1) Bodily consciousness 2) Material consciousness of the natural order 3) first metaphysical conceit representing a non-material reality 4) Final elevation of individual consciousness to a state of Supra-consciousness 'validated' by the presence of other spiritual peers - angels and liberated souls in the presence of the ultimate reality -- Brahman, the unbounded all-knowing Self, the eye of the world. Such descriptions defy explanation and can be best understood here through poetic metaphors such as the Sun, meaning the physical light generating the manifest universe as well as the unmanifest light of understanding behind the multiple universes as expressed through Hinduism, Jainism, Sikhism, Sufism and Buddhism, each which bring their own symbolic representations to share similar findings. Interestingly the 4 above mentioned categories might be equated with the four stages of consciousness 1) Waking 2) Sleeping 3 Dreaming 4 Transcendental Consciousness, known as the Turiya state.
Finally, is obvious that ED's idiosyncratic punctuation and syntax are deployed toward her ultimate meaning as intellectual markers that act as director's pointers on a musical score to indicate how to 'read' her. To enjoy my musical interpretation of the poem click on the link above the original essay.
Warm regards, Chris.
Immortal Booze Round 3
Eilish A Hansen of Modpo writes:
Chris, my first introduction to you was through your musical rendition of the poem - and i so enjoyed it - enthralled with the eclecticism - and am i wrong, in thinking there is a hint of playfulness (which is found so often in ED's work) - i have always been fascinated by, the parallels found in western and eastern ideologies, and comparative studies - there is no doubt, in my mind, that what Emily is getting at is paravidya; that, it can not be taught in any conventional sense, ultimately it is 'beyond', and possibly, it can not be known. As in the Vedic tradition, it is through the grace of a Guru (having attained enlightenment) that one experiences such 'Knowledge' - Emily is a Guru. There are so many parallels - however in doing this comparison i think you have forced the framework of the Vedas on the poem and this makes your argument less compelling. I think Emily herself has employed (comparatively speaking) Vedic inquiry within the poem, but this does not translate as well when 'analyzing' the poem, again, it feels forced and looses coherence. Never the less, this is one of the more thought provoking essays i have read here - and i agree with your premise; 'the core experience has many worldwide cultural correlatives suggesting the ‘elixir of immortality'.' Bravo! - Eilish
Dear Ellish,
I'm glad this attracted your attention and personally I agree this is ED plugging into Paravidya, the Supreme Knowledge bank (a name on the border on the Nameless up the among the Inns of Molten Blue beyond wordily philosophical and critical frameworks. I would be interested to see where you feel the argument is specifically forced. My attempt was playful, of course as I think critique should be when interpreting art that certainly is. We should not take ourselves so seriously to think we've 'got it'. No one ultimately 'gets Emily' which means there is no end to our enjoyment. Summation is death. Surrender to Ignorance is bliss. After all everyone looks bee-eyed at things with their individual compound ommatidia vision Let's thank Ms Queen Bee ED for the fact we are foolishly attempting to wrangle her poem like rodeo calf ropers a century after she wrote this. LOL.
I would, however contend that holding this nineteenth century poem up to a Western critical framework and reading it through the idea of say mytho-historicism, semiotics, gender studies, queer theory, post-colonial studies, any number of whatevers, or the Big Mother of them all today -- Post-structuralism might be equally forced. Post-modern theory generally purports there are only relative truths and subjective outcomes because all frames ultimately 'bleed' and become unstable and de-centred which leads us all back to the Go square of the Western board game -- Monopoly that invented this pleasant game. I am now thinking that is why Al and the A-team are busy with 'close reading' which may be a way to find relative meanings in a number of given words/phrases in a poem even if those meanings conflict with other parts of the poem as if each word is a place to dive independently into the river course of the poem as a whole.
On an East-West note which you raised, by determining the frame, however, we claim intellectual property rights and risk cultural hegemony which was Said's argument against Orientalism, that political Western form of colonialism which even extended to the library shelf. Am I diverting here? Yes of course! Only because my playful summer rort is intended to turn tables on that idea and in so doing claim Emily for the ancient Eastern fort in this universe of absurd critical gamesmanship. Although she had certainly read some Emerson, and, while not a paid-up subscriber of the New England Transcendentalists she would probably feel at home with a cosmology as broad as can be found in India, I think. Have a great day and thanks for the opportunity to gas a bit more. Chris.
Despite references to tankards and Scottish ‘drams’, this poem has nothing to do with alcohol. Likewise, ‘seraphs’ and ‘saint’s’ may be part of the Judeo-Christian meta-fabric, yet the core experience has many worldwide cultural correlatives suggesting the ‘elixir of immortality’. Thus I am going to look predominantly through an Indian lens using negation, the keynote of Vedic inquiry to interpret ideas in the poem through what they are not. In Sanskrit this is called the neti neti method -- ‘not this, not this’, the goal being to arrive at what ‘Is’.
Dickinson sets up her first riddle - that she has drunk an intoxicant ‘never brewed’. This isn’t your usual beery beverage of foaming ‘pearls’, nor a wine-vat distillation from the River Rhine. If “never brewed”, then what is it?
This first negative moves us to her second meta-option — being “an inebriate of air” and “debauchee of dew”, even more intense declarations of drunkenness. Again, such tropes are meant to trip us up. Neti neti. Not air, not water. This liquor is finer than the elements and drinking ‘it’ causes Emily to go “reeling through summer”, suggestive both of joyful dance and spinning in a stupor. How can this be when such intoxication comes “From inns of Molten Blue” — the ‘taverns’ of the sky? Again we’re presented paradox after paradox. Not this, not this.
The word ‘molten’ is a key, connoting lava. Heat alludes to ‘light’ whose source is the ‘Sun’. We are being led into a supra-conscious experience born of Light from the sky whose side-effect is intoxication. And those blue inns? They suggest ’the Heaven of many mansions'. In Indian philosophy it is observed that as blue permeates most of nature — the sky, ocean, rivers and lakes, it represents stability of mind and Cosmic Order. Hence Vishnu and His avatars Rama and Krishna who maintain the universe have blue skin.
Ambrosia was the nectar of immortality to the Greek gods. Amrita means the same in Sanskrit. Yoga philosophy teaches that one drop of this nectar dribbling from the pituitary gland down the throat in deep meditation is enough to conquer death. Inner light then floods and anahad (celestial) music announces Moksha, Liberation. The hallmark of this state is sublime intoxication.
The rest of the poem riddles the reader along, rough-handling nature’s blowsy nectar gatherers — bees who are ‘turned out’ by ‘’landlords” from the heavenly ‘inns’ and butterflies who leave their work. Both might also represent human beings of continuing development. These ‘inns’, are the meeting houses of the ‘Heavenly Hierarchy’, synonymous with that supra-consciousness bestowed on the rare few. In Indian cosmological parlance such planetary god-realms are known as lokas. Meanwhile, enjoying a high perceptual state, the poet is free to “drink but more’’ and even the angelic beings, the “seraphs” and saints” (neighbours) marvel at the "the little tippler” who, by the end of the poem is even able to “lean”, close and familiar to take support as an intimate friend, having realised within the self the awesome power of the Sun, meaning Brahman, the indefinable 'Isness' behind the universes.
Round Two 'Immortal Booze'
Anonymous writes:
Likening Emily's poem to riddles is a brilliant. I very much like your approach of "not this, not this" in order to get to what "is" especially your "not air, not water" deduction. Your heaven of many mansions seems also to work. The blue representing stability and order might be ironic here because she is speaking of reeling and drunkenness. You have a very" enlightening" and unique interpretation of this poem. You are right, her poem is not about alcohol but her drunkenness of life through metaphors of summer days of light and heat. I want to hear more of what you think it "is" at the end. And I wonder what you would say about what the poem "does"- how does it work?
Dear Anon,
Thanks for asking about the 'Is-factor' hinted at in my interpretation. Yes, i did run out of space, so thought it best to leave the discussion open. As you have asked, I will share more of my thoughts.
I have purposely avoided a post-modern analysis imposing a reductivist reading of ED's apparent human ego-state which speaks more to our age of doubt and need for empirical interpretation which I have read in some discussions at ModPo 2014 Also, by viewing the poem merely through the lens of modernist aesthetics there is a tendency to concentrate inordinately on 'form' rather than 'content'. I believe they go together. Aesthetic understanding alone, I believe, only achieves a basic level of functional interpretation and does not explore other possibilities the poet may be trying to represent which may enter the realm of philosophical speculation and belief. A great poet/poem is like the ice-berg with only the tip exposed. The depths remain. This is the reason poetry endures many readings compared with prose.
As for drunkenness and disorder, according to classical Hindu bhakti, Sikh and Sufi accounts of spiritual intoxication we are looking at a highly-ordered state of perceptual coherence. It's a paradox. From the perspective of our normal 10 percent brainpower, limited consciousness we think of dysfunction. However those experiencing expanded supra-conscious life (the seraphs and saints) exist in both a state of highest bliss (anand) while operating rationally within the world. "Heads in Heaven, feet on earth'. In the Bhagavad Gita this state is called 'Yoga' referring to the ability of 'think on a cosmic level, yet also perform day to day tasks with 'skill in action'. Yoga (comes from the Sanskrit root 'to yoke' the parts and integrate all the 'limbs') Perhaps consider such supra-awareness as the compound eye of a bee, which has hundreds of individual eyes (known as ommatidia) aligned with one another other, yet each with its own lens and each looking in a different direction, yet also able to operate as one visionary unit at the same time. A supra-conscious individual literally 'sees' through every pore in their body and does not identify with their human form while still living and operating through it. There is no disorder or 'drunken behaviour' where disorder is suggestive of dullness and sensory impairment. "Before enlightenment chop wood and carry water, after enlightenment chop wood and carry water.)
As for the 'how' of the poem, using the 'neti-neti' riddle approach each stanza distinguishes between 4 stages of understanding 1) Bodily consciousness 2) Material consciousness of the natural order 3) first metaphysical conceit representing a non-material reality 4) Final elevation of individual consciousness to a state of Supra-consciousness 'validated' by the presence of other spiritual peers - angels and liberated souls in the presence of the ultimate reality -- Brahman, the unbounded all-knowing Self, the eye of the world. Such descriptions defy explanation and can be best understood here through poetic metaphors such as the Sun, meaning the physical light generating the manifest universe as well as the unmanifest light of understanding behind the multiple universes as expressed through Hinduism, Jainism, Sikhism, Sufism and Buddhism, each which bring their own symbolic representations to share similar findings. Interestingly the 4 above mentioned categories might be equated with the four stages of consciousness 1) Waking 2) Sleeping 3 Dreaming 4 Transcendental Consciousness, known as the Turiya state.
Finally, is obvious that ED's idiosyncratic punctuation and syntax are deployed toward her ultimate meaning as intellectual markers that act as director's pointers on a musical score to indicate how to 'read' her. To enjoy my musical interpretation of the poem click on the link above the original essay.
Warm regards, Chris.
Immortal Booze Round 3
Eilish A Hansen of Modpo writes:
Chris, my first introduction to you was through your musical rendition of the poem - and i so enjoyed it - enthralled with the eclecticism - and am i wrong, in thinking there is a hint of playfulness (which is found so often in ED's work) - i have always been fascinated by, the parallels found in western and eastern ideologies, and comparative studies - there is no doubt, in my mind, that what Emily is getting at is paravidya; that, it can not be taught in any conventional sense, ultimately it is 'beyond', and possibly, it can not be known. As in the Vedic tradition, it is through the grace of a Guru (having attained enlightenment) that one experiences such 'Knowledge' - Emily is a Guru. There are so many parallels - however in doing this comparison i think you have forced the framework of the Vedas on the poem and this makes your argument less compelling. I think Emily herself has employed (comparatively speaking) Vedic inquiry within the poem, but this does not translate as well when 'analyzing' the poem, again, it feels forced and looses coherence. Never the less, this is one of the more thought provoking essays i have read here - and i agree with your premise; 'the core experience has many worldwide cultural correlatives suggesting the ‘elixir of immortality'.' Bravo! - Eilish
Dear Ellish,
I'm glad this attracted your attention and personally I agree this is ED plugging into Paravidya, the Supreme Knowledge bank (a name on the border on the Nameless up the among the Inns of Molten Blue beyond wordily philosophical and critical frameworks. I would be interested to see where you feel the argument is specifically forced. My attempt was playful, of course as I think critique should be when interpreting art that certainly is. We should not take ourselves so seriously to think we've 'got it'. No one ultimately 'gets Emily' which means there is no end to our enjoyment. Summation is death. Surrender to Ignorance is bliss. After all everyone looks bee-eyed at things with their individual compound ommatidia vision Let's thank Ms Queen Bee ED for the fact we are foolishly attempting to wrangle her poem like rodeo calf ropers a century after she wrote this. LOL.
I would, however contend that holding this nineteenth century poem up to a Western critical framework and reading it through the idea of say mytho-historicism, semiotics, gender studies, queer theory, post-colonial studies, any number of whatevers, or the Big Mother of them all today -- Post-structuralism might be equally forced. Post-modern theory generally purports there are only relative truths and subjective outcomes because all frames ultimately 'bleed' and become unstable and de-centred which leads us all back to the Go square of the Western board game -- Monopoly that invented this pleasant game. I am now thinking that is why Al and the A-team are busy with 'close reading' which may be a way to find relative meanings in a number of given words/phrases in a poem even if those meanings conflict with other parts of the poem as if each word is a place to dive independently into the river course of the poem as a whole.
On an East-West note which you raised, by determining the frame, however, we claim intellectual property rights and risk cultural hegemony which was Said's argument against Orientalism, that political Western form of colonialism which even extended to the library shelf. Am I diverting here? Yes of course! Only because my playful summer rort is intended to turn tables on that idea and in so doing claim Emily for the ancient Eastern fort in this universe of absurd critical gamesmanship. Although she had certainly read some Emerson, and, while not a paid-up subscriber of the New England Transcendentalists she would probably feel at home with a cosmology as broad as can be found in India, I think. Have a great day and thanks for the opportunity to gas a bit more. Chris.
RSS Feed
