In Walcott’s poem, “the sea is history”. The colonizing influence has washed away the history of the native people. What is considered important is their modern history that is shaped by the influence of the colonizer: the creation of a nation, voting, ambassadors, etc. Their early history has been drowned in the sea, replaced with the Biblical early history that the colonizers imposed upon them. In Ramanujan’s poem, “The poets only sang of the floods”. Poetry is the field of concern and not history, but the image is very similar. The flooding river could be the colonizers, and the poets begin to write only about the colonization and not about the people. They lose sight of the nature of the people and focus on exterior events. The water washed away their previous poetry.
In the poem by Ramanujan, the line that I found the most intersting is “The poets only sang of the floods”. It is the city of temples and poets are singing for cities and temples. Over here, we see that there is only concern about poetry and not history like in Walcott's poem. But the image that both poems are showing us is quite similar to one another. To me, the flowing river can represent the colonizers that are trying to change the things. Like in other poem, it says "sea is history", over here it says that "the river has water enough to be poetic about only once a year and then it carries away..." which shows us that water has washed away the history that they had before.
In Walcott's poem, it tells us that the "sea is history." It begins with men, asking “Where are your monuments, your battles, martyrs?/Where is your tribal memory?”. The speaker of the poem answers “in the sea.” In the process of colonization, it simply has washed away the history of these people. It uses the sea as as a metaphor for the histories that are hidden. For them, the results of colonization was more important than history since it created a nation, voting, ambassadors, police, judges and so on. In this poem if history can be described in any detail, it's just old-fashioned history. Their history has been drained in the sea and it is replaced by early biblical history such as New Testament that these colonizers are trying to enforce on them. We get a sense of that you either have no history or that you are history, or that you are going to be history.
In Walcott's poem "The sea is history" an attempt to look for history is made. However, the constant movement of the sea keeps the history "locked up." The sea becomes an image that is destructive. It causes "lamentation," an expression of grief. Walcott's poem, "The sea is history" is similar to Ramanujah's poem "A River" in a way that it depicts water in a negative way. The poet relys on life's mishappenings to create lines in his poem. Perhaps the post colonial effect is seen through the selfish preception the poets have towards the people. It is as if the poets do not care about the pregnant women that was carried away by the flood. There is an indication made that the "white sisters clapping to the waves progress." This indication could symbolize the European's who supported and particiapted in colonization.Perhaps the sister clapped at the waves progress because it has destroyed the old culture, and made room for the new culture.
Two images of water that each poem gives me as a reader is, a river in the first poem, "A River". In the second poem, "The Sea is History", the image of water is much larger. A river and sea are two images that i notice. The River becomes a sort of Tsunami and wipes off Madurai. The floods or Tsunami becomes the colonizer. Water and women are usually associated with one another. Women giving birth in water was also the case in Ramanujan's poem he says, "The pregnant woman drowned, with perhaps twins in her, kicking at blank walls even before birth".The women who is a native doesn't give birth to twins who are also dead as the two cows. Twins could symbolize the population of Madurai and the two cows could symbolize the natural resources or food of Madurai and its people. All of this is taken by the river and its floods.
In the second poem, "The Sea is History" Walcott asks about the tribals memory and accomplishments. All of this is locked up by the sea. The sea seems to be the past, and the first part of the poem is about the past life. Walcott takes a biblical approach to the post colonial situation, he starts with the old testament and then ends with the new. "Then came the white sisters clapping to the waves' progress,and that was Emancipation - ", i believe this was the volta of the poem, This is when change started to take place. Politics started to come to the land and a new history was beginning. History doesn't really seem to have any ending.
I don't think it's always possible to parse image and text with the goal of finding a corresponding political or historical event. I think it’s important when we read these poems through the lens of post-colonialism that we don’t also forget that these poems are the products of individuals who also happen to be products of colonialism. This is probably truer for some poems more than others. The images of the sea in Walcott’s poem, and the river in Ramanujan’s poem, seem to be concealing a hidden civilization and sense of time and history.
In Ramanujan’s poem, the flood that overtakes the village is an annual event, a habitual thing that carries away houses, cows and pregnant women. The tone of the poem suggests resilience just as the bridge patched by repair and twins with different colored diapers has a tone of lightness to it. The main thing that remains inconstant seems to be the differentiation between the old poets and the new poets.
In Walcott’s poem, history seems quite literally to be encoded in the sea and in nature. It’s important to see where he distinguishes history from faith and question what it is he means by such a close association between Biblicial references, sea imagery and what he calls “history.” However, the poem is so rich in imagery and reference and music that I don’t know if I could make any real assertions about it in this space.
Both Ramanujan’s “A River” and Walcott’s “The Sea is History” rely on water imagery to discuss the effects of colonialism on the colonized subjects. However, despite a few initial similarities I believe that the authors possess differing attitudes towards water and its role in a postcolonial context. In “A River” Ramanujan presents water as a destructive force that wrecks havoc on the lives of the people. During times of flood “it carries away/ in the first half-hour/ three village houses,/ a couple of cows/…/ and one pregnant woman.” The speaker therefore assumes an ironic tone when he claims that “the river has water enough/ to be poetic/ about only once a year” because in reality water is not poetic at all. When the “river dries to a trickle” it exposes the “sand ribs,/ straw and women’s hair/ clogging the Watergates/ at the rusty bars.” As the water disappears we are able to glimpse the destruction it concealed—the dirt and grime of poverty and the deaths of countless people. As a result, Ramanujan suggests that those poets who discussed water in poetry but chose not to speak “in verse/ of the pregnant woman/ drowned, with perhaps twins in her,” are only ignoring the brutal truths of reality, the damage done by the colonizer.
Walcott also uses water imagery in “The Sea is History,” however; he presents the sea not only as a “vault” that conceals the artifacts and relics of the past, but also as a place where life exists and new history can be formed. As I discussed in more detail in my other post, the link that is forged between the sea and history is only validated at the end of the poem when the speaker discusses the creatures that inhabit and attain life from it: “then came the secretarial heron,/ then came the bullfrog bellowing for a vote,/ fireflies with bright ideas/ and bats like jetting ambassadors.” By focusing on the sea’s connection to life, Walcott links it to a budding politics that he associates with the beginning of history—a history that the colonized subjects can create in response and resistance to their oppressors. Therefore, water in Walcott’s poem emerges as a positive force with the ability to empower the colonized, whereas in Ramanujan’s poem, water embodies the destructive and oppressive nature of the colonizer.
In his poem “A River,” A.K. Ramanujan describes “Madurai, a city of temples and poets” that experiences seasonal floods. He emphasizes that even during the summers when the “river dries to a trickle” the poets still “only sang of the floods.” If we view the flood as a symbol of the violent, destructive effects of colonization that obliterates indigenous culture, then Ramanujan is critiquing the natives’ fascination with the colonizer’s beliefs. The flood can, for example, be an allusion to the biblical flood. In this respect Ramanujan’s poem would be similar to Walcott’s “The Sea is History” in condemning religious colonization and more importantly, the natives’ tendency to accept biblical accounts of history over their own indigenous accounts of history. Like Walcott, who encourages the “Sirs,” the colonized peoples of the world, to dive into the depths of sea to recover and reclaim their lost cultural past, Ramanujan emphasizes that the natives should stop foolishly talking “of the inches rising, / the precise number of cobbled steps / run over by the water” and try to save the village houses, the cows, and the pregnant woman from being washed away, drowned beneath watery depths.
The cyclical flood the poet refers to should not be merely conceived in terms of annual seasons but also the much more expansive scale of historical time, where colonization occurs over and over again. The suggestion that this repetitive cycle exists is not simply a reflection of Ramanujan’s pessimism because once we recognize the patterns of destruction, that cycle can be broken. He critiques the old poets and the new poets for failing to record the violent effects of colonization in verse, even when the river dries up every summer to reveal the haunting remnants of the colonial legacy: “ribs, straw and women’s hair.” Ramanujan ultimately suggests that the native people’s resiliency, their efforts to constantly resurrect “the bridges with patches of repair all over them” is worthy of poetic celebration, just as Walcott emphasizes that indigenous accounts of history are just as valid, if not more so, than the biblical history imposed upon them.
Ramanujan’s “A River” and Walcott’s “The Sea is History” use water to symbolize the colonialism of the land and people depicted in each poem. The speaker in “A River” directs the reader from a city to a rural area by the river which “dries to a trickle” every year. It is a natural cycle for the river to dry on a yearly basis and signs of its importance as a lifeline are evident in remains left after the water is gone. The poem makes a darker turn with “the wet stones glistening like sleepy/ crocodiles, the dry ones/ shaven water-buffaloes lounging in the sun…”. The comparision of “wet” stones to crocodiles, vicious beasts that lash out violently on their kill, implicates an omen of sorts. This ‘omen’ is highlighted by the following comparison of the “dry” stones to resting water-buffaloes, or common prey of the crocodiles. Upon further reading of the poem, it becomes apparent that the crocodile and water are associated with colonizers and all that is dry, as well as water-buffaloes, represents the native people and their culture. The flood symbolizes the colonizers and their steady takeover of the native land and culture. The poets who once wrote of the cities, wrote only of the floods - but only after they passed. The common practice of colonizers censoring public opinion in any form is suggested by “The new poets still quoted/ the old poets, but no one spoke/ in verse…”. The poets limit their speech until the flood tides pass and one poet reveals the pillaging of the earth and its people wrought on by the “floods”.
Walcott takes a similar approach on the subject of colonization where water is the medium of colonization in the shaping of a culture’s history. The speaker makes intertextual biblical references to the Genesis, Exodus, Solomon, etc. With every description of the ugly ‘journey’ colonialism takes on its mission to conquer by way of sea, there is an allusion to first a creature or property of the sea and a biblical text. It’s made clear this poem is centralized on the effects of the British Empire with “weighted by its jewels/ like a bald queen” which implicate the royal family of England. The speaker describes a turn from nature to an unwelcome, unsightly surge of colonies with “then came, like scum on the river's drying lip,/ the brown reeds of villages/ mantling and congealing into towns…” Since colonies need governing, the speaker tells of the gradual establishment of those colonizers who are self-appointed into office over the natives. The speaker makes a connection between imperialism and the false guise of religion it operates under.
Throughout his poem "The Sea is Hisotry", Walcott directly relates water to history whereas he writes in the first stanza "the sea is history." Every event and situation is grounded on the sea. The story of Jonah was related to "the tital wave", as well as the reference to Jesus Christ was based on "the scum on the river's drying lips." All the historically significant and religious references are based on the movements of the sea.
Similiarily, the events in Ramanujah's poem "The River" also relates to water because they are all affected or caused by the flood. For example, in the flood, "the pregnant woman drowned", and "carried three village houses." However, unlike Walcott's poem, the events aren't the main purpose of the poem. Ramanujha's purpose was to express the lack of innovation and motivation in the new poets. They also use different techniques whereas water is more of a poetic device in Ramanujah's. Although the purposes and techniques in the two poems are different, they both use water as an imagery and enhance the depth of the historical events.
Ramanujan discusses flooding and poets’ responses to the disaster in “A River.” He criticizes the lack of attention given to the after effects of the flood. People only focus on the river which lasts a day and leaves behind more permanent. It seems like maybe this is an allusion to the focus given to colonial times in India and how the issues of post-colonialism might be ignored.
Walcott mentions the Biblical accounts of the Noah’s flood, the Red Sea, and Jonah being tossed into the sea in “The Sea is History.” The comparison is that water swallows everything like a people’s history not existing under colonialism. He discusses the story of Jonah but asks, “where is your Renaissance?” The idea here is that the religion of the colonizers (which colonizers distort for their own purposes) is irrelevant. People need to find their own history and develop their culture. Walcott’s criticism of Christianity is harsh. The validity of historical events shouldn’t be dismissed as false to oppose injustice. They do not directly relate.
Ramanjun’s “A River” and Walcott’s “The Sea is History” both use water as a metaphor for colonization. In “A River,” the speaker tells readers about cyclical floods which carry away “three village houses/one pregnant woman/and a couple of cows.” This destructive force of the river speaks to the damaging effects of colonization. Walcott also uses the devastating capacity of water as a metaphor for colonization when the speaker mentions “drowned women” and a “tidal wave swallowing Port Royal.” In both poems, colonization can be seen as a force which ‘washes over’ existing culture. In Walcott’s poem, the Christianizing of society through colonization is viewed critically. The speaker says “…and those were the ivory bracelets/of the Song of Solomon/but the ocean kept turning blank pages/looking for History.” The speaker makes a distinction between biblical history and the actual history of the society. In Ramanujan’s poem, the speaker seems more critical of the poets’ response to the floods, and thus to colonization as a whole. He or she says, “The new poets still quoted/the old poets, but no one spoke/in verse/of the pregnant woman/drowned, with perhaps twins in her/kicking at blank walls/even before birth.” The speaker is criticizing the response of clinging to tradition, which cannot speak to the reality of colonization. Ramanujan suggests that old traditions do not mediate the present conflict. While both poems use water as a metaphor for colonization, they seem to draw different criticisms of their societies. Walcott’s poem is contemptuous of the tendency to absorb colonial religious teachings at the expense of one’s own culture, while Ramanujan’s speaker criticizes the artistic response to colonization. Walcott’s speaker asks, “Where are your monuments, your battles, martyrs?/Where is your tribal memory?” His people have forgotten their own cultural legends and artifacts in favor of Christian ones, thus sacrificing their identity. Ramanujan’s speaker is lamenting the poetic response when he or she says “The new poets still quoted/the old poets.” Despite their differences, in both poems the speakers seem to be trying to negotiate the “third space of enunciation.” In other words, something new has been created in the culture as a result of syncretism and colonization. Walcott’s speaker’s third space is one in which Christianity must coexist with tribal traditions, and Ramanujan’s third space is one in which the poets must find their new voice.
Ramanujan and Walcott use water differently in the two poems. Ramanujan uses water as a lens through which to criticize other poets of the culture. Ramanujan chastises the poets who "only sang of the floods" and do not convey the value and beauty of things that are lost in the flood of colonial conquest.
In a similar but different manner, Walcott describes water as washing away and trapping "tribal memory." Walcott equates The Sea of History with Christianity replacing tribal culture. Whereas Ramanujan laments the loss of tribal culture, Walcott abhors the culture that has replaced his own.
“The Sea is History” by Derek Walcott speaks just like “A River” by Ramanujan where one culture has to die or be exploited for another culture to exist. It reminds me of Darwin’s theory where only the better adapted animals who are able to compete and exist even in the midst of highly competitive situation are able to to not only live but live longer for existence. New Testament is compared with Old Testament. New Testament that was the creation of mankind to alter what God has previously written down as his word. Just like diminishing and devastating a culture by altering it via greed interest taking what one likes such as the resources and leaving everything else including the culture behind. New Testament kept things it liked and revised the old ideas with that of modernized man’s needs relevant in today’s society, just like a place after colonization. Resources such as “oil”, “coral”, “ivory” and “salt” are taken advantaged off on expanse of indigenous people with their “charred ribs” (29). Sea is deep and has hidden secrets just like a recreated town with washed away people in Ramanujan’s case. Sea is deep with deep secrets of the creatures that live and are dead or missing no one can ever recall because the sea is deep. If the sea were to open up it would spill out history and how Christianization attempted to recreate mankind as that of recreating itself along the process via a new creation of New v. Old Testament whose sole purpose was to serve one’s own selfish interest. Finding deep secrets of the sea would mean to look up ourselves by digging deep for one’s own identity before creating false image of oneself via colonizing the place and calling it as though it was one’s own. Can we really create a civilization and expect it to flourish on our selfish interests? “A River” and “The Sea is history” calls this idea in question where there are no answers just like post colonization and the gray area of penumbra that lies therein.
“A River” by A.K Ramanujan focuses on post colonialism and the traces left behind by the colonized people in such a mesmerized way that, in the end it is hard to pull the pieces apart and tell the difference amongst people before and after colonization. Ramanujan mentions, “with different coloured diapers / to tell them apart” (48-49). Reader is left to ponder upon “A River” where the colonization has spared the place via limiting factors of destructive people to think about a situation which is as barren as that of a river without water. The function of a river in the first stanza speaks about the consequences of colonization as an attempt to wash away the civilization or way of life that existed beforehand. Most importantly, “bearing the sand ribs” and “patches of repair” are of great significance here. When people are colonized they have to give up or at least adapt to new culture or else they can’t survive. Just like a river where one has to adapt and flourish or feel desolate or apart from everything and everyone including the changing nature of the place like a barren river. There are no traces left besides “ribs of sand” to name it as one’s own heritage, tradition or artifacts as history. For a flood as that of civilization has washed everything apart. A flood may be reminiscent of a reminder of horrible impacts of civilization whose history has been severely disturbed so much that every now and then one associates the colonization as that of the flood which has taken away everything within the people and its place. So helpless are the people that the only thing they recall is when the floods started and how the river has been affected in the past until today where there is nothing but flood. When a country is taken over, the colonized people recall the date when the people took over the indigenous country and its people. Flood too is symbolic because people only recall that it left behind the “sand ribs”, “straws” and “women’s hair” as the sign that the place once had water and was flooded. To remember the culture once it was washed away is like remembering the clogged river. It is useless or forbidden to hold onto one’s culture because it is no longer there. Also, to hold onto past would be to give up what is taking place at present by being lost in the past just like a “clogged” brain. The second stanza focuses on impacts of colonization and the consequences that changed people. Example would be “three village houses”, “one pregnant woman” and “couple of cows” (25-27). A pregnant woman serves as a symbol of country, a colonized place. A country that was not allowed to produce what it could have produced as a result of colonization; pregnancy means a place that is colonized with another people and its culture v. country’s own history and the changes that were to take place but did not take place as a result of colonization. It is like killing the twins before they are even born. Twins that are alike just cultures which could have flourished as one within a country but was not allowed to happen; a country where one’s own culture can flourish along with the new culture. Colonization meant washing away the culture and its people for it to create a new culture and civilization on a ruined, destructive land and then to call it as the new “colonized” place as though it is better than that of old culture would be hypocritical. A culture that could have coexisted with that of indigenous culture as one in the embodiment of a pregnant woman unable to deliver babies for the fear of how she would tell them apart is just like that of a country where coexistence does not exist so it is better to diminish it complete to give priority to a new culture via superiority. Who knows what could have happened if the pregnant woman was to give birth? It could have been negative or positive? Just like that of a country that is allowed to practice and keep its own culture along with the new culture. Who knows what would happen?
In Walcott’s poem, “the sea is history”. The colonizing influence has washed away the history of the native people. What is considered important is their modern history that is shaped by the influence of the colonizer: the creation of a nation, voting, ambassadors, etc. Their early history has been drowned in the sea, replaced with the Biblical early history that the colonizers imposed upon them.
ReplyDeleteIn Ramanujan’s poem, “The poets only sang of the floods”. Poetry is the field of concern and not history, but the image is very similar. The flooding river could be the colonizers, and the poets begin to write only about the colonization and not about the people. They lose sight of the nature of the people and focus on exterior events. The water washed away their previous poetry.
In the poem by Ramanujan, the line that I found the most intersting is “The poets only sang of the floods”. It is the city of temples and poets are singing for cities and temples. Over here, we see that there is only concern about poetry and not history like in Walcott's poem. But the image that both poems are showing us is quite similar to one another. To me, the flowing river can represent the colonizers that are trying to change the things. Like in other poem, it says "sea is history", over here it says that "the river has water enough to be poetic about only once a year and then it carries away..." which shows us that water has washed away the history that they had before.
ReplyDeleteIn Walcott's poem, it tells us that the "sea is history." It begins with men, asking “Where are your monuments, your battles, martyrs?/Where is your tribal memory?”. The speaker of the poem answers “in the sea.” In the process of colonization, it simply has washed away the history of these people. It uses the sea as as a metaphor for the histories that are hidden. For them, the results of colonization was more important than history since it created a nation, voting, ambassadors, police, judges and so on. In this poem if history can be described in any detail, it's just old-fashioned history. Their history has been drained in the sea and it is replaced by early biblical history such as New Testament that these colonizers are trying to enforce on them. We get a sense of that you either have no history or that you are history, or that you are going to be history.
In Walcott's poem "The sea is history" an attempt to look for history is made. However, the constant movement of the sea keeps the history "locked up." The sea becomes an image that is destructive. It causes "lamentation," an expression of grief. Walcott's poem, "The sea is history" is similar to Ramanujah's poem "A River" in a way that it depicts water in a negative way. The poet relys on life's mishappenings to create lines in his poem. Perhaps the post colonial effect is seen through the selfish preception the poets have towards the people. It is as if the poets do not care about the pregnant women that was carried away by the flood. There is an indication made that the "white sisters clapping to the waves progress." This indication could symbolize the European's
ReplyDeletewho supported and particiapted in colonization.Perhaps the sister clapped at the waves progress because it has destroyed the old culture, and made room for the new culture.
Two images of water that each poem gives me as a reader is, a river in the first poem, "A River". In the second poem, "The Sea is History", the image of water is much larger. A river and sea are two images that i notice. The River becomes a sort of Tsunami and wipes off Madurai. The floods or Tsunami becomes the colonizer. Water and women are usually associated with one another. Women giving birth in water was also the case in Ramanujan's poem he says, "The pregnant woman drowned, with perhaps twins in her, kicking at blank walls even before birth".The women who is a native doesn't give birth to twins who are also dead as the two cows. Twins could symbolize the population of Madurai and the two cows could symbolize the natural resources or food of Madurai and its people. All of this is taken by the river and its floods.
ReplyDeleteIn the second poem, "The Sea is History" Walcott asks about the tribals memory and accomplishments. All of this is locked up by the sea. The sea seems to be the past, and the first part of the poem is about the past life. Walcott takes a biblical approach to the post colonial situation, he starts with the old testament and then ends with the new. "Then came the white sisters clapping to the waves' progress,and that was Emancipation - ", i believe this was the volta of the poem, This is when change started to take place. Politics started to come to the land and a new history was beginning. History doesn't really seem to have any ending.
I don't think it's always possible to parse image and text with the goal of finding a corresponding political or historical event. I think it’s important when we read these poems through the lens of post-colonialism that we don’t also forget that these poems are the products of individuals who also happen to be products of colonialism. This is probably truer for some poems more than others. The images of the sea in Walcott’s poem, and the river in Ramanujan’s poem, seem to be concealing a hidden civilization and sense of time and history.
ReplyDeleteIn Ramanujan’s poem, the flood that overtakes the village is an annual event, a habitual thing that carries away houses, cows and pregnant women. The tone of the poem suggests resilience just as the bridge patched by repair and twins with different colored diapers has a tone of lightness to it. The main thing that remains inconstant seems to be the differentiation between the old poets and the new poets.
In Walcott’s poem, history seems quite literally to be encoded in the sea and in nature. It’s important to see where he distinguishes history from faith and question what it is he means by such a close association between Biblicial references, sea imagery and what he calls “history.” However, the poem is so rich in imagery and reference and music that I don’t know if I could make any real assertions about it in this space.
Both Ramanujan’s “A River” and Walcott’s “The Sea is History” rely on water imagery to discuss the effects of colonialism on the colonized subjects. However, despite a few initial similarities I believe that the authors possess differing attitudes towards water and its role in a postcolonial context. In “A River” Ramanujan presents water as a destructive force that wrecks havoc on the lives of the people. During times of flood “it carries away/ in the first half-hour/ three village houses,/ a couple of cows/…/ and one pregnant woman.” The speaker therefore assumes an ironic tone when he claims that “the river has water enough/ to be poetic/ about only once a year” because in reality water is not poetic at all. When the “river dries to a trickle” it exposes the “sand ribs,/ straw and women’s hair/ clogging the Watergates/ at the rusty bars.” As the water disappears we are able to glimpse the destruction it concealed—the dirt and grime of poverty and the deaths of countless people. As a result, Ramanujan suggests that those poets who discussed water in poetry but chose not to speak “in verse/ of the pregnant woman/ drowned, with perhaps twins in her,” are only ignoring the brutal truths of reality, the damage done by the colonizer.
ReplyDeleteWalcott also uses water imagery in “The Sea is History,” however; he presents the sea not only as a “vault” that conceals the artifacts and relics of the past, but also as a place where life exists and new history can be formed. As I discussed in more detail in my other post, the link that is forged between the sea and history is only validated at the end of the poem when the speaker discusses the creatures that inhabit and attain life from it: “then came the secretarial heron,/ then came the bullfrog bellowing for a vote,/ fireflies with bright ideas/ and bats like jetting ambassadors.” By focusing on the sea’s connection to life, Walcott links it to a budding politics that he associates with the beginning of history—a history that the colonized subjects can create in response and resistance to their oppressors. Therefore, water in Walcott’s poem emerges as a positive force with the ability to empower the colonized, whereas in Ramanujan’s poem, water embodies the destructive and oppressive nature of the colonizer.
In his poem “A River,” A.K. Ramanujan describes “Madurai, a city of temples and poets” that experiences seasonal floods. He emphasizes that even during the summers when the “river dries to a trickle” the poets still “only sang of the floods.” If we view the flood as a symbol of the violent, destructive effects of colonization that obliterates indigenous culture, then Ramanujan is critiquing the natives’ fascination with the colonizer’s beliefs. The flood can, for example, be an allusion to the biblical flood. In this respect Ramanujan’s poem would be similar to Walcott’s “The Sea is History” in condemning religious colonization and more importantly, the natives’ tendency to accept biblical accounts of history over their own indigenous accounts of history. Like Walcott, who encourages the “Sirs,” the colonized peoples of the world, to dive into the depths of sea to recover and reclaim their lost cultural past, Ramanujan emphasizes that the natives should stop foolishly talking “of the inches rising, / the precise number of cobbled steps / run over by the water” and try to save the village houses, the cows, and the pregnant woman from being washed away, drowned beneath watery depths.
ReplyDeleteThe cyclical flood the poet refers to should not be merely conceived in terms of annual seasons but also the much more expansive scale of historical time, where colonization occurs over and over again. The suggestion that this repetitive cycle exists is not simply a reflection of Ramanujan’s pessimism because once we recognize the patterns of destruction, that cycle can be broken. He critiques the old poets and the new poets for failing to record the violent effects of colonization in verse, even when the river dries up every summer to reveal the haunting remnants of the colonial legacy: “ribs, straw and women’s hair.” Ramanujan ultimately suggests that the native people’s resiliency, their efforts to constantly resurrect “the bridges with patches of repair all over them” is worthy of poetic celebration, just as Walcott emphasizes that indigenous accounts of history are just as valid, if not more so, than the biblical history imposed upon them.
Ramanujan’s “A River” and Walcott’s “The Sea is History” use water to symbolize the colonialism of the land and people depicted in each poem. The speaker in “A River” directs the reader from a city to a rural area by the river which “dries to a trickle” every year. It is a natural cycle for the river to dry on a yearly basis and signs of its importance as a lifeline are evident in remains left after the water is gone. The poem makes a darker turn with “the wet stones glistening like sleepy/ crocodiles, the dry ones/ shaven water-buffaloes lounging in the sun…”. The comparision of “wet” stones to crocodiles, vicious beasts that lash out violently on their kill, implicates an omen of sorts. This ‘omen’ is highlighted by the following comparison of the “dry” stones to resting water-buffaloes, or common prey of the crocodiles. Upon further reading of the poem, it becomes apparent that the crocodile and water are associated with colonizers and all that is dry, as well as water-buffaloes, represents the native people and their culture. The flood symbolizes the colonizers and their steady takeover of the native land and culture. The poets who once wrote of the cities, wrote only of the floods - but only after they passed. The common practice of colonizers censoring public opinion in any form is suggested by “The new poets still quoted/ the old poets, but no one spoke/ in verse…”. The poets limit their speech until the flood tides pass and one poet reveals the pillaging of the earth and its people wrought on by the “floods”.
ReplyDeleteWalcott takes a similar approach on the subject of colonization where water is the medium of colonization in the shaping of a culture’s history. The speaker makes intertextual biblical references to the Genesis, Exodus, Solomon, etc. With every description of the ugly ‘journey’ colonialism takes on its mission to conquer by way of sea, there is an allusion to first a creature or property of the sea and a biblical text. It’s made clear this poem is centralized on the effects of the British Empire with “weighted by its jewels/ like a bald queen” which implicate the royal family of England. The speaker describes a turn from nature to an unwelcome, unsightly surge of colonies with “then came, like scum on the river's drying lip,/ the brown reeds of villages/ mantling and congealing into towns…” Since colonies need governing, the speaker tells of the gradual establishment of those colonizers who are self-appointed into office over the natives. The speaker makes a connection between imperialism and the false guise of religion it operates under.
Throughout his poem "The Sea is Hisotry", Walcott directly relates water to history whereas he writes in the first stanza "the sea is history." Every event and situation is grounded on the sea. The story of Jonah was related to "the tital wave", as well as the reference to Jesus Christ was based on "the scum on the river's drying lips." All the historically significant and religious references are based on the movements of the sea.
ReplyDeleteSimiliarily, the events in Ramanujah's poem "The River" also relates to water because they are all affected or caused by the flood. For example, in the flood, "the pregnant woman drowned", and "carried three village houses." However, unlike Walcott's poem, the events aren't the main purpose of the poem. Ramanujha's purpose was to express the lack of innovation and motivation in the new poets. They also use different techniques whereas water is more of a poetic device in Ramanujah's. Although the purposes and techniques in the two poems are different, they both use water as an imagery and enhance the depth of the historical events.
Ramanujan discusses flooding and poets’ responses to the disaster in “A River.” He criticizes the lack of attention given to the after effects of the flood. People only focus on the river which lasts a day and leaves behind more permanent. It seems like maybe this is an allusion to the focus given to colonial times in India and how the issues of post-colonialism might be ignored.
ReplyDeleteWalcott mentions the Biblical accounts of the Noah’s flood, the Red Sea, and Jonah being tossed into the sea in “The Sea is History.” The comparison is that water swallows everything like a people’s history not existing under colonialism. He discusses the story of Jonah but asks, “where is your Renaissance?” The idea here is that the religion of the colonizers (which colonizers distort for their own purposes) is irrelevant. People need to find their own history and develop their culture. Walcott’s criticism of Christianity is harsh. The validity of historical events shouldn’t be dismissed as false to oppose injustice. They do not directly relate.
Ramanjun’s “A River” and Walcott’s “The Sea is History” both use water as a metaphor for colonization. In “A River,” the speaker tells readers about cyclical floods which carry away “three village houses/one pregnant woman/and a couple of cows.” This destructive force of the river speaks to the damaging effects of colonization. Walcott also uses the devastating capacity of water as a metaphor for colonization when the speaker mentions “drowned women” and a “tidal wave swallowing Port Royal.” In both poems, colonization can be seen as a force which ‘washes over’ existing culture. In Walcott’s poem, the Christianizing of society through colonization is viewed critically. The speaker says “…and those were the ivory bracelets/of the Song of Solomon/but the ocean kept turning blank pages/looking for History.” The speaker makes a distinction between biblical history and the actual history of the society. In Ramanujan’s poem, the speaker seems more critical of the poets’ response to the floods, and thus to colonization as a whole. He or she says, “The new poets still quoted/the old poets, but no one spoke/in verse/of the pregnant woman/drowned, with perhaps twins in her/kicking at blank walls/even before birth.” The speaker is criticizing the response of clinging to tradition, which cannot speak to the reality of colonization. Ramanujan suggests that old traditions do not mediate the present conflict.
ReplyDeleteWhile both poems use water as a metaphor for colonization, they seem to draw different criticisms of their societies. Walcott’s poem is contemptuous of the tendency to absorb colonial religious teachings at the expense of one’s own culture, while Ramanujan’s speaker criticizes the artistic response to colonization. Walcott’s speaker asks, “Where are your monuments, your battles, martyrs?/Where is your tribal memory?” His people have forgotten their own cultural legends and artifacts in favor of Christian ones, thus sacrificing their identity. Ramanujan’s speaker is lamenting the poetic response when he or she says “The new poets still quoted/the old poets.” Despite their differences, in both poems the speakers seem to be trying to negotiate the “third space of enunciation.” In other words, something new has been created in the culture as a result of syncretism and colonization. Walcott’s speaker’s third space is one in which Christianity must coexist with tribal traditions, and Ramanujan’s third space is one in which the poets must find their new voice.
Ramanujan and Walcott use water differently in the two poems. Ramanujan uses water as a lens through which to criticize other poets of the culture. Ramanujan chastises the poets who "only sang of the floods" and do not convey the value and beauty of things that are lost in the flood of colonial conquest.
ReplyDeleteIn a similar but different manner, Walcott describes water as washing away and trapping "tribal memory." Walcott equates The Sea of History with Christianity replacing tribal culture. Whereas Ramanujan laments the loss of tribal culture, Walcott abhors the culture that has replaced his own.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete“The Sea is History” by Derek Walcott speaks just like “A River” by Ramanujan where one culture has to die or be exploited for another culture to exist. It reminds me of Darwin’s theory where only the better adapted animals who are able to compete and exist even in the midst of highly competitive situation are able to to not only live but live longer for existence. New Testament is compared with Old Testament. New Testament that was the creation of mankind to alter what God has previously written down as his word. Just like diminishing and devastating a culture by altering it via greed interest taking what one likes such as the resources and leaving everything else including the culture behind. New Testament kept things it liked and revised the old ideas with that of modernized man’s needs relevant in today’s society, just like a place after colonization. Resources such as “oil”, “coral”, “ivory” and “salt” are taken advantaged off on expanse of indigenous people with their “charred ribs” (29). Sea is deep and has hidden secrets just like a recreated town with washed away people in Ramanujan’s case. Sea is deep with deep secrets of the creatures that live and are dead or missing no one can ever recall because the sea is deep. If the sea were to open up it would spill out history and how Christianization attempted to recreate mankind as that of recreating itself along the process via a new creation of New v. Old Testament whose sole purpose was to serve one’s own selfish interest. Finding deep secrets of the sea would mean to look up ourselves by digging deep for one’s own identity before creating false image of oneself via colonizing the place and calling it as though it was one’s own. Can we really create a civilization and expect it to flourish on our selfish interests? “A River” and “The Sea is history” calls this idea in question where there are no answers just like post colonization and the gray area of penumbra that lies therein.
ReplyDelete“A River” by A.K Ramanujan focuses on post colonialism and the traces left behind by the colonized people in such a mesmerized way that, in the end it is hard to pull the pieces apart and tell the difference amongst people before and after colonization. Ramanujan mentions, “with different coloured diapers / to tell them apart” (48-49). Reader is left to ponder upon “A River” where the colonization has spared the place via limiting factors of destructive people to think about a situation which is as barren as that of a river without water. The function of a river in the first stanza speaks about the consequences of colonization as an attempt to wash away the civilization or way of life that existed beforehand. Most importantly, “bearing the sand ribs” and “patches of repair” are of great significance here. When people are colonized they have to give up or at least adapt to new culture or else they can’t survive. Just like a river where one has to adapt and flourish or feel desolate or apart from everything and everyone including the changing nature of the place like a barren river. There are no traces left besides “ribs of sand” to name it as one’s own heritage, tradition or artifacts as history. For a flood as that of civilization has washed everything apart. A flood may be reminiscent of a reminder of horrible impacts of civilization whose history has been severely disturbed so much that every now and then one associates the colonization as that of the flood which has taken away everything within the people and its place. So helpless are the people that the only thing they recall is when the floods started and how the river has been affected in the past until today where there is nothing but flood. When a country is taken over, the colonized people recall the date when the people took over the indigenous country and its people. Flood too is symbolic because people only recall that it left behind the “sand ribs”, “straws” and “women’s hair” as the sign that the place once had water and was flooded. To remember the culture once it was washed away is like remembering the clogged river. It is useless or forbidden to hold onto one’s culture because it is no longer there. Also, to hold onto past would be to give up what is taking place at present by being lost in the past just like a “clogged” brain. The second stanza focuses on impacts of colonization and the consequences that changed people. Example would be “three village houses”, “one pregnant woman” and “couple of cows” (25-27). A pregnant woman serves as a symbol of country, a colonized place. A country that was not allowed to produce what it could have produced as a result of colonization; pregnancy means a place that is colonized with another people and its culture v. country’s own history and the changes that were to take place but did not take place as a result of colonization. It is like killing the twins before they are even born. Twins that are alike just cultures which could have flourished as one within a country but was not allowed to happen; a country where one’s own culture can flourish along with the new culture. Colonization meant washing away the culture and its people for it to create a new culture and civilization on a ruined, destructive land and then to call it as the new “colonized” place as though it is better than that of old culture would be hypocritical. A culture that could have coexisted with that of indigenous culture as one in the embodiment of a pregnant woman unable to deliver babies for the fear of how she would tell them apart is just like that of a country where coexistence does not exist so it is better to diminish it complete to give priority to a new culture via superiority. Who knows what could have happened if the pregnant woman was to give birth? It could have been negative or positive? Just like that of a country that is allowed to practice and keep its own culture along with the new culture. Who knows what would happen?
ReplyDelete