18 pages • 36 minutes read
Ilya KaminskyA modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
In Kaminsky’s poem, individual and collective sensibility fuse into one. Critic Will Brewbaker claims: “From the beginning, Kaminsky makes his intent clear: he will hold up a mirror to himself, and, if we happen to catch our own reflection, we would be wise to join him in owning our failures — political, personal, or otherwise.” For Kaminsky, this occurs through the expert way he works with the American lyric: “we opposed them but not / enough. I was / in my bed, around my bed America / was falling,” seamlessly shifting perspective between “we,” and “I” (Lines 3-6).
Brewbaker notes: “As the scope widens from ‘house’ to ‘street’ and all the way out to ‘our great country,’ the net of complicity widens, too, to include every reader and—importantly—the speaker himself.” The house becomes a symbol for shared reality and interconnectivity. Not only the speaker’s individual house and comfort of their bed, but “the disastrous reign” also takes place in a house: “a house of money” (Line 9). In this way, Kaminsky’s commitment to interrogate language in a time of crisis confronts the way language obscures and divides. As an alternative, he exposes and unites.
Kaminsky is obviously interested in how these the webs of connection are “invisible.” This is evident in the choice of language (“invisible house”) and is also seen in the polyvalence of the diction. Richard Osler, writing in The Literary Review, notes that there is a war “inside and outside America.” For Kaminsky, humanity is scrutinized under the pressures of reality to the point where the violence overseas or violence in which Americans are implicated might as well be done to America: “America was falling” (Line 6) when “other people’s houses” (Line 1) were bombed. The critic Karl Kirchway writes, “These poems bestow the power of sacred drama on a secular martyrology.” (Kirchway, Karl. “A Soldier Kills a Deaf Boy and Rebels with Silence.” 2019. New York Times). In the poem, the spiritual precept to treat others as one wants to be treated is turned on its head: what humans do to others is what they do to themselves.
Kaminsky’s primary relationship to the world and poetry is one of humility and careful attention: “It felt kind of wrong to write poetry about my father dying. How could a human become a pretty line in a poem? I was afraid it would hurt my mother and my brother, so I started playing with a language they didn’t know” (Armitstead, Claire. “'I will never hear my father's voice': Ilya Kaminsky on deafness and escaping the Soviet Union.” 2019. The Guardian).
In the poem, Kaminsky dives headfirst into the complexities of moral responsibility and guilt. In effect, Kaminsky carefully plumbs the depths of the situation in order to reveal how enjoyment of beauty can function as irreverence to suffering: “I took a chair outside and watched the sun” (Line 7). In turn, the poem is also a parable about the inadequacy of apology in times of systemic and ongoing violence. However, Kaminsky does not discredit beauty nor oppose it. Instead, the poem demands people live in a way that is worthy of the beauty apparent when simply watching the sun.
Kaminsky possesses a profound spiritual sensibility that honors the continuities between time, space, and memory. His language startles readers in the way it strikes as simultaneously old and new. For example, the closing poem of Deaf Republic roughly alludes to classical motifs for marking time and situating history: “Inhabitant of earth for forty something years / I once found myself in a peaceful country” (Lines 1-2). However, readers quickly realize they are rooted in today because “I watch neighbors open / their phones to watch / a cop demanding a man’s driver’s license” (Lines 2-4). (Kaminsky, Ilya. “In a Time of Peace” 2019. Poets.org).
Similarly, Lines 8-9 employ an imaginative urgency: “In the sixth month / of a disastrous reign in the house of money.” The specific diction choice of “reign” alludes the extravagance and social suffering of the Reign of Terror during the French revolution, but also feels incredibly modern because of the use “house of money” (Line 9).