Introduction
"The Language of Paradox" is a seminal essay by Cleanth Brooks, a prominent American literary critic and scholar. Published in 1947 as part of his influential work "The Well Wrought Urn: Studies in the Structure of Poetry," the essay is a foundational exploration of the role of paradox in poetry. Brooks contends that far from being a sign of muddled thinking, paradox is a deliberate and essential technique employed by poets to convey intricate meanings and engage readers in a more profound intellectual and emotional experience.
Structure
1. Introduction to Paradox:
In the opening section of "The Language of Paradox," Cleanth Brooks introduces the central theme of the essay—paradox. He establishes the context by challenging the common perception that paradox in literature reflects muddled or contradictory thinking. Brooks asserts that, in reality, paradox is a deliberate and essential literary device employed by poets to convey nuanced and complex meanings. This introductory portion serves to lay the foundation for the subsequent analysis, framing paradox as a deliberate strategy for poets to engage readers and elevate the depth of their work.
2. Analysis of Specific Poems:
Following the introduction, Brooks engages in a detailed analysis of specific poems, employing a close reading approach to illuminate instances of paradox. Drawing on examples from various poets, including John Donne and Gerard Manley Hopkins, Brooks dissects the language and structure of these works to showcase how paradox operates within the poetic framework. This section of the essay is characterized by a meticulous examination of literary devices, linguistic nuances, and thematic elements, demonstrating how paradox is woven into the fabric of the poems to enhance their complexity and meaning.
3. Examination of Resolutions:
In the subsequent part of the essay, Brooks turns his attention to the resolutions of paradoxes within the examined poems. Here, he explores how apparent contradictions are harmoniously resolved, emphasizing the unity that emerges from the seemingly conflicting elements. By unraveling the resolutions, Brooks reveals that the use of paradox is not a haphazard or chaotic endeavor but a deliberate choice by poets to create a sense of coherence and deeper understanding. This analysis sheds light on the transformative power of paradox within the poetic context.
4. Broader Implications:
Moving beyond the specific poems, Brooks broadens the scope of his discussion to explore the wider implications of paradox in poetry. He examines how the deliberate use of paradox contributes to the overall impact and effectiveness of poetic expression. Brooks argues that paradox serves not only to challenge and engage readers but also to evoke emotional responses and provoke thoughtful reflection. This section delves into the significance of paradox as a literary device that transcends individual poems, shaping the broader landscape of poetic artistry.
5. Conclusion:
In the concluding segment of the essay, Brooks summarizes key insights and reinforces the importance of paradox in poetry. He consolidates the arguments presented throughout the essay, reiterating that paradox is a deliberate and valuable tool for poets to convey intricate meanings. The conclusion leaves the reader with a heightened appreciation for the intentional use of paradox in literature, emphasizing its role in elevating the depth and impact of poetic expression. Brooks's final remarks serve to underscore the lasting implications of the essay's exploration into the language of paradox within the realm of literary art.
Summary
Cleanth Brooks's essay, "The Language of Paradox," challenges the conventional notion that paradox in poetry reflects confused thinking. Instead, he argues that paradox is a deliberate and essential poetic device employed by writers to convey intricate meanings. Brooks conducts a close analysis of specific poems, including those by John Donne and Gerard Manley Hopkins, illustrating how paradox serves as a unifying force, resolving apparent contradictions and enhancing the depth and complexity of poetic expression. The essay emphasizes the importance of readers engaging with paradoxical language to uncover the nuanced unity that it creates, fostering a more profound understanding of poetry.
Summary
Cleanth Brooks's essay, "The Language of Paradox," challenges the conventional notion that paradox in poetry reflects confused thinking. Instead, he argues that paradox is a deliberate and essential poetic device employed by writers to convey intricate meanings. Brooks conducts a close analysis of specific poems, including those by John Donne and Gerard Manley Hopkins, illustrating how paradox serves as a unifying force, resolving apparent contradictions and enhancing the depth and complexity of poetic expression. The essay emphasizes the importance of readers engaging with paradoxical language to uncover the nuanced unity that it creates, fostering a more profound understanding of poetry.
In essence, Brooks contends that paradox is a tool for poets to provoke thought, challenge conventional wisdom, and evoke emotional responses from readers. The essay's structure includes an introduction to the concept of paradox, detailed analyses of poems, and a conclusion that reinforces the idea that paradox is not a sign of confusion but a deliberate and valuable aspect of poetry that enriches the reader's experience.
Brooks begins the essay by discussing common prejudices on paradox. He says that paradox is often considered as intellectual than emotional, clever than profound, and rational than divinely irrational. He dismisses these notions and argues that ‘paradox is the language appropriate and inevitable to poetry’. He points at the contradictions that are inherent in poetry and states that if those contradictions do not exist, some of the best poetry will not exist today. He illustrates this by citing examples from canonical poems.
Brooks comments that William Wordsworth is a poet who distrusts sophistry and relies on simplicity. Though he will not provide too many examples for paradox, some of his best poems emerge out of paradoxical situations. He quotes from the poem It is a Beauteous Evening and illustrates that the poem is based on paradoxical context. Looking at the evening sky, the poet is filled with worship whereas the girl who walks with him is not at all moved by the sight. The paradox is revealed when the poet says that the girl is deeply devotional because she unconsciously sympathizes with all forms of nature throughout the year whereas the poet’s worship is temporary and sporadic. The self righteous nun like evening sky is contrasted with the innocence of the girl who wears no sign of devotion but is in communion with nature.
In Wordsworth’s sonnet Composed upon Westminster Bridge, the poet is surprised to see a man made city-London- is able to wear the beauty of morning. The poet used to look at the city as inanimate and mechanical and this morning vision offers him the glory of the city. This paradoxical situation resolves the tension between the mechanical and the organic, and the poet realizes that the city is also part of nature, lighted by the sun of nature. These testify what Wordsworth has stated in The Preface to Lyrical ballad; ‘to choose incidents and situations from common life’ but to treat them that ‘ordinary things should be preserved to the mind in an unusual aspect’. Paradox is employed to evoke romantic preoccupation with wonder and surprise. Neoclassical poets like Alexander Pope invoke irony, though irony and wonder often happen together. The fusion of irony and wonder is found in the poems of Blake, Coleridge and Gray. Paradox unites the opposites and contradictory through the imagination of the poet.
Paradox springs from the very nature of poetic language. In poetic use, both connotation and denotation gain prominence. The poet has to make up his language as he goes. In scientific use of language, terms are stabilized and frozen in strict denotation. The poet has to work with metaphors to express the subtle nature of human emotion. Poetic language involves continual tilting of the planes, necessary overlapping, discrepancies and contradictions. The nature of poetic language forces poets to be paradoxical. In Wordsworth’s Evening sonnet, the evening is described as “beauteous, calm, free, holy, quiet, breathless”. By placing the adjectives calm and breathless-which suggests excitement that upsets the calm and quiet- together, the poem invokes paradox.
Brooks delves into an in-depth analysis of the poem Canonization by John Donne. According to him, this poem provides a concrete example for extension of the basic metaphor into a paradox. In the poem, profane love is treated equal to divine love. The poet has daringly used religious terms to describe two lovers who have renounced the world and have hermitage in each other’s body. By describing the lovers fit for canonization, the poet has produced an effective parody of Christian sainthood.
The double and contradictory meaning of the word ‘die’ for is another instance of paradox. The lovers are willing to die if they cannot live by love. Here the poet hints at the double meaning of the word. In 16 and 17 century, the word ‘die’ refers to experience the consummation of the act of love. In that sense, it also means their love is not exhausted by lust. At another instance, the poet stresses on the duality and singleness of love. The lovers are compared to phoenix, which dies to be born. Similarly the lovers have renounced life in order to gain most intense life. He also quotes Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet to emphasize the metaphor of love and pilgrimage to the holy land.
Brooks has offered a detailed analysis of the poem and states that the only way the poet could say what canonization says is by paradox. Donne has maintained love and religion and has effectively portrayed the complexity of the experience. According to Brooks, Donne is obsessed with the problem of unity and resolves the contradictory ideas by employing paradoxes. Imagination, according to Coleridge, brings together the opposites such as sameness with difference, general with concrete, idea with image, individual with representative etc…By quoting Shakespeare’s “The Phoenix and Turtle”, he establishes that paradox is the only solution to unite the double/ multiple names of life. He concludes by commenting that the urn in which the ash of the lovers is kept is the poem itself. Like the phoenix it rises from the ashes and we have to be prepared to accept the paradoxes of imagination.
