Today's word is
anodyne
Oh, looky here: a word that is both an adjective and a noun. Well, that's something new for us to play with.
*****
Monday, November 28, 2005
Sorry, folks. I had to step away for awhile. Too pooped. Now I have a blissful morning with no company except my cat and a soft grey sky, so I can do a brain dump here and then desultorily attend to some other chores. Hope it was all worth the wait.
First, a little haiku:
anodyne for dark
months looming, a cardinal
amid bare branches
While driving to work the day before Thanksgiving, almost a week after I wrote this, I heard a beautiful piece on NPR wherein the host Tom Ashcroft discusses with its author Graeme Gibson a new book for which to lust called The Bedside Book of Birds. During the program, Gibson reads a nice poem he included by Alberto Manguel (sp?) about a cardinal the poet sees out his window which then leads his mind into an inquiry about words -- and birds -- as symbols.
Mmmm...synchronicity. My mind has kind of been going in that direction lately anyway as I contemplate what makes a poem comprehensible to others, how much you have to know -- and what kinds of things you have to know -- to understand a poem, any poem. How much do you have to know to fully grasp something by Eliot vs. something by Dickinson, for example? Will education help you with the latter? Will your spirituality help you with the former?
Hardly in the same league with either, of course, I still wonder with every word I use whether it will be understood and how. When I put the name of a type of plant (a brunnera, for example) in a poem, if you don't know what a brunnera is, do you lose the sense of the poem? If you don't know what winter in a land of long winters and deciduous forests looks like, can you feel this haiku? What if you've never seen a cardinal except on Christmas stamps, as was my case before living here? Will you even know what you aren't getting? And does that matter?
This is one of those things I drive myself nuts over -- and yet another reason to spread knowledge of words, right? Words are inherently weak -- so much vagueness and misinterpretation possible. Look, even this fairly straightforward word, "anodyne," can be either a noun or an adjective. Goodness. If you can't trust a word even to be the same kind of word from reading to reading, how can you trust it to say what you mean from eye to eye, ear to ear? How much do we ever really say to each other? What do we say that doesn't come through? What do we say that we didn't know we'd said?
And actually, does spreading the knowledge of words, one by one, actually alleviate any of this or just make it worse?
I'll probably never know. I'll just keep plodding along anyway. Cheers!
Recent Comments