DON PATERSON

WRITERS AND THEIR WORK

Series Editors:

Professor Dinah Birch CBE,

University of Liverpool
Professor Dame Janet Beer,
University of Liverpool

Writers and Their Work, launched in 1994 in association with the British
Council, won immediate acclaim for its publication of brief but rigorous
critical examinations of the works of distinguished writers and schools of
writing. The series embraces the best of modern literary theory and criticism,
and features studies of many popular contemporary writers, as well as the
canonical figures of literature and important literary genres.

© Copyright 2021 by Ben Wilkinson

First published in 2021 by
Liverpool University Press
4 Cambridge Street
Liverpool L69 7ZU
on behalf of
Northcote House Publishers Ltd
Mary Tavy
Devon PL19 9PY
Ben Wilkinson has asserted the right to be identified as the author of this
book in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a
retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic,
mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written
permission of the publisher.
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
ISBN 978-1-80085-537-3
eISBN 978-1-80085-757-5
Typeset by Carnegie Book Production, Lancaster
 W
W

DON PATERSON
Ben Wilkinson

Don Paterson
for Ms Fowler and Mrs Trubshaw

Education is not the filling of a pail,

but the lighting of a fire
 Contents
Contents

Acknowledgements ix
Biographical Outline xi
Abbreviations xv
Prologue 1
1. For the Hell of It: Nil Nil (1993) 13
2. Which Man I Am: God’s Gift to Women (1997) 29
3. Not Your Name, Not Mine: The Eyes (1999) 45
4. Shrewd Obliquity of Speech: Landing Light (2003) 61
5. Breath, You Invisible Poem: Orpheus (2006) 79
6. None of This Matters: Rain (2009) 95
Coda: 40 Sonnets (2015) and Zonal (2020) 115
Notes 121
Select Bibliography 133
Index 137

vii
 Acknowledgements
Acknowledgements

Many thanks to Christabel Scaife at Liverpool University

Press for her patience during the long road to this book’s
completion; to Alan Buckley, Niall Campbell, Kayo Chingonyi,
Steven Earnshaw, Alan Gillis, Chris Jones, Helen Mort, Conor
O’Callaghan, and Maurice Riordan for their advice and/or
encouragement at key junctures; and to my good friend Alan
Malpass, for many reassuring conversations on the life of the
early career researcher.
Thanks to Faber and to Rogers, Coleridge & White for
permission to quote from several poems, and to Don Paterson for
taking the time to check the factual accuracy of the biographical
outline, as well as providing helpful assistance at various stages
throughout this book’s completion.
The discussion of ‘An Elliptical Stylus’ in Chapter 1 draws
in part from my paper ‘“Something axiomatic on the nature of
articulacy”: Don Paterson’s “An Elliptical Stylus” as ars poetica’.
Thanks to Peter Boxall for publishing this article in Textual
Practice (32:4, 2018).
Thanks are also due to Sheffield Hallam University, the Arts
and Humanities Research Council, and the University of Bolton
for support that enabled the writing of this book.

ix
 Biographical Outline
Biographical Outline

1963 Born Dundee, Scotland, 30 October.

1979 Leaves school to pursue career in music. Briefly
works at DC Thomson comics.
1984 Moves to London. Takes lessons from the guitarist
Derek Bailey. Tours and records with Ken Hyder’s
Talisker, as well as a number of free improvisation
groups. Works as peripatetic music teacher.
1985–89 Forms the Celtic-influenced jazz group Lammas
with saxophonist Tim Garland. Begins attending
regular poetry workshops with other upcoming
poets, including Lavinia Greenlaw, Maurice Riordan,
Jo Shapcott, and Michael Donaghy. In 1989, moves
to Brighton.
1990 Receives Eric Gregory Award from the Society of
Authors for poets under the age of thirty.
1992 ‘An Elliptical Stylus’ is awarded third place in The
Poetry Society’s National Poetry Competition.
1993 Nil Nil, his first full-length collection of poems, is
published by Faber. It receives excellent reviews and
wins the Forward Prize for Best First Collection
and a Scottish Arts Council Book Award. Wins
the Arvon International Poetry Competition for
‘A Private Bottling’.
1994–96 Becomes Creative Writing Fellow at the University
of Dundee. Named by The Poetry Society as one
of twenty New Generation poets, a promotion
highlighting significant voices in contemporary
British poetry.

xi
 don paterson

1997 Returns to London. Second collection, God’s Gift to

Women, published by Faber. It is awarded both the
Geoffrey Faber Memorial Prize and the T. S. Eliot
Prize for Poetry. Begins work as Editor for the Picador
Poetry list, a division of Pan Macmillan. Also works
as freelance journalist, writing videogame reviews for
The Times and an arts column for Scotland on Sunday.
1999 Moves to Edinburgh. Publishes a third collection
with Faber, The Eyes, translated versions after
Antonio Machado. Edits 101 Sonnets: From Shakespeare
to Heaney (Faber), an anthology of classic, modern,
and contemporary sonnets. Birth of twin sons, Jamie
and Russell.
2001 Moves from Edinburgh to Kirriemuir, Scotland.
2003 Landing Light, a fourth collection with Faber, wins the
Whitbread Award for Poetry and an unprecedented
second T. S. Eliot Prize. Begins teaching in the School
of English at the University of St Andrews.
2004 Publishes first book of aphorisms, The Book of Shadows
(Picador). Edits New British Poetry with Charles
Simic, a survey anthology introducing contemporary
British poets to an American audience, published by
Graywolf Press.
2006 Publishes Orpheus with Faber, a translation of Rainer
Maria Rilke’s Sonnets to Orpheus, to positive reviews.
2007 Moves to St Andrews, Scotland. Publishes second
book of aphorisms, The Blind Eye: A Book of Late
Advice (Faber).
2008 Awarded the OBE. ‘Love Poem for Natalie “Tusja”
Beridze’ wins the Forward Prize for Best Single Poem.
2009 Rain, a sixth volume, is published by Faber and is
awarded the Forward Prize for Best Collection of
the Year. The book receives many positive reviews,
and is praised in The Guardian by the Poet Laureate
Carol Ann Duffy as ‘the best collection of poetry to
appear in years … To read this book is to have the
privilege of seeing a world-class talent assert itself.’
It is published in an American edition in 2010 by
Farrar, Straus and Giroux, and reviewed positively
in The New Yorker.

xii
 biographical outline

2010 Awarded the Queen’s Gold Medal for Poetry. Reading

Shakespeare’s Sonnets, a reader’s guide, is published by
Faber.
2012 Returns to Edinburgh. Selected Poems published by
Faber.
2014 Smith: A Reader’s Guide to the Poetry of Michael Donaghy,
is published by Picador.
2015 Publishes a seventh book of poems with Faber,
40 Sonnets, which is awarded the Costa Prize for
Poetry. The book is subsequently published in an
American edition by Farrar, Straus and Giroux in
2017.
2018 The Poem: Lyric, Sign, Metre, a treatise on the art of
poetry, published by Faber.
2020 Publishes an eighth book of poems, Zonal, with
Faber.

xiii
 Abbreviations
Abbreviations and References

I have used the Selected Poems (London: Faber, 2012) where

possible, cited in the text as SP, followed by a page number.
In instances where poems from individual collections and
aphorisms from books of aphorisms are cited, the following
abbreviations are used:

GG God’s Gift to Women (London: Faber, 1997)

LL Landing Light (London: Faber, 2003)
NN Nil Nil (London: Faber, 1993)
O Orpheus (London: Faber, 2006)
R Rain (London: Faber, 2009)
TE The Eyes (London: Faber, 1999)
Z Zonal (London: Faber, 2020)
40S 40 Sonnets (London: Faber, 2015)

BE The Blind Eye: A Book of Late Advice (London: Faber, 2007)

TBS The Book of Shadows (London: Picador, 2004)

xv
 Prologue
Prologue

The Scottish author Don Paterson is widely regarded as the

leading British poet of his generation. Dynamic, interrogative,
and unsettling; crafted yet open-ended; fiercely smart, savage,
and stirring – from the get-go, his poetry has made for essential
reading. Between them, his eight collections of poetry to date –
Nil Nil (1993), God’s Gift to Women (1997), The Eyes (1999), Landing
Light (2003), Orpheus (2006), Rain (2009), 40 Sonnets (2015), and
Zonal (2020) – have won numerous literary prizes. He is the
only poet in the history of the T. S. Eliot Prize to win the award
twice, he has received the Forward Prize in every category (Best
Collection, Best First Collection, and Best Single Poem), and
in 2010 he was awarded the Queen’s Gold Medal for Poetry.
Accolades are not always reliable indicators of lasting literary
value, but to garner them in the quantity that Paterson’s poetry
has, from judging panels that extend beyond the British poetry
community to include authors, critics, readers, and cultural
commentators, confirms his poetry’s broad appeal and signif-
icance. As one critic has remarked: ‘Ask any reader of British
poetry to identify who is doing the best work right now, and
you should get short odds on the answer being Don Paterson.
In a community increasingly divided … there is something
reassuring about the consensus surrounding Paterson. He
emerged in the early 1990s as a key figure, and since then his
reputation has only grown.’1
As such, his critical stock is beginning to rise: a sixth
collection, Rain, commanded lengthy reviews in The New Yorker
and The Times Literary Supplement, and essays on his work have
appeared in anthologies including The Edinburgh Companion to
Contemporary Scottish Poetry (2009). In spite of this, no study
providing a clear overview of Paterson’s oeuvre has, until now,

1
 don paterson

existed. There have been book-length works on his British

contemporaries Carol Ann Duffy and Simon Armitage, and,
in 2014, Don Paterson: Contemporary Critical Essays provided a
collection of assorted essays on the poet’s work as poet, editor,
theorist, and cultural arbiter. But the need for a comprehensive
study focused primarily on Paterson’s poetry was yet to be
addressed. On one level, it was this need that led me to write
this book.
But Paterson’s poetry also reveals the unusual development
of a paradoxically shifting yet singular poetic sensibility. Edna
Longley has praised his work for ‘taking up the problematic
questions of selfhood where Louis MacNeice and Philip
Larkin left off’;2 A. S. Byatt has singled out the ‘life, energy,
verbal precision and inventiveness’ of his poems;3 while
Paul Muldoon describes him as ‘simply the most interesting
mid-career poet at work in the UK’.4 Muldoon’s statement in
particular hints at how, compared with that of his contem-
poraries, Paterson’s work has taken a striking trajectory.
Rather than looking to achieve originality through the typical
refinement of an idiosyncratic poetic voice, each of Paterson’s
published poetry collections to date represents a stylistic sea
change, what Sean O’Brien argues is the result of ‘a process
of attempted self-cancellation, a shedding of particulars in
pursuit of a final adaptability’. 5
Beneath the stylistic evidence of this process is the deeper
sense – evident in both Paterson’s poems and his critical prose
– of a growing poetic vision. This is best understood as rooted
in Paterson’s conviction that ‘a poet should be in service to the
poem, and while that’s the case, nothing exists except the poem;
the poem annihilates the poet’.6 It is this belief in the poem as
an art form that is self-contained and self-sustaining, creating
its own autonomous universe, which often seems to guide his
writing. In the unambiguously titled ‘Poetry’ (one of Paterson’s
‘versions’ after the Spanish of Antonio Machado, collected in his
third volume The Eyes) the speaker, in a moment of aphoristic
revelation, suggests that
the pure verse, when it finally comes, will sound
like a mountain spring, anonymous and serene.

2
 prologue

As if to dispel any doubts, the sonnet concludes:

Beneath the blue oblivious sky, the water
sings of nothing, not your name, not mine. (SP 71)

As will be illustrated throughout this study, beyond the marked

impact of Machado’s via negativa,7 which Paterson applauds as
evidence of a poet ‘obsessed with the suppression of his own
ego’ (TE 55), the influence of Jorge Luis Borges’s philosophical
parables and the eerily suspended aphorisms of Antonio Porchia
can be seen to bolster this belief in the poem as a self-governing
creation, whose success depends on detaching itself from
its human source. This aesthetic, defined as much by prose
writers and philosophical thinkers in the tradition as it is by
poetic forebears, is one where any final approach is precluded.
For Paterson, this is in the hope of allowing what might be
termed the most poetically true, rather than any diminishingly
intended, writing to emerge. ‘I do not know which of us has
written this page’ states Borges’s divided narrator,8 chiming with
Porchia’s maxim, ‘My “I” has gone farther and farther away
from me. Today it is my farthest “you”.’9 Alongside scrutiny
of the recurrent motifs and the stylistic and thematic features
of Paterson’s poetry, an understanding of this compositional
allegiance to the individual poem enables the most rewarding
readings of Paterson’s work.
However, Paterson’s poetic practice is not merely an updated
version of the Modernist aesthetic of T. S. Eliot and Ezra Pound.
This study will discuss how his work shares affinities with
Eliot’s influential statement in ‘Tradition and the Individual
Talent’, in which he claims that ‘the progress of an artist is a
continual self-sacrifice, a continual extinction of personality’.10
But I will also show how the poems move beyond Eliot’s willed
workshopping of the poetic self, uncovering the ways in which
the poems adhere too closely to direct address of the reader to
fit fully with Eliot’s sense of a ‘process of depersonalisation’, in
which the art of poetry ‘may be said to approach the condition
of science’.11
Paterson’s defining view of the successful poem as an
autonomous creation, however, remains central to his poetry.
With its playful assertion that there is ‘no I to speak of’, ‘A

3
 don paterson

Talking Book’ (LL 27) from Paterson’s fourth collection, Landing

Light, overtly reiterates the earlier mantra of ‘Poetry’, while one
of Paterson’s most repeated poetic claims maintains that ‘a poem
is a little machine for remembering itself’.12 Here, the suggestion
is that our memory of the poem is the poem itself, belonging
to the reader as much as its author. But the ‘impersonality’
of Paterson’s verse must always be considered alongside the
emotionally direct, witty, and entertaining address it often
strikes, as well as the sometimes confessional and consistent
nature of the personae that are variously deployed in his
writing.
What further separates Paterson from the Modernist aesthetic
are his specific misgivings about contemporary poetry, and his
unfashionable conviction that writing poems can still be a moral
project. Speaking about poetry’s current position as a ‘marginal
art form’, he has argued that ‘one of the legacies of Modernism
is that somehow we poets managed to make ourselves irrelevant
to a general readership that had instinctively come to poetry
for, and it sounds heretical to say this, moral education and
comfort’.13 In the aforementioned ‘A Talking Book’, ambition
may be veiled by the poem’s playful narrative tone, but the
declaration of poetry’s power to impart knowledge and real
feeling cannot be ignored. While the two may not appear
immediately connected, this concern about poets – and, by
extension, poems – losing the conviction and authority they
once possessed, ‘until they say so little that no one wants to
listen to them at all’,14 is closely bound with the belief that a
good poem should sing alone. Rarely one to mince his words,
Paterson is clearly opposed to a trend he identifies as exhibiting
a panicked ‘fear of boring the reader’, with every line having
‘three interesting things in it because the poet is terrified of
the reader falling asleep’.15 We need only look to his ars poetica,
particularly his major work of poetic theory The Poem: Lyric, Sign,
Metre (2018), to find the claim that ‘the good poem often seems
to arrive with an air of perfect inevitability’.16 Paterson takes
issue with ‘academic accounts’ of verse and what he sees as their
confusion between ‘intrinsic technique’ and ‘extrinsic effect’,
bolstering his view of good poetry as a spell-like, self-affirming
creation that, in entering the collective unconscious through
virtue of its memorability, has the power to alter the way we view

4
 prologue

the world.17 As Paterson claims, ‘poetry emerges naturally from

our speech as the immediate consequence of emotional urgency,
and our desire to communicate this urgency by organising …
those natural features of language that best carry it’.18
Alongside these concepts of what poetry is, and what purpose
it can (and perhaps should) be put, is what we might call
the philosophical hinterland to Paterson’s poems. A recurring
quotation in Paterson’s critical writings is Charles Simic’s remark
that poems are ‘translations from the silence’.19 For Paterson,
this silence is much more than the empty air into which the
notes of the Orphic lyre are played. It also embodies what his
poems frequently pose as the false divide between the ‘real’
and the symbolic, or more specifically ‘the human dream’ we
inhabit, an all-pervasive trap our consciousnesses fall prey to, in
which the labelling-gun of language, as Paterson has it, makes
‘everything appear purely in the guise of its human utility,
and held in place by its human name’ (TBS 13). Part of poetry’s
moral purpose, in Paterson’s view, often seems to be in acting
as a kind of temporary corrective to our perceptually restrictive
state of consciousness, serving to open the doors of perception
in making valuable additions to our stock of available reality.
In Paterson’s sixth collection of poems, Rain, the vignette ‘The
Error’ provides a précis of this existential dilemma:
As the bird is to the air
and the whale is to the sea
so man is to his dream.

His world is just the glare

of the world’s utility
returned by his eye-beam.

Each self-reflecting mind

is in this manner destined
to forget its element,

and this is why we find

however deep we listen
that the skies are silent. (SP 140)

Given that the metaphysical implications of ‘the human dream’

have come to dominate Paterson’s thinking, any reading of his

5
 don paterson

oeuvre must consider its profound influence on the poetry. But

it is also worth noting that such concerns are subtly present in a
number of his early poems, where shifts between everyday false
distinctions expose reductive thinking to the almost ungraspable
complexity of truths lurking beneath our perceptions. We might
often like to think of art as mirroring life, acting as mere copy
of reality’s truths, but Paterson’s poems are keen to show that,
at best, the ‘real’ can be seen as a fundamentally unknowable
realm beyond our blinkered human perceptions, and, at worst,
a flimsy construct shored up by the ignorance of uninterrogated
anthropocentrism.
Beyond the philosophical concerns that undoubtedly inform
the poems, however, any account of Paterson’s poetry, as Alan
Gillis notes, ‘will be incomplete if it does not allow for his
vim and unpredictable energy, his fresh-air inventiveness and
wit’.20 Nor will any critical engagement succeed if it overlooks
the connected verisimilitude of his work, borne of a talent for
drawing the mythical and spiritual from out of the quotidian – a
feature that often lends the poems their surface effervescence.
Paterson’s poems are as much engaged with the abstract,
philosophical, and hallucinatory as they are with the life-as-
lived world of sport, sex, drink, music, class politics, and, in his
later writing, fatherhood, middle age, friendship, grief, and loss.
In fact, their power often lies in recognising that distinctions
between ordinariness and otherness swiftly collapse under
interrogative lyric enquiry.
The shifting yet cohesive nature of Paterson’s verse requires
a reader to recognise its dualities. These include – though as
we shall see, are by no means confined to – an individual,
sometimes deceptively autobiographical poetic voice as played
against conflicting personae, unreliable narrators, and a recurrent
obsession with the instability and unknowability of the self; an
allegiance to the lyric tradition, forms, and the musical craft of
poetry as challenged by frequent stylistic fractures, contorted
sequences, and the foregrounding of postmodern play; and a
strikingly modern, philosophical, often amused and sceptical
engagement with the world, while also maintaining a partly
religious sense of wonder in its existential concerns. These are
expressed in tones that are by turns direct, colloquial, eloquent,
playful, and profoundly philosophical. Allowing for the free

6
 prologue

play of these competing features will, I hope, assist readers in

the fullest appreciation of Paterson’s poems.
Paterson’s aesthetic might be best understood as one
dominated by seeming paradox and contradiction. Here is a
poet fundamentally concerned with ‘the age-old task of making
the normal and habitual appear newly strange’.21 One could pick
almost any poem from his oeuvre and find that the surreal and
the mystical are never far removed from the rooted detail of
the quotidian. In this way, paradox and contradiction supply
the intellectual means by which Paterson addresses the core
thematic concern of his work: the divide between our routine
encounters with the world, and the sense that the complex nature
of reality lies beyond the perceptually restricted state of human
consciousness. As Sean O’Brien has written, ‘Paterson’s poems
reveal a determination to use poetry as a kind of thinking,
rather than be the passive prisoner of period and style and
received ideas.’22 In this sense, his work bears out the concept
of defamiliarisation, proposed by the Russian formalist Victor
Shklovsky in his essay ‘Art as Technique’:
The purpose of art is to impart the sensation of things as they are
perceived and not as they are known. The technique of art is to
make objects ‘unfamiliar’, to make forms difficult, to increase the
difficulty and length of perception because the process of perception
is an aesthetic end in itself and must be prolonged. Art is a way of
experiencing the artfulness of an object: the object is not important.23

The key stylistic features of Paterson’s poetry – the deft use of

quotidian detail, the idiomatic assurance of direct address to the
reader, and the increased anonymity of poetic voice catalysed
by experimental use of personae – can all be seen as facilitators
to the interrogative philosophical thinking and imaginative
transformation that the poems insist upon. Though a poet’s
theoretical pronouncements and their actual poetic practice do
not map precisely onto one another, it is revealing that Paterson
argues for poetry’s transformative responsibility in much of his
ars poetica. A notable example is in ‘The Dark Art of Poetry’,
his T. S. Eliot lecture of 2004. Having criticised the ‘populist’
strand of mainstream poetry that trades in ‘recognition comedy’
(which, according to Paterson, demonstrates ‘no need either
for originality or epiphany’, merely portraying things in the

7
 don paterson

habitual manner to which we are accustomed to perceiving

them), as well as avant-garde tendencies that he diagnoses as
‘so desperate for transcendence they see it everywhere’, Paterson
expounds on what he views to be those ‘risks’ taken by the best
poems:
Risk, of the sort that makes readers feel genuinely uncomfortable,
excited, open to suggestion, vulnerable to reprogramming, complicit
in the creative business of their transformation – is quite different.
Real danger flirts with the things we most dread as poets. Perhaps
the biggest risk of all is that of being largely understood and then
found to be talking a pile of garbage. But risk is also writing with
real feeling, as Frost did, while somehow avoiding sentimentality;
simplicity, as Cavafy did, and somehow avoiding artlessness; daring
to be prophetic, as Rilke did, and miraculously avoiding preten-
tiousness; writing with real originality, as Dickinson did, while
somehow avoiding cliché … The narrowest of these paths, though,
the poets’ beautiful tightrope-walk, is the one between sense and
mystery – to make one, while revealing the other.24

This belief that the most rewarding balance a poem can strike is
one between sense and mystery is a central feature of Paterson’s
poetry. Indeed, at about the time of this T. S. Eliot lecture,
Paterson briefly occupied a central position within an ongoing
controversy in contemporary British poetry. In suggesting that
the so-called ‘mainstream’ (a term with ‘vanilla overtones’
that might nevertheless usefully describe lyric poets who
seek to intelligently engage ‘a general – i.e., non-practising
and non-academic – readership’) occupied the middle ground
between the ‘infantilising’ populists on one side and ‘the
Postmoderns’ on the other (specifically those ‘experimental’
poets most readily associated with the Cambridge School in
the wake of J. H. Prynne), his position was seen as openly
antagonistic.25 Unsurprisingly, Paterson inspired especial ire
from the Cambridge School when he further proposed that
their collective project was ‘unethical’, namely for its deliberate
use of obfuscating language ‘likely to confound the reader’. In
mocking fashion, Paterson went on to conclude that such poets
‘probably do deserve to inherit the earth, being the first literary
movement to have conceived the masterstroke of eliminating the
reader entirely’.26

8
 prologue

Though Paterson has since taken a much more placative

position, with such tribalism in contemporary British poetry
having significantly waned, his specific sense of poetry’s
clarifying moral project remains. As we shall see in close
readings of the work, Paterson’s arsenal of poetic techniques
is deployed as a means of interrogating received ideas and
assumptions, though he seeks to achieve this through a poetry
of plain sense, altering the reader’s perceptions through
exposing the intrinsic otherness of the apparently ordinary.
This is not to suggest that Paterson’s poetry, in John Keats’s
rightly disparaging sense, ‘has a palpable design upon us’.27 Not
only would this be to ignore the unforced manner in which
his poems frequently destabilise and transform their quotidian
settings, it would also discount the autonomous qualities of his
poems. As Paterson himself has stated: ‘As soon as you start
thinking about the audience, if you start second guessing what
the audience might like, then you’re lost; all you should ever
be thinking about is the poem.’28 Rather, in Paterson’s poems
‘the structure is as important as the fracture; one cannot exist
without the other’.29 One way in which this can be understood
is how the poems’ increasing clarity of syntax and pared-back
diction deliver the ‘structure’ of plain sense so as to enable the
subtle ‘fracture’ of their subject matter. As O’Brien states: ‘At the
same time as Paterson’s own work undertakes an increasingly
strict rationing of “personality”, his metaphysical cast of mind
and imagination leads to a much firmer assertion that poetry
is a mode of knowledge than perhaps we are accustomed to.’30
Reading Paterson’s work, as with that of many of our best
poets, you become especially aware that unexpected truths
can often be revealed in poetry through the dramatised
merging of quotidian ordinariness and supernatural otherness.
This approach is one that necessarily requires a degree of
exaggerative imaginativeness and invention. The imaginative
world, after all, has its own veracity: in seeking not to offer
absolute truths, but intuitive ones that can often seem truer
than the simple sense data or qualia we glean from the physical
world, poetry can be seen to distinguish itself from other forms
of intellectual enquiry. As Paterson has recommended: ‘Every
morning the writer should go to the window, look out and
remind himself of this fact: aside from his own species, not one

9
 don paterson

thing he sees – not one bird, tree or stone – has in its possession
the name he gives it’ (TBS 136). An allegiance to poetic truth,
as Paterson’s poetry evinces, is not then a persistent attempt
to ‘accurately’ describe, but rather a destabilisation of conven-
tional representations and an interrogation of received ideas
so as to deliver a transformative payoff, altering the reader’s
preconceived perceptions. In this way, poetry becomes a mode
of knowledge, a means of making greater sense of the world.
As already suggested, Paterson’s poetry to date has followed
a marked stylistic trajectory, while also maintaining a thematic
consistency. Revealing an abiding interest in their underpinning
thematic concern – the divide between our routine encounters
with the world, and the sense that the complex nature of
reality lies beyond the perceptually restricted state of human
consciousness – his poems’ explorations have deepened as
Paterson’s concept of poetry as a mode of knowledge has
come to the fore. Suffice to say for now, as cautious as these
explorations manifest themselves in his first volume, Nil Nil,
they lay the groundwork for Paterson’s later work, and its
increasing dedication to poetry as a mode of knowledge. As
Patrick Crotty noted of second collection God’s Gift to Women:
‘The high jinks about trains and the naming and fate of
defunct Dundee stations … like the volume’s general air of
knowing cleverness, could not quite hide the unusual scale and
seriousness of the poet’s agitation by “big” questions of religion
and sexuality.’31 With the consequent translation project of third
collection The Eyes, Paterson’s poetry can be seen to have granted
itself greater scope to explore these philosophical proclivities.
These translated ‘versions’ of the poems of Antonio Machado
capture, as Michael Wood has said, ‘a peculiar aptitude for
reflecting on poems while writing them, and for making the
poet not a forlorn artist or a suffering everyman, and not even,
essentially, a projection of the historical person of the poet, but
the agent of a lyrical intelligence’.32
Up to and including the catalytic Machado ‘versions’ of
The Eyes, there is a crystallising sense of Paterson’s poems
developing a philosophical model with which to examine their
subject matters. So it is in Landing Light (2003) that Paterson’s
concept of ‘the human dream’ first overtly appears, issued from
the anonymous voice of ‘A Talking Book’:

10
 prologue

By all means, turn the page or close the book.

But first, imagine how this world would look
were it not duly filtered, cropped and strained
into that pinhole camera you call a brain
by whose inverted dim imaginings
you presume to question it. So many things
are hidden from you. Luckily. Here’s one. (LL 30)

The poem’s ludic yet forceful argument runs parallel to the

philosophical observations apparent in several of Paterson’s
aphorisms. ‘We live in a human dream’, states Paterson in The
Book of Shadows, ‘being one in which everything appears purely
in the guise of its human utility, and held in place by its human
name. Names are small and sinister metaphors that restrict,
absolutely, the use of an object. Our eyes open to this madness
every morning; at night we dream within the dream’ (TBS 13).
With Orpheus, Paterson’s translated ‘versions’ of Rainer Maria
Rilke’s Die Sonette an Orpheus (1922), the concept of ‘the human
dream’ becomes the encompassing principle of the translation
project, foregrounding the philosophical questing and existential
musings at the sonnets’ cores: ‘But is that true?’ (O 13), ‘What
was real in that All?’ (O 38), ‘O, where are we now?’ (O 56).
The concept receives further explication in the accompanying
‘Afterword’, in which the potential fallout of such a halluci-
natory state is explored. ‘Eventually’, writes Paterson, ‘the dream
becomes so heavily constructed and all-pervasive that we begin
to mistake it for our element. We are then in danger of blithely or
accidentally destroying our real element and habitat, with which
we no longer feel any physical continuity’ (O 71).
The overall impression here – which, as we will discover, the
poems of Paterson’s sixth collection, Rain, most distinctly bear
out – is of an ontological attempt to utilise poetry as a means
of constructing a worldview. The poetry seeks to combine an
objective and godless scientific materialism with the mystery
accommodated by a more openly spiritual attitude. Just as Robert
Crawford has commented how Paterson’s poems can seem like
those of one who has ‘never forgiven his God for walking
out’,33 Sean O’Brien has noted that ‘Paterson fell away from
Pentecostalism while seeming to take with him an appetite for
totalizing depictions of human experience’.34 The development

11
 don paterson

of Paterson’s poetry towards this apparent attempt to uncover

an all-encompassing ontology is fascinating, precisely for the
way it combines empirical philosophy with spiritual receptivity.
This strongly recalls the theoretical writings of the French
Symbolist Stéphane Mallarmé, a clear influence on the poet:
‘we are merely empty forms of matter’, Mallarmé once claimed,
‘but we are indeed sublime in having invented God and our
soul’.35 The sense of an underpinning philosophy in Paterson’s
work holds interesting consequences, in the manner in which
it has increasingly shaped the poems’ intellectual handling
of recurrent subject matter – doubles and doubling, the self,
sexuality, death, love, and paternity, among others – but also
the way in which it is enacted through the stylistic strategies
of the poems.
In a review of Rain, Dan Chiasson notes the manner in which a
number of that book’s elegiac poems exhibit a ‘loss-consciousness’
that ‘changes the meaning of their formalism’.36 Alongside
discussion of Paterson’s use of quotidian detail, direct address
to the reader, and the adaptable use of poetic voice in several
key poems, this study will also explore how Paterson’s use of
form has become increasingly indispensable to the generation
of his poems’ metaphysical arguments. As such, it is my hope
that this volume will help readers both new to and already
familiar with Paterson’s poems, to appreciate the imaginative,
structural, and stylistic means by which they operate, offering
insights into the poems’ literary and theoretical forebears and
their philosophical hinterland along the way. In doing so, this
study will make the case for Paterson as a major lyric poet,
assessing how his poems achieve their memorability, emotional
and intellectual depths, and remarkable transformative power,
in their increasing allegiance to poetry as a mode of knowledge.

12
 1

For the Hell of It:

Nil Nil (1993)
For the Hell of It

Whether they intend it or not, the first poem of a poet’s first

collection will often be read as a statement of intent or ars poetica.
It is worthwhile beginning with a detailed discussion of ‘The
Ferryman’s Arms’, the opening poem in Nil Nil, not least because
it offers a pertinent illustration of some of the main features of
Paterson’s early work. Poet-critic Alan Gillis has summarised
these as threefold: the poem’s use of ‘grounded context, detail
and atmosphere’ to conjure a quotidian setting that is, in turn,
‘pierced through’ so as to ‘explore underlying black-and-white
binaries’;1 its ‘open-ended ambiguity that ensures there can
be no clear-cut moral distinction’ between the realms of the
‘real’ and the symbolic; and its ‘revelation of a bifurcation’,
particularly within the notion of the self.2 ‘The Ferryman’s
Arms’ begins with an everyday scene, in which the speaker,
waiting to catch a boat, decides to pass the time with recreation:
About to sit down with my half-pint of Guinness
I was magnetized by a remote phosphorescence
and drawn, like a moth, to the darkened back room
where a pool-table hummed to itself in the corner.
With ten minutes to kill and the whole place deserted
I took myself on for the hell of it. Slotting
a coin in the tongue, I looked round for a cue –
while I stood with my back turned, the balls were deposited
with an abrupt intestinal rumble; a striplight
batted awake in its dusty green cowl. (SP 3)

At first glance, these lines depict an ordinary setting, but a

closer read reveals how the poem is already haunted by a

13
 don paterson

sense of menacing otherness. Note the pool-table that ‘hummed

to itself’ and the coin slotted into its tongue, suggesting the
ancient Greek custom of placing the ferryman Charon’s fee in
the mouths of the deceased, payment for the journey across
the River Styx, from the land of the living to the land of the
dead. We are reminded of Louis MacNeice’s ‘Charon’, a poem
in which a journey that similarly recalls Dante’s Inferno finds a
ferryman transformed: ‘He looked at us coldly / And his eyes
were dead and his hands on the oar / Were black with obols’.3
Consequently the speaker, and by extension the reader, senses
that they are about to embark on such a voyage, but ‘The
Ferryman’s Arms’ more than gestures towards the emergence of
this shadowy symbolic realm from within its everyday setting.
For one, the speaker talks of having ‘ten minutes to kill’ when,
as William Matthews once memorably noted, it is time that kills
us.4 Moreover, like the pool table, the mundane striplight is seen
to have ‘batted awake’ and appears to be alive. This is more
disturbing, since its ‘dusty green cowl’ conjures the symbolic
living embodiment of death, the Grim Reaper, now staring
down at the poem’s speaker and the game about to commence.
In the middle of these two paradoxes – the speaker ‘killing’ time
that is in fact killing him, and the poem’s sense that death has
come to life – comes the poem’s key line, ‘I took myself on for the
hell of it’ (SP 3). Here is another paradox: the colloquial term ‘for
the hell of it’ might mean to do something for no reason other
than fun or pleasure, but the phrase takes on a more pertinently
sinister resonance, given the seemingly literal Hell the speaker
appears to be about to experience.
Paradox and contradiction can be seen to supply the intellectual
means by which Paterson often addresses the underpinning
thematic concern of his work: the divide between our routine
encounters with the world, and the sense that the complex
nature of reality lies beyond the perceptually restricted state of
human consciousness. With this in mind, the aforementioned
paradoxes in ‘The Ferryman’s Arms’ suggest more than just
the ‘revelation of a bifurcation, a split between realms’.5 In his
game of pool against himself, the speaker goes on to ‘make an
immaculate clearance’, telling how ‘the black / did the vanishing
trick while the white stopped / before gently rolling back as
if nothing had happened’ (SP 3). Here, the ordinary detail of

14
 for the hell of it

the black-and-white pool balls makes them seem separate and

distinct. Yet, by the end of the poem, the speaker boards the
ferry and leaves the losing version of himself at the table, ‘stuck
in his tent of light’.
On the one hand, the black ball can be seen to represent
the victorious speaker, ‘vanishing’ aboard a boat soon to travel
across Styx-like waters that are ‘as black as my stout’, while
similarly the white ball represents the losing doppelgänger,
who fails to comprehend that the poem’s everyday setting is
already ‘a kind of death-realm’.6 But, on the other, in spite of
its haunting imagery, the world the poem conjures remains
rooted in the quotidian, emphasising the fact that winner and
loser are still fundamentally one and the same. Black and
white, darkness and light, suffering and pleasure, even death
and life – the poem suggests that such oppositions not only
overlap and blur with one another, but are essentially identical.
To understand the complex nature of the human condition,
the poem suggests, we must recognise the monistic state of
the universe, a ‘oneness’ that language’s attempts to divide
and compartmentalise, and the subsequent habitual reality we
inhabit, have obscured from view. The resulting implication is
that we must also acknowledge the constructed and shifting
nature of the self. ‘Perhaps, ultimately’, Paterson has argued,
‘the price of the imaginative life is the knowledge that there is
no locus, no centre to which we can hold’ (TBS 151). As such,
‘The Ferryman’s Arms’ recalls ‘The Other’ by Edward Thomas,
a poem that also addresses a doppelgänger and the sense of a
divided, incoherent identity, the understanding of which gives
rise to the fruitless pursuit of a ‘true’ or ideal self. As the speaker
in ‘The Other’ confesses: ‘I travelled fast, in hopes I should /
Outrun that other. What to do / When caught, I planned not. I
pursued / To prove the likeness, and, if true, / To watch until
myself I knew.’7
‘The Ferryman’s Arms’ may not offer an answer to Thomas’s
conundrum, but it does supply a kind of coping strategy in its
final twist. If we are to make sense of the difficult knowledge
that the imaginative life can bring, specifically its manifestation
in the writing and close reading of poems, this ‘thought has
to be dismissed, and dismissed again’ (TBS 151). To an extent,
speaker and reader must act like the white ball on the pool

15
 don paterson

table, ‘as if nothing had happened’, unless, like the ‘foaming

lip’ of waves on the coast, we want to find ourselves ‘trying,
with a nutter’s persistence, to read / and re-read the shoreline’.
The speaker may take himself on ‘for the hell of it’, dividing
black-and-white binaries so as to deconstruct both his unified
sense of self and the everyday world around him, but he also
returns to a singular concept of himself when boarding the boat,
in order to make sense of the experience. ‘I got aboard early, /
remembering the ferry would leave on the hour / even for only
my losing opponent’, states the poet, ‘but I left him there, stuck
in his tent of light’.
In this manner, the opening poem of Paterson’s first collection
reveals how his poetry’s subtle cultivation of paradox, drawn
from the everyday details of the quotidian, enables a perceptual
transformation. But equally, it intuits the necessity of partly
re-subscribing to the habitual reality from which the poem allows
a brief departure. Hence Paterson’s commitment throughout
Nil Nil to the solid foundations of the everyday. The poem’s
suggestion is that, having gleaned this knowledge, we can
return to our ordinary lives wiser and, in a sense familiar from
the painfully self-aware poetry of Philip Larkin, less deceived.
Like Larkin, Paterson’s work is concerned with the complex
truths that underpin seemingly mundane interactions between
individual and world, but his poetics insists on a more enquiring
and metaphysical engagement with the fundamental nature of
the reality we inhabit. ‘The Ferryman’s Arms’ is therefore not
only remarkable for its intense scrutiny of everyday life, enabling
poet and reader to reassess uninterrogated assumptions and
preconceptions. It also hints at the beginnings of Paterson’s
broader ontological attempt to utilise poetry as a means of
developing a worldview.
Paterson’s estrangement of the everyday in the poems of Nil
Nil can serve to defamiliarise and so allow for an interrogation
of unexamined preconceptions and perspectives, but also to
destabilise notions of a unified sense of self. W. B. Yeats once
claimed that ‘we make out of the quarrel with others, rhetoric,
but of the quarrel with ourselves, poetry’, to which a number of
Paterson’s poems offer an unusually precise illustration.8 Several
feature speakers who are either morbidly aware of a perceived
Cartesian divide between the life of the mind and the life of the

16
 for the hell of it

flesh, or else of the conflicting, sometimes incompatible facets

of their mutable identities.
The former concern is addressed in ‘Morning Prayer’,
Paterson’s reworking of ‘Oraison du soir’ (‘Evening Prayer’),
by Arthur Rimbaud. Rimbaud’s poetry espouses the literary
and philosophical aesthetic of those nineteenth-century poets
in the lineage of Charles Baudelaire, poets whose collective
influence exerts a notable effect on Paterson’s early poetry. It is
therefore not surprising to find a ‘version’ of Rimbaud in Nil
Nil. As the French-language poet Jean Moréas broadly claimed
for the Symbolist movement in The Symbolist Manifesto: ‘in this
art, scenes from nature, human activities, and all other real
world phenomena will not be described for their own sake; here,
they are perceptible surfaces created to represent their esoteric
affinities with the primordial ideals’.9 With their commitment
to exposing the complex, elemental otherness lurking within
the apparently ordinary, the poems of Nil Nil share obvious
affinities with this Symbolist poetics. Yet, in loosely translating
Rimbaud, Paterson pushes his poem into surprising territory.
‘Morning Prayer’ replaces the intoxicated night café setting
of the original with the hungover morning-after. We find the
speaker staring at his reflection:
I spend my life sitting, like an angel at the barber’s,
with a mug in one hand, fag in the other,
my froth-slabbered face in the gantry mirror
while the smoke towels me down, warm and white. (SP 4)

Whereas the speaker in ‘The Ferryman’s Arms’ is divided, here

he seems reassuringly cohesive. But any comfortable, unified
sense of self is short-lived. The optimistic if absurd simile in
the speaker’s description of himself as ‘an angel at the barber’s’
quickly gives way to the cigarette and morning drink of tea
or coffee in either hand, already at odds with one another. As
a stimulant, the latter suggests an attempt to revive a hazy
and sluggish mindset, but the former provides the opposite, a
smokescreen that allows a level of comfort, ‘warm and white’,
in momentarily preventing a clear-eyed analysis of the situation.
When the smoke clears, the speaker cannot help but recognise
how his bodily impulses tell a truth at odds with his ideal sense
of self. He recalls ‘old dreams’ that barely ‘hold their heat’ now

17
 don paterson

his heart ‘saps itself’ and ‘stews in its own juice’; he confesses
to drinking to excess the night before so as to ‘stomach’ his
worst thoughts; and, by the end of the poem, he seems to resent
being trapped in what feels like an alien body, only stirring
into life at ‘the most bitter necessities’ (SP 4). If the self can
only remain active and practical in maintaining a rootedness
to a specific body, as Timothy Donnelly notes, Paterson’s poem
‘confronts the possibility that … embodiedness itself becomes, at
times, indistinguishable from a custodianship to the mechanical
exigencies of a material contraption’.10
Yet the most surprising aspect of the poem is the way in
which it frames this knowledge. In Rimbaud’s original, it is the
speaker’s night-time drunkenness that facilitates his maudlin
self-analysis; however true his observations, there is the sense
that he will sober up, and so return to an integrated sense of
self. In Paterson’s poem, however, the same thoughts occur
in the context of the morning after drinking. There may be a
residual level of intoxication, but it appears that the more the
speaker sobers, the more his sense of an irrevocable divide
between mind and body takes hold. Unlike Rimbaud’s original,
which articulates an intoxicated hopelessness, the speaker in
‘Morning Prayer’ returns to sobriety and supposed normality
with these thoughts, lending them the force of a dawning
epiphany. However tentatively and obliquely, the poem again
marks the beginnings of Paterson’s sense of the truth-seeking
and transformative possibilities of poetry.
While ‘Morning Prayer’ exhibits a fascinated disgust with the
divide between mind and body, another poem in Nil Nil, ‘An
Elliptical Stylus’, addresses the mutability of personal identity,
though the effect is similarly one of perceptual transformation.
Principally, the poem is a barbed critique of rigid conceptions
of social class; it seems to argue that these views remain
residually present in late twentieth-century British society,
despite an ostensibly increased level of social mobility. Such
is the complexity of the poem’s repeated volte-face and tonal
variance, however, it has elicited an array of critical responses.
‘A grabbing of the individual reader by the collar’;11 ‘an attack on
middle England’s complacency’;12 a poem that ‘gives us a voice
which arrestingly declaims its otherness’13 while also declaring
‘chips on shoulders’:14 these are just a handful of reactions to ‘An

18
 for the hell of it

Elliptical Stylus’. All of these critics agree on the poem’s central

theme: as Adam Thorpe summarises, the piece is ostensibly a
‘sad little story about the speaker’s Scottish working-class father
being mocked by a salesman’.15 But there is much more to ‘An
Elliptical Stylus’ than a tale of masculine pride and posturing.
The initial setting in ‘An Elliptical Stylus’ is the speaker’s
uncle’s house, where father and speaker-son are given a proud
demonstration of the eponymous stylus, a superior needle that
enhances the sound quality of a vinyl record player. The poem
sets up a conventional dynamic: while the speaker’s father
is portrayed as voicing his approval with a stereotypically
working-class, Scots-inflected tone (‘“Aye, yer elliptical stylus –
/ fairly brings out a’ the wee details”’), the speaker recalls the
experience with atmospheric, almost florid, descriptive finesse:
Balanced at a fraction of an ounce
the fat cartridge sank down like a feather;
music billowed into three dimensions
as if we could have walked between the players. (SP 10)

The immediate precursor here is Seamus Heaney’s ‘Digging’,

the opening poem of his debut collection, Death of a Naturalist
(1966). Both poems find the articulate poet-son remembering
his non-literary father in an attempt to find common ground
and continuity between their generational, educational, and
vocational differences. The difference between the poems,
however, is that where the narrator of ‘Digging’, despite his
admiration, finds he’s ‘no spade to follow men’ like his labouring
father, resolving instead to ‘dig’ with his pen, Paterson’s poem
sees father and poet-son sharing in an artistic experience.16
As Sarah Broom notes: ‘the father hears the quality of sound
produced by the elliptical stylus … and wants to buy one for
“our ancient, beat-up Phillips turntable”’.17 The implication is
that, rather than the distant and anonymous father figure in
Heaney’s ‘Digging’, present only as ‘a clean rasping sound’,18
the poet’s father in ‘An Elliptical Stylus’ is of a certain sophis-
tication, someone who can ‘appreciate the difference’. Instead
of Heaney’s fiercely individual image of the ‘squat pen’, then,
which remains a symbol of his solitary artistic seriousness in
spite of attempts to metaphorically connect that object to his
father’s spade, Paterson’s deployment of the stylus, of ‘music

19
 don paterson

billowing into three dimensions’, evinces a collective aesthetic

appreciation. It suggests that the poem’s overt focus will not
be a class divide between father and son, but the broader class
anxieties that the speaker not only recalls from childhood, but
also finds apparent in his later adult life.
The poem’s second stanza sees father and son arrive at the
shop. Met with condescension from the owner given the obvious
age of their record player, the poet-narrator recalls how ‘we had
the guy in stitches: “You can’t … / er … you’ll have to upgrade
your equipment.”’ The stanza’s pathos is palpable: the speaker
notes how the middle-class owner ‘sent us from the shop’,
implying a clear social hierarchy, while the box of needles they
end up with are ‘thick as carpet-tacks, / the only sort they made
to fit our model’ (SP 10). This descriptiveness sets the scene and
supplies the emotional resonance that draws the reader into
the poem. The part-jokey, part-dejected tone also makes the
sudden, disorienting turn that follows – a characteristic feature
of Paterson’s writing – all the more effective and jolting.
This third stanza sees the poet-narrator invite the reader to
‘eavesdrop’ on the poem he instead might be writing, were he
the shop owner’s son. The parody is sharply executed:
(Supposing I’d been his son: let’s eavesdrop
on ‘Fidelities’, the poem I’m writing now:
The day my father died, he showed me how
he’d prime the deck for optimum performance:
it’s that lesson I recall – how he’d refine
the arm’s weight, to leave the stylus balanced
somewhere between ellipsis and precision,
as I gently lower the sharp nib to the line
and wait for it to pick up the vibration
till it moves across the page, like a cardiograph … ) (SP 10)

Several critics have explored this ‘striking … parenthetical

stanza’,19 finding in its delicate and controlled nostalgia
a clear send-up of the perceived qualities of middle-class
verse: ‘restraint, precision, clarity, balance’.20 There is also
a disruption of preconceptions, as the poet-speaker, having
previously asserted his working-class credentials, subverts them
(and any easy judgements) in a falsely empathetic, barbed,
yet accomplished description of middle-class inheritance. The

20
 for the hell of it

title of this ‘alternative’ poem is immediately telling. In its

witty punning on the superior quality of sound the elliptical
stylus produces, ‘Fidelities’ not only gestures towards that which
father and son have been denied, but also serves to mock
naïve notions of poetry as a means of capturing ‘true’ feeling
and meaning through apparently faithful representations of a
reified conception of actuality. The poem’s delicious lampoon
of such an approach – ‘lowering the sharp nib to the line’,
as if the stylus (but also the poet’s pen) might ‘pick up the
vibration’ of authentic feeling ‘till it moves across the page, like
a cardiograph’ – is thus a subtle refusal of documentary truth,
in favour of what might be termed poetic truth. As outlined,
rather than a persistent attempt to ‘accurately’ describe, in these
terms, Paterson sees poetry as characterised by its interrogation
of conventional representations and ideas, so as to deliver a
transformative payoff that alters our preconceptions.
Given this intricate web of ideas lurking behind the poem’s
surface play, it is worth considering the way in which the
poem’s parenthetical stanza not only posits but actually creates
a parallel universe, reminiscent of those in a number of the
short stories of Jorge Luis Borges. After all, ‘Fidelities’, like
‘An Elliptical Stylus’, is pointedly introduced as ‘the poem I’m
writing now’. In interview, Paterson has commented how ‘Borges
is just as big an influence, possibly more of an influence, than
any poet’ on his work and, indeed, ‘An Elliptical Stylus’ is one
of several poems in Nil Nil that combines the quotidian with a
labyrinthine Borgesian conceit to startling effect.21 The conceit
recalls the divided self of ‘Borges and I’, in which the narrator
becomes aware of the disorienting dual life he leads as both
author and individual. In Borges’s story, a first-person voice
narrates, but its identity is divided, between one that inhabits
the suspended medium of language, and another that lives an
everyday life, unavoidably detached from the former’s literary
creations. Yet, as the story implies, while author and individual
may not be identical, neither are they, as facets of the one person,
fully separate or distinct. As the narrator states, it is impossible
to know ‘which of us has written this page’.22
In this sense, ‘An Elliptical Stylus’ can be seen to interrogate
the distinction between the real and the symbolic, or, more
specifically, to shake us from ‘the human dream’. This is

21
 don paterson

Paterson’s Heideggerian coinage for what he views as the

perceptually limited human condition, whereby the labelling-
gun of language makes ‘everything appear purely in the guise
of its human utility, and held in place by its human name’
(TBS 13). As we will see, the philosophical implications of ‘the
human dream’ come to dominate Paterson’s later work. But it
is also worth noting that a fascination with the deceptions of
routinely perceived reality are present in an early poem such
as ‘An Elliptical Stylus’. In reading the parenthetical excerpt
from ‘Fidelities’ less as an imaginary flight of fancy, and more
as a poem by another poet who, inhabiting a possible parallel
universe, is selfsame to the speaker yet was born the son of
a middle-class shop owner, its narrative purpose within the
context and complex argument of ‘An Elliptical Stylus’ becomes
much clearer. But first, let us return to the poem’s narrative.
The fourth and final stanza returns to deflated son and father,
driving home from the shop ‘slowly, as if we had a puncture’,
with ‘my Dad trying not to blink, and that man’s laugh / stuck
in my head’ (SP 11). This, too, we are told, is where ‘the story
sticks’, and where the poem’s argument comes to the fore. The
loose rhyme scheme and forceful rising metre underline the
poet-narrator’s refusal of
any attempt to cauterize this fable
with something axiomatic on the nature
of articulacy and inheritance,
since he can well afford to make his own
excuses, you your own interpretation.
But if you still insist on resonance –
I’d swing for him, and every other cunt
happy to let my father know his station,
which probably includes yourself. To be blunt. (SP 11)

Having carefully developed an emotive familial recollection

(now crucially labelled a ‘fable’, as if to suggest its possible,
though nonetheless purposeful, artifice) it seems odd that the
poem should deny – or at least seem to want to deny – the reader
a pithy, summarising conclusion. As one critic has questioned:
‘What else is such a poem for, if not “something axiomatic on
the nature / of articulacy and inheritance”?’23 Paterson’s own
thoughts go some way towards illuminating the situation:

22
 for the hell of it

The poem … was intended as a deliberate inversion of the current

practice of inviting the audience to ‘share’ the experience; I’m terrified
some well-heeled wee bugger will come up to me afterwards and
tell me how much he enjoyed it. I think there are some grudges
which need to be renewed annually; poetry is a good way of making
palatable things that should remain indigestible, making certain
kinds of crime easier for both the perpetrator and the victim to live
with. There are a lot of sub-Tony Harrison types about who see their
poetry as lending dignity to the working-class experience … when
what they’re really dealing with is their own embarrassment with
their social origins, and their awkwardness in using the language of
their superiors. It’s depressing to see the working-classes patronise
themselves in this way.24

This correlates with a somewhat cautious reading of the poem’s

‘aesthetic poise’ as ‘a retrospective “swing” for the salesman’.25
The final reversion to a stereotypically working-class response
of aggression is viewed to be the result of a dissatisfaction with
the poem’s earlier appropriation of measured, stereotypically
middle-class poetic technique. Apparently, this leaves the poem
on the defensive and with a desire to ‘out-articulate you, the
reader, and then perhaps swing for you anyway’.26 But the most
illuminating reading of the poem must surely pay attention to
the poem’s central paradox. In both its refusal and acceptance
to offer the reader a conclusive moral, it adopts a stance that is
both in line with, and a volte-face of, that ‘deliberate inversion …
of inviting the audience to “share” the experience’.
The poem’s defining feature is the manner in which it
continually remains one step ahead of the reader. It achieves
this in a typically Patersonian estrangement of everyday detail,
but also with its insistence on direct address to the reader, and
its use of personae. To begin with, the reader is comfortably
ensconced within the poem’s commonplace mise en scène
and class dynamic. But in convincingly adopting the persona
of a stereotypically middle-class poet, the poem conjures its
parenthetical parallel world, destabilising the emotive anecdote
that precedes it. The poem then withholds the fable’s expected
précis, before the poet-speaker threatens to ‘swing’ for us,
employing a direct address that insists on a more attentive,
active, and clear-eyed engagement with the poem. The poem
becomes a gauntlet, thrown down to any reader who thinks of

23
 don paterson

poetry, as Paterson has put it in a lecture on the art form, as

‘a kind of straight-faced recognition comedy’, having ‘no need
either for originality or epiphany’.27 In this way, the everyday
yet unstable world of ‘An Elliptical Stylus’ refuses to reflect the
comfortable perceptions and reductive preconceptions a reader
may bring to it.
As readers, of course, we do continue to make instinctive
stereotypical class-bound judgements of the characters the poem
depicts. This is partly encouraged and directed by the poem
itself: note its crafted and crafty use of language, but also
its foregrounding of our anticipated judgements, and surface
refusal to deliver the tale’s expected neat summary. Yet, while
the poem does not make plain its truths on ‘the nature of
articulacy and inheritance’, they can be found within the poem,
if the reader is willing to look for them. Aggressive it may be,
but the ‘resonance’ provided in the poem’s closing lines can
be viewed as less a recourse to stereotypical working-class
inarticulacy, and more an imperative to think interrogatively
about what a poem depicts and suggests. The poet-speaker
may appear willing to espouse a comfortable stereotype for the
reader who refuses to see beyond simplifying class boundaries,
but the implication is that such a reader misses the poem’s
purpose, if that is what they ‘insist’. ‘An Elliptical Stylus’
therefore demands an understanding: neither the poem, nor
its supposed moral or message, can be paraphrased, precisely
because its transformative effect only functions when the reader
is fully engaged in the demanding act of reading and thinking.
Alongside Nil Nil’s explorations of the constructed and
mutable nature of the self, many of the book’s poems reveal a
recurrent fascination with the indistinct divide between reality
and its copy. In ‘The Ferryman’s Arms’, ‘Morning Prayer’, and
‘An Elliptical Stylus’ the concept of identity as unwavering,
unified, and stable is put under the interrogative pressure of the
poem’s language to reveal it as an ungraspable, variable, and
often externally inscribed construct. Similarly, a poem such as
‘Next to Nothing’ departs from a conventional understanding of
reality and its copy – wherein the latter is a faithful represen-
tation of the former, akin to the classical concept of artistic
mimesis – to reveal that the real and the imaginary are in fact
much more intimately intertwined.

24
 for the hell of it

‘Next to Nothing’ is a vignette that depicts a deserted railway

station. It opens with a disturbing image in this uncanny
setting, suggesting that time has come to a standstill: ‘The
platform clock stuck on the golden section: / ten to three.
A frozen sun’ (NN 34). This mention of the golden section
seems particularly significant. As a mysterious ratio that has
fascinated philosophers, mathematicians, scientists, and artists
since Euclid’s geometrical treatise Elements, it gestures towards
the often strange laws that appear to govern the universe and so,
again, to Paterson’s poetry’s insistence on defamiliarising and
making renewed sense of the world. This is literally echoed in
the poem’s description of ‘the dead / acoustic of a small county’,
providing further quotidian detail, while also paradoxically
reinforcing the sense that the place the poem depicts is a
non-place, bolstered by the thumping adjectival ‘dead’ at the
end of the line. As such, absence both indicates and becomes a
new model of presence within the poem. A distant, unseen dog
is reduced to its bark, which in turn is conjured as ‘a short tear
in the sky, above the wood’, while the ‘ghost of a lame porter /
stabs a brush along the ground, then vanishes’ (NN 34). Despite
the poem’s inversion of a traditional presence/absence hierarchy,
however, at this point the sense of grounded reality remains.
The poem’s verisimilitude may be fraught with strangeness, but
it is rooted within the realms of the typical and unremarkable.
It is only when the scene’s apparent adherence to the balancing
ratio of the golden section is broken that the poem enacts its
full transformation.
The poem’s underlying argument appears to be in dialogue
with disparities in accounts of this puzzling ratio. Whereas
the German psychologist Adolf Zeising has suggested that the
golden section represents a universal law ‘in which is contained
the ground-principle of all formative striving for beauty and
completeness in the realms of both nature and art, and which
permeates … all structures, forms and proportions’,28 George
Markowsky has argued that ‘much of what is presented about
the section in art, architecture, literature, and aesthetics is false
or seriously misleading’.29 In Paterson’s ‘Next to Nothing’, the
specific suggestion is that when the world is seen to depart from
such a fundamentally – and therefore narrowly – human model
of rationalising phenomena, a glimpse of the chaos lurking

25
 don paterson

beneath our constricted perceptions is offered. Consequently,

the apparent deterioration of all things towards nothingness,
given the entropic laws that govern the matter of the universe,
begins to occur.30 ‘The clock puts on a minute’ and ‘tips the
balance’, as the previously ‘fixed stars’ in the poem ‘fall as
dust’ and (just as disturbingly, albeit less galactically) ‘birdsong
thaws in the air’ (NN 34). The poem has segued from a
vaguely strange verisimilitude to a jolting unreality in tellingly
effortless manner. It is telling because this sense of unreality
has stemmed from grounded reality itself: the quotidian setting
of a railway station that, while quietly uncanny from the outset,
is otherwise ordinary.
At this point, the poem’s final line complicates things further,
as across the station announcement system ‘the recorded voice
addresses its own echo’. This completes the deconstruction of
a presence/absence hierarchy, and in turn the hierarchy of the
real and its unreal copy. The recorded voice simultaneously
gestures towards the absence of its origin while also asserting
its presence and consequent independence from any origin,
addressing itself in a kind of self-guaranteeing feedback loop. In
rendering any simplistic concept of reality untenable, reality and
unreality blur in ‘Next to Nothing’ to the extent that everything
begins to feel unreal. This is the fullest sense of the poem’s title.
The deserted railway station is demonstrably ‘next to nothing’,
but so too is everything else, since our modern perspectives on
all landscapes are prone to the effects of hyperreal simulation.
As the aphorist Antonio Porchia, mentioned in the prologue as
a decisive influence on Paterson’s poetry, reflects: ‘Sometimes I
think that everything I see does not exist. Because everything
I see is what I saw. And everything that I saw does not exist.’31
In a paradoxical yet clarifying sense that has ramifications
throughout the rest of Paterson’s oeuvre, ‘Next to Nothing’
uncovers how nothingness can come to engulf everything that
the human mind perceives, and how everything is consequently
revealed to be nothing in terms of how it is perceived. To quote
Porchia again: ‘When I believe that the stone is stone and the
cloud cloud, I am in a state of unconsciousness.’32
‘Next to Nothing’s surface nihilism offers up the poem as a
snapshot of paralysis. Indeed, Nil Nil’s overall atmosphere, along
with the immediate sense and tenor of its poems, can appear

26
 for the hell of it

unremittingly disturbing, bleak, despairing, haunted, and, at

times, nightmarish. This is accentuated by the foreshortened
and enigmatic nature of a number of its sonnets, near-sonnets,
and vignettes, what Patrick Crotty keenly notes as the result of
Paterson’s ‘desire to foster mystery in the attempt to supply a
stylistic equivalent for the pervasive theme of estrangement’.33
Whether coincidental or not, the phrase ‘nil nil’ visually contracts
to ‘nihil’ and, in this sense, the book’s title is grimly tautological:
it could as well be Nil. And yet, Nil Nil also functions as a
double negative, in which case the opposite is true: Nil Nil is
everything. At the basic level of the deceptively simple phrasing
of a book’s title, Paterson’s work offers a provocative paradox,
evincing a complexity that undermines any simplistic critical
engagement. If everything, or in other words, the entirety of the
universe, comes from nothing (the gravitational singularity that
existed prior to the Big Bang), and consequently everything is
expanding yet at the same time decaying, in turn, everything
will eventually become nothing again.34 At first glance, these
astrophysical connotations may seem far-fetched, but consider
how the title’s immediate suggestion of a football score
(grounded, as ever, in the quotidian) conjures an everyday
microcosm of this decay at work, or rather, at play. In spite of
the frenetic activity on the pitch and in the stands during the
game, the score is identical, and the field of play equally empty,
at the end as it is at the beginning of a 0–0 draw. Like a nil–
nil football game – both exciting and disappointing, eventful
yet unresolved, everything and nothing – Nil Nil resists, at
every turn, any reductive interpretation that would prevent its
deadly serious play from exposing the inherent otherness of the
ostensibly ordinary.
Nil Nil ends with its title poem, the sped-up tale of a fictitious
football team’s inglorious decline. ‘From the top, then, the zenith,
the silent footage: / McGrandle, majestic in ankle-length shorts’,
the poem renders in dismally hilarious detail ‘the descent into
pitch-sharing, / pay-cuts, pawned silver, the Highland Division,
/ the absolute sitters ballooned over open goals’ (SP 18). Yet, at
the same time, by deploying Paterson’s characteristic blend of
the everyday, the surreal, and the mystical, the poem represents
a search for ontological significance. In the epigraph for ‘Nil
Nil’, for instance, the fabricated presence of François Aussemain

27
 don paterson

offers a lofty persona for Paterson’s more avowedly philosophical

thoughts, musing on ‘those ignoble lines of succession that
end in neither triumph nor disaster, but merely plunge on
into deeper and deeper obscurity’, while the poem’s plot is
eventually ‘thinned down to a point so refined / not even the angels
could dance on it’ (SP 19). In essence, this final poem is an echoing
coda to much of that which has preceded it: namely, poems in
which Paterson’s perpetual face-off between routine encounters
with the world, and the sense that the complex nature of
reality lies beyond the perceptually restricted state of human
consciousness, have begun to play out.
Consequently, with a swift ‘Goodbye’, Paterson’s first collection
leaves the reader behind, though not without having made
a considerable impression. The poems’ subtle cultivation of
metaphysical paradox, drawn from the specific details of the
everyday, frequently set into motion perceptual transformations
that offer striking perspectives on the human condition and
the reality we inhabit. This inventive use of quotidian detail
is augmented, in poems such as ‘An Elliptical Stylus’, by the
tentative use of poetic personae and direct address to the
reader – stylistic features that, as we shall see, are exhibited in
Paterson’s later work with greater flexibility and prowess. In
Nil Nil, they emerge as part of a burgeoning sense of poetry’s
function as a mode of knowledge. The collection ends with an
instruction for the reader to ‘get off’ the poem’s slowing train
of thought, with the poet declaring that he will ‘continue alone,
on foot, in the failing light’ (SP 19). The promise seems to be that
Paterson’s next book of poems will extend and expand the
journey into considerably darker territory.

28
 2

Which Man I Am:

God’s Gift to Women (1997)
Which Man I Am

Paterson’s early poems often concern themselves with the

fluid and malleable nature of the self. While they interrogate
notions of identity as stable and coherent, however, they do
so almost entirely from the perspective of a broadly consistent
persona. As Vicki Bertram has not unfairly summarised, the
speaker in Paterson’s early work tends to be ‘an alienated and
asocial bachelor: the solitary drinker, greeting the dawn by
pissing from his window, recollecting shags from his past,
troubled by his mortality, disgusted by procreation’.1 But
the anticipation and directing of the reader’s expectations in
a poem such as ‘An Elliptical Stylus’, and the self-reflexive,
brisk dismissal of the speaker’s audience at the close of
‘Nil Nil’, reveal how Paterson’s first published poems also
demonstrate an unusually keen understanding of poetry’s
inescapable artifice – the fullest sense of a poem as ‘a made
thing’, from the Greek poíēma.
In spite of the dependable characterisation of the speaker in
these poems, then, it would be misleading to view Paterson’s
work as concerned with mere recherché explorations of personal
identity. Aspects of these early poems appear to suggest a
deep-rooted fascination with the ways in which poetry not
only serves to question reified notions of the self, but how
the art form actively constructs and deconstructs believable
identities – how even the most apparently autobiographical
poem cannot help but deploy a persona that, while gesturing
towards a flesh-and-bones speaker, remains, paradoxically, no
more than a dramatised representation. As Peter Robinson
has noted, in attempting to discuss the complex selves and

29
 don paterson

situations that poems can often present, ‘I don’t believe that the
speaker of a poem has to be a living, or once living, person …
yet for communication to take place representations have to be
representations of something.’2 In other words, the illusion of the
presence of the poet within a poem is made possible by that
poem’s conjuring of the illusion of the present moment. Poems
may utilise language in such ways as to gesture towards an
immediacy that, in turn, gives rise to the seeming presence of
a very real speaker.
Paterson recognises the manner in which interactions
between poem and reader are governed by this strange set of
circumstances. Not only has he spoken of the poem as an ‘act
of collusion’,3 but he has repeatedly expressed his belief that
a poet should never ‘confuse the voice of the poem with your
own voice, because you’re just limiting what you’re capable
of doing’.4 The dynamic use of personae in Paterson’s second
collection, God’s Gift to Women, evinces this, and is doubtless
what has led some critics to variously label the volume as ‘highly
self-conscious’,5 ‘incorrigibly post-modernist’,6 and marked by
‘sleight-of-hand … as an attempt by Paterson to distance himself
from his subject’.7 Yet while Robert Potts is right to describe
God’s Gift to Women as ‘a book which plays obsessively with the
vatic delivery of narrative or fiction’, it would be ill-advised to
dismiss Paterson’s inventive use of personae as merely ‘wasting
itself in play and disguise’.8 As close readings reveal, what
William Scammell has termed Paterson’s ‘intention to take
switchback rides on all the registers, and daring us to follow’9 is
most fully appreciated as a perceptually transformative attempt
to unpick subject matter from a range of perspectives.
Though it has attracted sceptical criticism since it was
first published during Modernism’s heyday in the 1920s, it is
difficult to exaggerate the enduring influence of T. S. Eliot’s
essay ‘Tradition and the Individual Talent’. On the one hand, in
arguing that a poet’s significance lies in ‘the appreciation of his
relation to the dead poets and artists … of the existing order …
of English literature’,10 Eliot’s reductive notions of Tradition and
the Canon (rather than plural traditions and canons) may appear
to modern readers as hierarchical and hegemonic. But, on the
other, his suggestion that the mature poet commits himself
to a ‘process of depersonalisation’, and that ‘the progress of

30
 which man i am

an artist is a continual self-sacrifice, a continual extinction of

personality’,11 is not so easily dismissed. Where a number of
the experiments with personae in God’s Gift are concerned,
the essay’s influence as theoretical underpinning to Paterson’s
increasingly sophisticated range of poetic voice is amply in
evidence. Just as Eliot claims that ‘poetry is not a turning loose
of emotion, but an escape from emotion; it is not the expression
of personality, but an escape from personality’,12 Paterson has
stated in interview:
It’s a tremendously liberating day in a poet’s life when you suddenly
realise you can make it all up; the idea that poetry involves a
fidelity to one’s own experience and emotions is much more
deeply engrained than you suspect – it operates almost as a moral
imperative, so the first time you put words into someone’s mouth,
or kill off an aunt or uncle, it feels deliciously sinful.13

‘11:00: Baldovan’, part of a sporadic sequence in God’s Gift

structured around the haphazard schedule of a discontinued
railway line, can be seen to align Paterson with Eliot’s sense that
the poet must ‘surrender himself wholly to the work’,14 enacting a
dismantling of the self. A tale of youthful dislocation, the poem
employs the persona of the poet’s childhood self, describing a
trip with another boy, Ross Mudie, as the two go ‘up the Hilltown
/ for the first time ever on our own’ (SP 30). In a characteristic
defamiliarisation of its quotidian setting, it evokes the queasiness
of juvenile anxiety: the two boys await the arrival of the local
bus at ‘Base Camp’ in ‘horizontal sleet’, raising ‘the steel flag of
the 20 terminus’ as if they were about to embark on a dangerous
mountaineering expedition. Even the speaker’s pocket money
has a sinister appearance – ‘the cold blazonry of a half-crown’,
‘threepenny bits / like thick cogs’, ‘black pennies’ – recalling the
recurrent use of coin imagery in Nil Nil. As discussion of ‘The
Ferryman’s Arms’ in the previous chapter revealed, this symbolic
paying of the ferryman’s fee often signals Paterson’s attempt
to not only traverse the divide between life and death, but to
expose these two conditions as less riven than the veil of human
perception suggests. As Paterson has argued elsewhere: ‘Man is
probably unique amongst the mammals in that he has conscious
foreknowledge of his own death. Knowing he will die means he
acts, in part, as if he were already dead’ (O 68).

31
 don paterson

In ‘11:00: Baldovan’, this notion of the defining feature of

human consciousness can be seen to find its fullest paradigm in
the ‘obscurely worried’ persona of the young poet. In repeatedly
asking his friend the same questions ‘over matters of procedure,
the protocol of travel’, the highly sensitive speaker embodies an
innocence that, through the course of the poem, paradoxically
leads him to see both himself and his surroundings with a
strangely renewed sense of flux. This occurs when the speaker’s
imagination takes a riotous turn, blurring reality with a vision
of destruction, in which ‘the bus will let us down in another
country’, a disorienting place ‘with the wrong streets and streets
that suddenly forget / their names at crossroads or in building-
sites’ (SP 30). As the poem progresses, this barren and confusing
landscape further deteriorates in reaction to the narrator’s
escalating fears, an atmosphere conveyed by the gathering pace
of the poem’s metre, along with the sudden abandonment of
conventional punctuation. The poem’s unnerving segue from
the habitual everyday to the darkly visionary suggests the ways
in which fantastical imaginings can be as valid and intuitively
true as the reified, language-dependent nature of consensual
reality.
Yet ‘11:00: Baldovan’ does not serve to primarily undermine
such simplified notions of the real. Rather, the tangible scenes
the poem constructs and unpicks, moving from innocence to
experience – from the speaker’s whimsical wish ‘to buy comics,
/ sweeties, and magic tricks’, to a fragmented world in which
the family home has been destroyed and his loved ones are
deceased – both facilitate and mirror the creation and disinte-
gration of the persona at its core. The aforementioned agency
of the poem’s landscape, engendering its own destruction, can
be seen as a metaphor for the quite deliberate collapse of the
young speaker’s fragile sense of self. In the believable yet
disquieting world the poem conjures, this process emerges from
the narrator’s anxious dread. But we also get the impression that
the poet (who inevitably also occupies the poem’s dramatised
voice) is quite consciously playing with this persona. As Eliot
argues: ‘There is a great deal, in the writing of poetry, which
must be conscious and deliberate.’15
In ‘11:00: Baldovan’, the assertion that ‘I’m weighing up
my spending power’ can be seen as much a reference to the

32
 which man i am

speaker’s pocketful of coins as to the poet’s sense of authorial

command. It is no coincidence that the knowing poet laments
his childhood persona’s constant fretting (‘I cannot know the
little good it will do me’), immediately before the world that
defines that character’s sense of self speedily disintegrates. The
poem may see Paterson afford that reimagined early self – and
by extension, the reader – the somewhat dubious benefit of
hard-won insight. But it is authorial experimentation with that
persona that appears to supply the poem’s governing force,
conjuring a credible identity only to unravel it. In deploying
and almost destroying a seemingly autobiographical approxi-
mation of his childhood self, Paterson makes the poem a site for
exploring the poet’s heightened sense of the ‘twin citizenship’ of
human life and death (O 69). According to Paterson, mankind has
become ‘so accustomed to living in death’s shadow … he barely
notices that, while contingency and fate might shape his life, it
is death that drives its plot’ (O 68). It is the poet, he claims, who
can ‘live in the heart of the paradox itself, forming a stereoscopic
view of the world with one eye in the land of the living and one
eye in the land of the dead’. In ‘11:00: Baldovan’, Paterson begins
to test the possibilities and limits of poetic personae, a project in
line with Eliot’s concept of poetry, as Maud Ellman succinctly
describes it, as ‘the workshop of the self, where personal identity
is both constructed and dismantled’.16
While ‘11:00: Baldovan’ sees Paterson creatively deploying
and undoing a single poetic self, another poem in God’s Gift,
‘Candlebird’, pushes the book’s experimentation with personae
further, conjuring several dramatised and competing identities
at once. A sonnet that loosely reworks a verse by the medieval
Arabic poet Abbas Ibn Al-Ahnaf, the poem draws on the latter’s
melancholic fascination with the changeable iterability of the
love lyric, in particular the idea that where the poet may fail
to impress the beloved with his crafted words, another could
succeed through borrowing and repeating them. ‘If, tonight,
she scorns me for my song, / You may be sure of this’, laments
Paterson’s lovelorn poet-speaker: ‘within the year / Another man
will say this verse to her / And she will yield to him for its
sad sweetness’ (SP 52). Unlike Ibn Al-Ahnaf’s more straightfor-
wardly direct address from poet-speaker to the second-person
‘you’ of the beloved,17 however, ‘Candlebird’ interlaces a complex

33
 don paterson

web of cajoling voices. This confounds any attempt to identify

the poem, and the mise en abyme of its poems-within-poems,
with an individual and coherent self:
‘“Then I am like the candlebird”’, he’ll continue,
After explaining what a candlebird is,
‘“Whose lifeless eyes see nothing and see all,
Lighting their small room with my burning tongue;

His shadow rears above hers on the wall

As hour by hour, I pass into the air.”
Take my hand. Now tell me: flesh or tallow?
Which I am tonight, I leave to you.’

So take my hand and tell me, flesh or tallow.

Which man I am tonight I leave to you. (SP 52)

In Ibn Al-Ahnaf’s original, the poet-speaker compares himself to

a candle, suggesting that his words are destined to illuminate the
sexual conquests of other men, rather than his own. Paterson’s
‘Candlebird’ preserves this implication, but the simile is made
more specific, invoking a particular type of seabird whose flesh
is so saturated in oil it may be threaded with a wick and burnt.
Coupled with the ironic manner in which this is presented – the
beloved’s suitor speaks the lines as if they were his, while the
quotation marks and italicisation make clear that they are the
work of the poet-speaker – this suggests an image of the poem
as a flighty creature, possessing a life of its own that will always
escape the intentions and desires of its author. Indeed, even the
poet-speaker’s ‘original’ poem is a version adapted from another.
But, at the same time, the deceased and threaded candlebird also
implies the damaging effects of any attempt to tether the poem
to a limited conception of its speaker, particularly one that is an
autobiographical approximation of its author. Having lamented
his failure to court his love interest by singing the work himself,
the poet-speaker’s quoting of his lines as they are successfully
spoken by another suggests how an audience’s interpretation of
any poem is subject to their notion of the persona that appears
to deliver it.
But while the emotional texture of ‘Candlebird’ seems forlorn
and resigned – the poet-speaker accepts the manner in which
he, and those who quote his lines, are at the mercy of the lover’s

34
 which man i am

(or reader’s) subjective apprehension – the sonnet’s final couplet

also serves to recast the poem as a statement of intent. Stripped
of the second and third stanza’s metatextual quotation marks
and italicisation, these final lines might appear to return the
poem to the bereft voice of the poet-speaker in the first quatrain.
But their near-identical repetition of the prior lines, as spoken
by the beloved’s suitor, deviates in one crucial detail. Where
the ‘other man’ seductively implores that it is up to his lover
whether she finds him, and his borrowed verses, to be ‘flesh or
tallow’ (which is to say authentic and worthy of approbation,
or else inauthentic and ‘lifeless’), the poet-speaker extends this
demand to conflate his own presence with that of the successful
suitor, reaching out instead to the reader. ‘“Which I am tonight,
I leave to you”’ becomes ‘Which man I am tonight I leave to you’:
shorn of its quotation marks, this final line directly addresses
and so involves the reader in the poem-as-dialogue, while
also reinforcing Paterson’s concept of a poem’s creative agency
and the ‘act of collusion’ between poem and reader. As he has
argued in his ars poetica: ‘the poem … demands the complicity
of the reader in its own creation’.18 We as readers are left to
decide, based on its lyric economies, whether or not the poem
evokes a convincing speaker whose conjured presence ensures
its emotional and intellectual significance.
The implication here is that it is not any connection with
an actual, or even once, living person that ensures a poem’s
authenticity and success. Rather, it is the poem’s creation of the
apparent presence of a convincing human being, its manipu-
lation of language to impart the illusion of the present moment.
‘You may be sure of this’; ‘Take my hand’; ‘Now tell me’;
‘Which I am tonight I leave to you’: the poem constantly issues
imperatives and directly addresses the reader, encouraging us
to recognise the active role we play in the construction of the
poem, as much as it may direct and subtly dictate the ways in
which we do so. Like John Keats’s ‘This Living Hand’, where the
once ‘warm and capable / Of earnest grasping’ is reanimated by
our reading into the poem’s illusion of the present, Paterson’s
poem is, on one level, an attempt to bridge the gap between the
urgency of the moment of poetic composition and the words as
we find them on the page, in the head or on the tongue of a
reader – years, decades, perhaps even centuries later. ‘And thou

35
 don paterson

be conscience-calmed’, writes Keats, ‘see here it is – / I hold it

towards you’.19
While as readers we apprehend the conjured presence of the
dual persona in ‘Candlebird’ just as we see Keats’s gesturing
hand, however, there is a difference. Keats’s poem attempts to
discover aspects of the system of language – how it is that poems
are made with, and succeed through, words rather than ideas.
But this occurs against the bedrock of a reassuringly coherent
poetic persona; there is no suggestion in ‘This Living Hand’, for
example, that the self that extends its hand through the poem is
compromised beyond its direct, physical counterpart inevitably
ending up ‘cold / And in the icy silence of the tomb’. The
impression is that the hand in the poem is the straightforwardly
mimetic equivalent to Keats’s actual hand buried in a cemetery
in Rome, revivified by the poem’s conjuring trick. Poem and
poet form a continuum. This is not the case in ‘Candlebird’. Here
we see Paterson go further than Eliot’s poetics of impersonality
and the willed workshopping of the self. It is a poem that
uncovers the manner in which the creative process inevitably
undoes the self, since that self is made from nothing more than
the fluid medium of language. The poem evinces Eliot’s ‘process
of depersonalisation’, but it again shares striking affinities with
the work of the Symbolist poet Stéphane Mallarmé. ‘The work
of the pure poetry implies the elocutionary disappearance of
the poet, who yields the initiative to words’,20 Mallarmé claimed;
‘it is in front of the paper that the artist creates himself’.21 As
Barthes argues in ‘The Death of the Author’:
Mallarmé was doubtless the first to see and to foresee in its full
extent the necessity to substitute language itself for the person who
until then had been supposed to be its owner. For him, for us too,
it is language which speaks, not the author; to write is, through
a prerequisite impersonality … to reach that point where only
language acts, ‘performs’, and not ‘me’.22

Though it frames and partly disguises it through its emotively

persuasive tale of seduction, this is the real subject of ‘Candlebird’.
‘I believe in poems, not poets, so sod the individual voice’
Paterson has written in an ars poetica essay accompanied by this
very poem, and while speaking in playfully combative fashion,
it is also clearly a stalwart belief of his, reiterated elsewhere in

36
 which man i am

his critical writings. ‘A poet should be in service to the poem’, he

states, ‘and while that’s the case, nothing exists except the poem;
the poem annihilates the poet’.23 It is telling that ‘Candlebird’ is
the penultimate poem in God’s Gift to Women, followed only by
‘Siesta’, the first of Paterson’s many translated versions after the
Spanish poet Antonio Machado, collected in his third volume
The Eyes. As will be further discussed in this chapter and
the next, it is through having variously pushed the limits of
poetic personae that Paterson eventually grants himself license
to inhabit and reimagine Machado’s ‘singerless song’ (TE 59),
attempting to create poems both autonomous and anonymous
where, as Michael Wood has noted, ‘the poet is not a forlorn
artist or a suffering everyman, and not even, essentially, a
projection of the historical person of the poet, but the agent of
a lyrical intelligence to which we could all aspire’.24
As ‘Candlebird’ suggests, in God’s Gift to Women Paterson’s
serious play with personae is amply in evidence. It is a technique
that allows Paterson to explore the way in which language,
rather than the author, speaks within a poem, but also in order
to scrutinise those most crucial aspects of identity: gender
and sexuality. ‘Paterson’s is a technically insightful and violent
imagination’, Robert Crawford has noted of God’s Gift to Women:
‘Callousness and damage get mixed up with sex and gender
in many poems.’25 God’s Gift to Women can be seen as an
attempt to interrogate issues of gender and sexuality by means
of ironically perpetuating traditional modes of representation
– the dominant, aggressive, and sometimes cruel nature of the
masculine, as pitched against the submissiveness and emotional
fragility of the feminine – rather than overtly fragmenting and
destabilising such conventions. But in doing so, the poems can
run the risk of merely replicating and endorsing, rather than
parodying and so subverting these representations. As Vicki
Bertram notes: ‘The predilection for bathos and the jokey games
symptomatic of postmodernist antics are presumably meant to
make the poems amusing, but the humour – because it depends
on irony alone – is coercive.’26 However, Bertram’s subscription
to the ‘foundationalism’ of feminist identity politics – fixing
and constraining the reified genders of the very identities she
presumably hopes to liberate – leads her to read many of the
poems in God’s Gift to Women in a rather straightforwardly

37
 don paterson

blinkered fashion, ignoring their dramatised speakers and

scenarios in favour of viewing such poems as evidence of the
barely veiled misogynistic intent of the poet ‘behind’ them.
‘In this volume’, she declaims, ‘lies and savage irony provide
perfect cover for a fully postmodern display of masculinity’.27 In
other words, God’s Gift to Women apparently finds a macho poet
indulging in chauvinism and chest-thumping, with the parody
and irony of the poems a smokescreen.
This critical position does many of the poems a disservice,
ignoring the way in which Paterson’s parodic use of dramatis
personae can allow for a transformative unpicking of conven-
tional depictions of gender and sexuality. If a poem such
as ‘from 1001 Nights: The Early Years’, reimagining an early
scene from the framing tale of The Arabian Nights (SP 27),
ultimately fails to transform conventional notions of gender
and sexuality by replicating rather than undermining and
reinventing them, ‘Imperial’, a thematically similar yet stylis-
tically distinct poem in God’s Gift to Women, cannot be so easily
dismissed. An account of a couple’s first sexual encounter and
accompanying emotional repercussions, this poem sets up a
familiar conceptual metaphor – love is war – in the stylistic
context of a traditional yet disrupted poetic form: an alternating
rhyme scheme in metered quatrains that comes to dispense
with conventional punctuation. Unlike ‘from 1001 Nights: The
Early Years’, this suggests from the outset that the poem’s
constructed persona will serve to challenge the very patriarchal
male viewpoint and male-dominated lyric tradition it puts into
motion. In subtly subversive fashion, the poem opens with
the voice of the beloved – ‘Is it normal to get this wet? Baby, I’m
frightened’ – who is then quickly and ironically silenced, as per
the conventions of the Renaissance love lyric: ‘I covered her
mouth with my own’ (SP 48). The couple then have sex, but
only ‘after months of jaw jaw, determined that neither / win
ground, or be handed the edge’. ‘We gave ourselves up’, laments
the speaker, ‘one to the other / like prisoners over a bridge’:
and no trade was ever so fair or so tender;
so where was the flaw in the plan,
the night we lay down on the flag of surrender
and woke on the flag of Japan (SP 48)

38
 which man i am

Just as the masculine persona in ‘Imperial’ is seemingly authori-

tative, the muted feminine character appears submissive and
hesitant. But both come to depart from the gender identities
assigned them in the poem’s first stanza. The poem’s calculated
and clinical poise in dealing with matters of intimacy might
initially recall the sceptical intelligence associated with the
amorous poetry of the seventeenth-century Metaphysical poet
John Donne. ‘They are ours as fruits are ours’ wrote Donne in
‘Community’, in a characteristic conceit that intellectualises the
manner in which men might sexually ‘devour’ women: ‘And
when he hath the kernel eat, / Who doth not fling away the
shell?’28 But where Donne’s poem exhibits the male bigotry of
his age in its philosophical play, ‘Imperial’ clearly interrogates its
own stance. Paterson’s speaker is not cocksure in the manner of
Donne’s, and not boastful; tinged with irony, the tone is broadly
one of weary resignation. Moreover, the silencing of the lover
by the male speaker before ‘she lay in my arms’ is short-lived,
giving way to the ‘storm-window’ above their bed, ‘stood at our
heads like a stone’. This decisively turbulent and morbid image
not only indicates that war will play vehicle to love’s tenor in
the poem’s metaphorical conceit, but that both parties will pay
the price of their strategised consummation, failing to achieve
more than a shallow resolution, much as once warring nations
count their fallen dead in the cemeteries. Rather than a merely
conventional scenario of passive female yielding to domineering
male, ‘Imperial’ suggests that both are engaged in tactical ‘jaw
jaw’, ‘determined that neither / win ground’.
In this manner, the poem’s argument displays a clear affinity
with the gender theorising of Judith Butler, particularly her
persuasive idea that genders are fundamentally performative.
According to Butler, ‘acts, gestures, and desire produce the effect
of an internal core or substance’, giving rise to the illusion of
genders as static entities, rather than the surfaces without fixity
or substance that they truly are.29 ‘The radical dependency
of the masculine subject on the female “Other” suddenly
exposes his autonomy as illusory’: Butler has thus argued for
the destabilising effect of female agency on male authority,30 an
argument with which Paterson’s ‘Imperial’ not only appears to
concur, but one that it imaginatively enacts. In the poem, it is
not simply masculine dominance but the persistent constructs

39
 don paterson

of both masculine and feminine stereotypes that sullies sex,

transforming what should be a loving act of intimacy into a
cautious tussle towards a truce, akin to prisoners traded ‘over
a bridge’ in the name of imperial control. As such, ‘no trade
was ever so fair or so tender’ is perhaps the most fiercely ironic
line in the entire poem (SP 48). There is little fair, and certainly
nothing tender, about a physical act that embodies no emotional
intimacy. Equally, the knowing lack of a question mark in the
following line – ‘so where was the flaw in the plan’ – lends the
statement a rhetorical hollowness. By now, both poet and reader
know exactly where the flaw is: it lies in the very fact that there
was a plan, borne of a cautious hostility between two lovers who
are unable to break free from damaging gender stereotypes.
The poem may on certain levels allow for the ‘parodic
displacement’ that Butler calls for, creating ‘a context … in
which subversive confusions can be fostered … to compel a
reconsideration of the place and stability of the masculine and
the feminine’31. But its final, beautifully worded, yet ultimately
grotesque image of two lovers laying down on ‘the flag of
surrender’ only to wake on the virginally bloodied ‘flag of
Japan’ seems to suggest, if anything, a renewal of imperial
hostilities between parties. In ‘Imperial’, and in God’s Gift more
generally, Paterson is clearly engaged in exposing the dangers
of a damaging and inflexible masculinity. But in spite of intelli-
gently discussing the pathology of gender stereotypes through
use of poetic personae, the poems seem to find little hope for
future change – even when his writing is as its most sensitive,
attuned, and philosophically discursive.
In poems that defamiliarise and question the everyday with
subversive use of parody and irony, God’s Gift to Women finds
Paterson blending playful use of conventional forms with a
variety of poetic personae. ‘Imperial’ does so in its interro-
gation of an atavistic masculinity, one that continues to pervade
contemporary society and exert its effects on both personal
and public footings. Yet, as the volume’s title poem suggests,
extending the search for transcendence and ontological signif-
icance first seen in Nil Nil’s title poem (not to mention ‘the
immaculate finish’ of ‘The Ferryman’s Arms’), the word ‘God’
in God’s Gift to Women is as important as the word ‘Women’.
Whether it materialises in the form of idealised father figure

40
 which man i am

and Holy Father, or more often as an untenable yet yearned-for

symbol of spiritual possibility and immaterial understanding,
the lure of religion in the broadest sense is one that frequently
ghosts the collection.
As Sean O’Brien has noted, with more than a little
understatement: ‘Like it or not, there is a residual religious
element in Paterson’s work.’32 While Paterson’s relationship with
religion and the spiritual may be undeniable, however, it is
far from straightforward. On the one hand, he clearly views
the practice of writing poetry as a transcendental event – ‘I’m
absolutely scunnered with writers who refuse to acknowledge
the spiritual dimension in their work’, he once proclaimed.33 But,
on the other, his opinions of organised religion are negative and
even damning, fed in part by formative experiences. Paterson’s
grandfather was a preacher in the United Reformed Church of
Scotland, and in his youth, Paterson himself fell for the appeal
of ‘charismatic Christianity’, memories that surely inform an
early poem from Nil Nil, ‘Amnesia’, which takes as its initial
point of departure the young speaker as ‘a very sick boy’, ‘arms
/ outstretched in catatonic supplication’ as he feigns speaking
in tongues for the approval of church elders (SP 12). ‘It was a
horrific experience’, Paterson later recounted of the time: ‘And
there were some responsible adults around who should not have
been filling impressionable minds with that sort of bullshit.’34
The tension – and the distinction – here is one between a
distrust of the potentially misleading, dogmatic dangers of
organised religion, and the appeal of the genuine, perception-
altering potential of spiritual receptivity.
‘Prologue’ is the opening poem in God’s Gift to Women. As
such, its title suggests that it can be read as a preface, setting
the tone for the rest of the book – though taking things at face
value in God’s Gift to Women is, as seen, always a potentially
perilous approach. What can be said for certain is that ‘Prologue’
draws a distinction between the transformative power of a
spiritually attuned poetry and the grandiose illusions of the
finger-wagging church. This seriously witty poem opens with
its speaker invoking himself – and by implied extension, a great
many poems’ speakers – as a self-important priest, intoning that
‘a poem is a little church, remember, / you its congregation, I,
its cantor’ (GG 1). The poem exemplifies Paterson’s ability to

41
 don paterson

combine a quotidian setting with heightened direct address,

transporting the reader from ordinariness to otherness. But
while this is true, and contributes to ‘Prologue’s success in both
undermining and enacting two different modes of ‘spiritual
transport’ – namely, that of prescribed religious dogma, and
the transcendental release of genuine poetry – ironic humour
and fluid use of persona are also key. This is evident in the
poem’s accomplished facility to both mock and exalt poetry
and religion in equal measure, complicating our conventional
understandings of both.
The priest-persona begins by chastising his audience, which
is to say us readers, with a litany of restrictions – ‘no flash, no
necking in the pew, / or snorting just to let your neighbour know
// you get the clever stuff, or eyeing the watch’ – before requesting
that we ‘be upstanding’. ‘Now’, invites our preacher with a wink,
‘let us raise the fucking tone’ (GG 1). If this is a wry attack on
the self-important dullness of the contemporary poetry reading,
where a captive audience wriggle in their seats, as bored as a
church congregation before a lecturing pastor, it is also a more
literal call for that audience, and the reader, to sit up and pay
attention, recognising that a poem is an act of communication
that always requires a degree of seriousness and intellectual
expenditure. As in his dealings with masculinity discussed in
‘Imperial’, Paterson again seems to be in dialogue with John
Donne, particularly the Donne of Anniversaries and Verse Letters,
who negotiates spiritual dilemmas with a similar mixture of
scepticism and intellectual rigour, but also impassioned resolve:
‘Our business is, to rectify / Nature, to what she was’, he states
in a belles-lettres ‘To Sir Edward Herbert, at Juliers’.35 The fault
may often be with the poet and/or poem, the method of delivery,
but equally it can lie with the audience, ‘Prologue’ suggests, and
a lack of capacity or willingness to engage and question.
‘Spiritual transport’, then, as the poem puts it, is not a
passively consumable experience. Just as discussion of ‘An
Elliptical Stylus’ revealed Paterson demonstrating the sense
in which poetry’s imaginatively transformative effects only
function through the act of attentive reading, ‘Prologue’ implies
that access to poetry’s spiritual capacity requires that very same
focus and effort. Yet, we are told, the poem is destined to fail if
it does not merit real attention: language in its ‘least prestigious

42
 which man i am

form’, which is to say the ‘less elevated’ realm of the hymns and
prayers of organised religion, is something for which Paterson
has elsewhere expressed his distain. ‘Prayer really is the lowest
form of literature’, he has claimed, ‘desire and flattery are
nowhere sung so nakedly’ (TBS 118). But while the ‘little church’
of lyric poetry may be ‘neither high nor broad’, it can, if poem
and reader are both up to the task, offer a less deceived and more
questing and questioning spirituality to the dogma practised
by the High or Broad Church (GG 2). It is this sentiment that
surely informs the world-wearied, bluntly nihilistic close of
‘Prologue’, an ‘Oh God’ that sends up more zealous uses of
that phrase, leading not into conventional prayer, but a falling
into silence, bereft of a final full-stop. In this meditative quiet,
the poem suggests – of the white space of the blank page, and
the careful marks the poet makes upon it – true revelation and
understanding might occur.
While Paterson may articulate this belief in ‘Prologue’,
however, arguing for a meaningful, broadly spiritual poetry
that is not apparent in the untenable rigidity of conventional
notions of God and the unconvincing scriptures of organised
religion, God’s Gift to Women nonetheless finds poems that
struggle to put this notion into practice. The title of ‘On Going
to Meet a Zen Master in the Kyushu Mountains and Not Finding
Him’, for example, may seem to suggest Buddhism as a more
palatable religious alternative (SP 49). But in doing so, Paterson
is only content to offer up a blank page as poem itself, playing
with notions of presence and absence that do more to recall the
via negativa or ‘negative way’ of ancient theology, an attempt to
understand the divine by way of negation. Where Paterson’s
approach deviates from the via negativa, however, is in his pursuit
of a genuine spiritualism that is without a godhead. The poem
is ‘missing’ because, for Paterson, God – in a Nietzschean sense
– has gone missing; it is also ‘missing’ much in the way that the
Buddha, in a sutta from the scriptures, is said to have refused to
answer questions about metaphysical propositions such as the
existence of the soul and life after death: the Buddha suggests
instead that understanding comes through questioning not what
is, but what is not. For Paterson, insistence on a sceptical yet
openly agnostic frame of mind requires that the spiritual be
approached obliquely, and negative transcendence clearly offers

43
 don paterson

one solution. As Crawford notes: ‘Paterson has never forgiven

his God for walking out, and the sense of emptiness at the
heart of many of these minutely imagined and powerful poems
adds to the nihilism which is twinned with verbal electricity.’36
The collection finds Paterson still yearning after the spiritual,
struggling towards an openly intuitive engagement with the
world through language that can also allow for the guarding
scepticism of a rigorously existential outlook.

44
 3

Not Your Name, Not Mine:

The Eyes (1999)
Not Your Name, Not Mine

If the poetry of God’s Gift to Women documents the struggle

between Paterson’s ludic tendencies and his increasingly
metaphysical and meditative sensibility, then The Eyes, his
third collection comprising loosely translated ‘versions’ after
the Spanish of Antonio Machado, can be seen as a neat
bypassing of this issue. As Peter Forbes has argued: ‘The
conflict between Paterson’s MacNeicean lyric streak and the
postmodernist demands of the age is not yet resolved’, though
the poems in The Eyes ‘neatly side-step the problem by using
someone else’s poems that are unashamedly lyrical’.1 But
there is an originality and force to Paterson’s adaptations
of Machado that makes them much more than mere artistic
portraiture. ‘Paterson’s previous work might have prepared
us for the spiritual and lyrical kinship he so obviously shares
with Machado’, as John Burnside argues, ‘yet his achievement,
in The Eyes, is one that should not be taken for granted: these
are both versions and highly original poems, in a very real
sense, highly inventive solutions … to a difficult and beautiful
problem’.2
The difficult and beautiful problem that Burnside alludes to
is one of artistic sensibility. As he rightly points out:
Machado is not an obvious poet to offer an Anglo-Saxon audience:
he demands that we set aside the notion that what matters – all
that matters – is the social (the public and the personal, as it were)
and insinuates the possibility that there really is an inner, asocial,
individual soul, in the philosophical or religious sense, engaged in
a spiritual journey.3

45
 don paterson

Machado is a poet of philosophical seriousness, who nevertheless

makes a gentle mockery of the solipsistic Romantic notion of the
sovereignty of the individual. It is not difficult to sense why
Paterson, a poet committed to serious play with poetic voice and
personae, should feel sympathy for a poet whose work exhibits
lyrical coherence within a credo committed to anonymity, the
artistic erasure of the self, and the poetic truths of paradox. As
Alan Trueblood notes in introduction to his own translations
of the Spanish poet: ‘Machado’s fidelity to his post-Romantic
aesthetic, his penchant for philosophical speculation, and his
growing commitment to a social role for art had made him
an increasingly isolated figure.’4 The same might be said to
a certain extent of Paterson and his poetry, and in Machado
he clearly admires what he sees as ‘his bravery’ – which for
Paterson amounts to his plainness of expression, his complex
thinking, and his emotional candour.5 That, and the sense that
‘there are several Antonio Machados, but I’ve only tried to write
the poem Machado is for me, one about God and love and
memory; to that extent The Eyes is really one poem’ (TE 55).
‘This poet of absences and distances’, as Jamie McKendrick has
labelled Machado,6 informs Paterson’s increasingly sophisticated
attempts at self-abnegation, but also the further development of
poems as a mode of knowledge, in which an openly intuitive,
spiritual engagement with the world is balanced with the
guarding rigour of a warily existential outlook.
In the previous chapter, we discussed how Paterson’s serious
play with poetic personae moves beyond T. S. Eliot’s theory
of impersonality as willed workshopping of the self, towards
an aesthetic that finds poetry to be a process that inevitably
undoes the self. Rather than attempting self-abnegation, in
which the active avoidance of a coherent and reified poetic
identity (typically bearing some perceived resemblance to its
author) is likely to find said identity returning at a gallop,
God’s Gift to Women, and the poem ‘Candlebird’ in particular,
illustrates Paterson’s interest in what Mallarmé first described as
‘the work of the pure poetry’, one that entails ‘the elocutionary
disappearance of the poet, who yields the initiative to words’.7
In Paterson’s increasingly sophisticated understanding of this
poetic technique, Antonio Machado makes for an apposite lyric
ally. As Alan Trueblood has noted of the Spanish poet’s work:

46
 not your name, not mine

‘He acknowledges an otherness within as well as without. The

self becomes many-sided, extensible, resisting delimitation.’8
Indeed, in his ‘Afterword’ to The Eyes, Paterson makes a similar
point in favour of Machado’s ‘selfless’ verse, before criticising
those who would label such poetry ‘postmodern’:
I can think of no writer so obsessed with the suppression of his
own ego, and he would have been disappointed in any reader who
sought to ‘explain’ a poem in terms of a geographic or psychological
provenance … The occasional intrusion of the discussion of the
processes of art itself, no doubt some will call ‘postmodern’. This
self-reflexion, i.e. writing becoming aware of itself as writing, is
a perennial and inevitable consequence of the serious play of the
human imagination; ‘postmodernism’ is a literary tendency distin-
guished only by a self-conscious focus on this operation to the
exclusion of others. This is to misread and diminish Machado; he
writes of writing only to deny his part in it, a double paradox – as
if Escher’s hands held erasers, not pens. (TE 55–9)

This dismissal of the contemporary notion of the ‘postmodern’ –

as needless critical foregrounding of the ubiquitous and age-old
inevitability of linguistic play – is an interesting one. It doubtless
speaks of Paterson’s attempt to reconcile the tension between
his own philosophically minded lyric tendencies with the ludic
play he is also given to. The appeal of Machado’s aesthetic is
in large part to do with what Paterson views as the inherent
purposefulness of Machado’s self-reflexion, distinguishing him
from those writers engaged in mere recherché postmodern
games. The image of M. C. Escher’s Drawing Hands lithograph –
an artwork in which two hands are involved in the paradoxical
act of drawing each other into existence – is invoked, but with
a twist: Paterson sees Machado as engaged in the necessary
process of self-erasure and, by extension, in poetic composition
as an act that always finds that language, rather than any
person or author, is doing the talking. And, since language is
the ultimate communal medium, this in turn allows for a poetry
that can legitimately assume a collective voice of shared thought
and feeling – something that, as we have already touched on
in previous chapters, Paterson is keen to reclaim in a modern
poetic climate where careful subjectivity is all. Machado, he
suggests, ‘offers us the chance to make a quiet return to a poetry

47
 don paterson

of moral instruction; a function contemporary poetry seems to

have forgotten it ever performed but whose absence may well
account for poetry’s present irrelevance to the lives of many
readers’ (TE 59–60). As Trueblood argues of Machado’s early
work:
The prominence … of compositions in which the poet’s individual
voice seeks attunement to the collective voice of popular poetry …
is symptomatic of a continuing search for forms of expression facili-
tating communion with others and, more broadly, of a search for
some meeting ground with the otherness of the world.9

The opening poem of The Eyes, ‘Advice’, is one of several

miniature manifestos in the volume, whereby Paterson’s ars poetica
is gradually readjusted in the light of Machado’s communally
voiced, deeply reflective poetry. ‘My advice?’ the poem begins,
as if the reader had asked for it, but with a nudge and a wink
that recognises the peculiar conversational dynamic that exists
between any poem and its audience. ‘To watch, and wait for the
tide to turn’, the poem continues, ‘wait as the beached boat waits’
(SP 57). If the poem’s anonymous voice is to be believed, it is only
‘the patient’ who succeed, getting ahead by their very dismissal
of the urge to get ahead, knowing that a boat’s departure will
come as and when it comes. This proffered advice, of course,
is as much general life advice as it is very specific advice to
the artist – especially to the aspirant poet, eager for the false
promise of lyric glory. But what of the speaker? ‘As I put it so
well myself’, he self-mockingly boasts: ‘“The patient triumph /
since life is long, and art merely a toy.”’ Quoting lines in order
to conflate personae, confronting the fact that the apparent
speaker of any poem is as easily undone as it is conjured: this is
a trick that Paterson has already enacted in ‘Candlebird’. Here, in
the first poem of The Eyes, he is similarly quick to confuse and
ultimately dismiss any assumed authorial identity the reader
might reductively inscribe. It doesn’t matter whether you think
‘Paterson’ or ‘Machado’ is doing the talking, the poem suggests:
the importance lies in the poem’s argument, the ideas it proposes
and provokes, rather than in an authorial locus.
At the same time, these quoted lines at the end of the poem’s
first stanza harbour a fidelity to the original Spanish from which
its final stanza, waiting in its own ‘little boat’, comes to depart.

48
 not your name, not mine

‘The only defensible fidelity is to the entirely subjective quality

of “spirit” or “vision”, rather than to literal meaning’, Paterson
argues in his ‘Afterword’ (TE 58) – whether or not you agree
with such scepticism about the possibility of any real equiva-
lences in the art of translation, it is this attitude that well equips
him to craft original poems from his own readings of Machado.
Unlike its inspirational source, Paterson’s ‘Advice’ is cleaved
into two five-line stanzas, and its second stanza is much more
playfully didactic than the original:
Well – okay – supposing life is short,
and the sea never touches your little boat –
just wait, and watch, and wait, for art is long;
whatever. To be quite honest with you,
none of this is terribly important. (SP 57)

Whereas Machado’s original registers a tone of resilient

hopefulness in the face of uncertainty and adversity10 (in a
more direct translation, Trueblood finds the poem stating that
the reader should ‘still wait and don’t depart, go right on
hoping’11), Paterson’s poem finds its speaker offering this advice
half-heartedly, with a dismissive ‘whatever’. Moreover, the polite
and slightly fussy diction of the poem’s final clause does little
to disguise its impatience with any reader, or ambitious poet,
who is keen to get ahead. ‘None of this is terribly important’
might sound like a strange rejection of art and life – the poem’s
ostensible twin subjects – but, framed within a poem that
adopts an anonymous and initially confident voice that comes
to deliberately undermine its own vatic pronouncements, this
statement in fact reveals that, up to a point, the only advice
finally worth listening to is likely that of your own gut instinct.
Patience is undeniably a virtue, but no one can tell you how long
to wait, or when it is time to act, to make something happen.
‘Set out from any point. They are all alike. They all lead to
a point of departure’,12 states the aphorist Antonio Porchia,
whose collection Voices furnishes Paterson with numerous
epigraphs dotted throughout his work, and whose influence
on Paterson may be accounted for by what W. S. Merwin has
described as Porchia’s ‘witness to the private ordeal and awe of
individual existence, the reality that is glimpsed through time
and circumstance’.13 This statement is of a kin with Paterson’s

49
 don paterson

refashioning of Machado here. ‘Advice’ seems to be about

the Paterson of God’s Gift to Women, of linguistic excess and
‘postmodern’ play, finding his ‘little boat’ suddenly stranded
ashore, and wondering what comes next. As well as a poem with
a genuine message about patience in the face of art’s demands
and life’s desires, it also reads as a playfully didactic testing of
Machadian waters, which Paterson’s further engagements with
the Spanish poet’s poetics will negotiate more confidently.
If ‘Advice’ finds Paterson gently launching a ‘little boat’ into
unfamiliar waters, then an emphatically titled sonnet, ‘Poetry’,
represents a new manifesto in earnest. In this vignette, Paterson
attempts to articulate the precise appeal of Machado’s aesthetic,
crafting a versioned refashioning of a late, key poem from
the Spanish poet’s oeuvre. As such, ‘Poetry’ picks up where
Machado’s poem steps off, beginning by invoking a metaphorical
comparison between the ‘steady’ formation of the poem, and
that of the ‘mindless diamond’ (SP 71). Just as the latter keeps
its ‘spark of the planet’s early fires’, we are told, trapped in its
‘net of ice’, ‘it’s not love’s later heat that poetry holds, / but the
atom of the love that drew it forth / from the silence’.
At first glance, this might suggest a Romantic poetic credo,
inviting comparison with Wordsworth’s Preface to the Lyrical
Ballads, in which he famously argues that while poetry may
be ‘the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings, it takes
its origin from emotion recollected in tranquillity’.14 But what
differentiates Machado – and by extension, Paterson in his
own take on Machado’s poetics – from Romantic solipsism, is
a commitment to a poetic voice of serene anonymity; or, at the
very least, the aim for such a voice. Whereas Romanticism might
be practically defined by the free expression and centrality of the
feelings of the individual, for Machado and for Paterson it is a
desire for the communal voice of language, not the artist, to do
the talking that comes to govern the poetic project – and along
with it, the hope of authentically capturing shared thoughts
and feelings. In poetry, each feeling, Machado once stated,
‘needs for its production the distress of other frightened hearts
amid a nature not understood … In short, my feeling is not
exclusively mine, but ours.’15 ‘So if the bright coal of his love /
begins to smoulder’, continues ‘Poetry’, ‘the poet hears his voice
suddenly forced … boastful / with his own huge feeling’ (SP 71).

50
 not your name, not mine

For Paterson, what is to be admired in Machado’s work is this

distaste for the excessive and decadent, for the kind of adorned
writing that seeks only to sweeten the honey of true emotion.
As Trueblood argues:
Machado is rarely truly self-deprecatory, and it is in self-affirmation,
not self-pity, that he recognises … the unmodishness of his ‘poetry
of the heart’ in the avant-garde atmosphere of the early twenties. He
looses his own shafts at the … conceptualistic, the self-propagating
and self-sufficing ‘creationist’, poetics manners that in his view
draw on more previously elaborated art than on life.16

What ‘Poetry’ articulates most clearly is Paterson’s championing

of this aesthetic. ‘If feeling yields a steadier light’, the poem
continues, ‘then the poet knows / the pure verse, when it finally
comes, / will sound like a mountain spring’. Here, the turn in the
sonnet can be seen to focus on the crux of what, for Paterson,
Machado’s brand of poetic authenticity is really about: the only
warranted intensity in the poem is that of the original emotion
that fired it, which remains its fundamental raison d’être. But in
order for it to truly resonate, this emotion needs to be tempered.
The metaphorical comparison with the diamond at the start of
the poem turns out to be especially apposite in this regard: it is
only with the polish and serendipitous craft of poetic form that
such poetry can take shape. This picks up on Paterson’s interest
in the challenges of poetic form. Freed from conscious thought,
form can help enable the poet to kindle the kind of intellectually
and emotionally transformative effects that Paterson especially
values, more readily allowing language and the unconscious to
take the reins of the poem, as opposed to the more manipulative
and often predictable machinations of the conscious mind. But
beyond this, ‘Poetry’ also advocates a kind of transcendent
lyricism, in which the personal is given over to the anonymous:
not in pursuit of artistic authority, as such, but to enable thought
and feeling to be more fully infused.
‘Beneath the blue oblivious sky, the water / sings of nothing,
not your name, not mine’, concludes the final couplet of ‘Poetry’,
burning away any authorial command in favour of another
image of transparent clarity. The blue sky, like the mountain
spring, like the flow of water, sings only of absence – an
absence perhaps best understood as a correlative to the Buddhist

51
 don paterson

concept of śūnyatā, the Sanskrit for ‘emptiness’ or ‘voidness’,

itself referring to enlightenment as a world ‘empty of a self, or of
anything pertaining to a self’.17 Ultimately, Paterson’s adaptation
of Machado here confirms what Michael Wood surmises of
the Spanish poet: ‘Machado is a great lyric poet who is also
thinking, even when he seems not to be – he has managed never
to hear of T. S. Eliot’s famous dissociation of sensibility … or if
he has heard of it, he works through it, and denies it.’18 As we
shall see, it is Paterson’s desire to do exactly that for his own
poetry: questioning, revaluating, and extending the intellectual
and emotional range of his own verse under the influence of
Machado, his lyric ally.
Just as Machado seems to have enabled Paterson to embrace
more thoroughly anonymous and adaptable modes of address
than Eliot’s self-abnegating impersonality, the Spanish poet’s
example also proves inspirational in Paterson’s increasing
interest in overcoming the divisive line between thought and
feeling in verse. This ‘dissociation of sensibility’, first outlined
by Eliot in his famous essay ‘The Metaphysical Poets’, offers
a convincing argument for a divide between erudition and
emotion that, in Eliot’s view, developed during the poetry of
the seventeenth century:
The difference is not a simple difference of degree between poets …
it is the difference between the intellectual poet and the reflective
poet. Tennyson and Browning are poets, and they think; but
they do not feel their thought as immediately as the odour of
a rose. A thought to Donne was an experience; it modified his
sensibility. When a poet’s mind is perfectly equipped for its work,
it is constantly amalgamating disparate experience; the ordinary
man’s experience is chaotic, irregular, fragmentary. The latter falls
in love, or reads Spinoza, and these two experiences have nothing
to do with each other … in the mind of the poet these experiences
are always forming new wholes. We may express the difference
by the following theory: the poets of the seventeenth century, the
successors of the dramatists of the sixteenth, possessed a mechanism
of sensibility which could devour any kind of experience. In the
seventeenth century a dissociation of sensibility set in, from which
we have never recovered.19

In the previous chapter, discussion of poems such as ‘Imperial’

and ‘Prologue’ showed Paterson to be stylistically close to

52
 not your name, not mine

Donne in this manner, intellectualising the amorous in the

former piece, and combining sceptical rigour with impassioned
resolve in matters spiritual in the latter. In The Eyes, Machado’s
influence enables this project to develop in earnest, without the
cover of overtly self-deprecating irony that pervades God’s Gift to
Women. As McKendrick notes, Machado’s poetry not only gives
Paterson ‘license to paint with a broader brush’, but it is as if ‘the
disguise of Machado’s voice has helped Paterson to broach the
larger questions about existence less obliquely and with more
emotional candour’.20
‘The Eyes’, the title poem of the volume, explores this dilemma
of how to conduct oneself with both thought and feeling – of
how to live a life in which, as Yeats put it, the rational ‘business
of the head in the world is to bow a ceaseless obeisance to the
heart’, or, as Eliot noted of the Metaphysicals, to allow one’s
‘mode of feeling to be directly and freshly altered by … reading
and thought’.21 It tells the tale of a widower who decides, after
his lover dies, to ‘shut himself’ away, alone with his memories of
her and ‘the big sunny mirror / where she’d fix her hair’ (SP 60).
In a fashion not dissimilar to the drunken speaker in God’s Gift
to Women’s ‘A Private Bottling’ (SP 33), proposing a toast to ‘your
sweet memory, but not to you’, the widower in ‘The Eyes’ hopes
that his beloved might remain ‘intact’, if only he can preserve
the pureness of her painfully permanent absence. Paterson picks
up on Machado’s original by likening this act to a ‘great block of
gold / he hoarded like a miser’, the suggestion being that while
art and memory may afford a momentary stay against time’s
passing (indeed, Machado once famously described poetry as
‘la palabra en el tiempo’, which is to say ‘the word in time’, or
as Robert Bly puts it, ‘human language in which we feel time
passing’22), any attempt to permanently halt its linear arrow is
doomed to grief and loneliness. So it proves for the widower
who, ‘around the first anniversary’, begins to wonder what
colour his lover’s eyes were. But his reflections in solitude fail
to yield more than panic: ‘Were they brown or black, / or grey?
Green? Christ! I can’t say …’ (SP 60).
The poem argues that the vagaries of personal memory, like
the fleeting reflections of a mirror, fail to preserve the past. It
is, rather, a chance encounter of a purely visual nature that can
deliver the truth, in the here-and-now of time’s flow, as ‘one

53
 don paterson

Spring morning, something gave in him’: the widower ‘shut the

front door, turned into the street’ and in a moment ‘from a dark
close, / he caught a flash of eyes’. The past is thus defined and
sustained by the present and the future – a continuum in which
time, as Paterson puts it in ‘Marginal Notes’ (a short sequence
elsewhere in The Eyes that picks up on Machado’s ars poetica), is
a ‘clear stream’, and genuine poetry the ‘lyric grammar / where
today is tomorrow, yesterday, still’ (TE 15–16). In turn, it appears
the way to link them is to see clearly, to combine thought with
feeling, to study the outer world without losing the depths of the
inner world. As Bly puts it in a manner especially pertinent to
‘The Eyes’: ‘If we look only at our problems, Machado said, the
inner world dissolves; if we look only at the world, it begins to
dissolve. If we want to create art, we have to stitch together the
inner and the outer world. How to do that? Machado concludes,
well, we could always use our eyes.’23
In the end, the widower in the poem does exactly that,
but whether this act of seeing ‘brings home the truth quite
uncomplicatedly’, as Trueblood argues, is another matter. In
his translation of this particular Machado piece, Trueblood’s
speaker emphatically concludes that the eyes he encounters are
the very image of his lover’s: ‘Like those!’24 But in Paterson’s
poem, the widower seems neither fully sure nor convinced.
‘He lowered his hat-brim / and walked on … yes, they were like
that; like that …’ (SP 60). The moment of clear-eyed perception,
a vivid encounter with the here-and-now, delivers some
reassurance, but it is by no means obvious that it delivers
convincing truth.
Paterson’s version of Machado does not so readily meet with
the Spanish poet’s belief in the ‘act of seeing’ as might initially
seem the case. On the one hand, of course, ‘The Eyes’ (and The
Eyes more generally) does find Paterson reiterating Machado’s
attempts to combine the philosophical force of intuitive thought
with the sensory abundance and genuine immediacy of feeling.
‘Paterson is keen to put culture in its place’, as William Scammell
quips in a review of The Eyes, ‘that is, back in the ordinary
human heart’.25 We might also refer to the way in which the
perceived duality of thought and feeling complements Paterson’s
allegiance to a poetic understanding of the monistic state of
the world, expressed in an early poem such as ‘The Ferryman’s

54
 not your name, not mine

Arms’. But on the other hand, the closing lines of ‘The Eyes’
are not fully compatible with Machado’s assertion that ‘only
vision is evidence, and that one never doubts what one sees,
only what one thinks’.26 For Paterson, the act of seeing is always
ripe for questioning, and part of the perceptually restricted
nature of human consciousness, ‘the human dream’, that is
an increasingly central concern in his poetry. While Paterson
does find a powerful kinship with what Trueblood describes as
Machado’s ‘prolonged effort to reconcile an inborn lyric impulse
with a conceptualising bent of mind’,27 it is a more heightened
awareness, or perhaps simply wariness, of the raw qualia of
experience that will separate Paterson from Machado, in his
blending of thought and feeling in poetry.
If a natural combination of philosophical thought and
genuine feeling were readily apparent in any of Paterson’s
poems before he explicitly took up the example of Machado,
‘A Private Bottling’ is likely the most memorable example
(SP 33). This meditatively confessional lyric in God’s Gift to
Women, structured around the speaker’s long night of whisky
sampling, appears to be as much about the drunken exorcism of
a former lover as it is ‘shy negotiations’ with matters spiritual.
In particular, the poem illustrates Paterson’s development of
his own twist on the via negativa, in searching for spiritual
meaning and an abiding loving faith without a godhead, one
that can sit comfortably alongside his sceptical, philosophically
rigorous and increasingly scientific-materialist outlook. For a
poet wanting to combine an openly intuitive frame of mind
with intellectual rigour, negative transcendence through poetic
language offers an attractive solution.
In his version of a sonnet from Machado’s series of ‘Parábolas’
(‘Parables’), Paterson formulates this credo with greater
conviction and clarity. In doing so, however, he is also careful
in attempts not to sacrifice the necessary obliquity that negative
affirmation requires. As such, ‘Profession of Faith’ begins in
much the same manner as Machado’s original, presenting the
extended conceit of the sea as a representation of God – or
rather, suggesting how the sea’s features bear comparison with
His fluid omnipresence. ‘He scatters like the moonlight on the
water / or appears on the horizon like a sail’, the poem claims,
delivering one intense image that illustrates the deity’s brilliant

55
 don paterson

but fleeting appearance, before another demonstrates God’s

unexpected, distant, and typically intangible nature (SP 61).
What follows is perhaps the most intellectually demanding
aspect of the poem, and a prime example of what Trueblood
means when he says that ‘the enigmas and obscurities of
Machado’s poetry are neither obscurantist or wilful’.28 Rather,
as Paterson clearly admires and succeeds in reimagining on his
own terms, they emerge from the effort to confront fundamental
questions about, and complex paradoxes inherent to, the human
condition. As Paterson has stated in interview, when asked
about the issue of ‘accessibility’ in poetry: ‘I think it’s possible to
write of things of immense philosophical subtlety in a language
readers can follow. But I do understand that the stranger, more
complex and more difficult the idea, the greater your obligation
to clear expression.’29 So ‘Profession of Faith’ continues:
He made the sea, and like the clouds and storms
is born of it, over and over. Thus the Creator
finds himself revived by his own creature:
he thrives on the same spirit he exhales. (SP 61)

Indeed, these lines do manage to capture a complex, abstract

idea in language that feels unadorned and clear, albeit musically
attuned. According to the poem, God is best understood as an
omnipresence forever at one with everything, sustained by
the very world he has created, ‘born of it, over and over’. In
other words, He is not to be conceived of as a distinct being,
but one dissolved into symbiotic union with His creation, the
world: in fact, the last line of the above excerpt is rendered in
Trueblood’s more faithful translation of Machado’s original as
‘his breath is spirit, and by the spirit he breathes’.30 For Paterson,
the appeal of such a concept seems clear enough: if we conceive
of God as essentially at one with the flow of creation, then a
spiritually open understanding of the world from an inherently
matter-based, broadly scientific perspective, without need for a
godhead, is not just possible but is also philosophically justified.
With this metaphysical thesis in place inside the first eight
lines of the poem, it is unsurprising to find Paterson separating
out the fourteen lines of Machado’s sonnet into octave and a
concluding, more emotionally eloquent sestet. The turn that
follows in ‘Profession of Faith’ not only makes an emphatic

56
 not your name, not mine

vow to this new, material-bound Lord to ‘uncover / your name

in my own’, but also to ‘restore / the soul you gifted me’. In the
previous chapter, discussion was made of the way in which
Paterson had wrestled with his dismissal of God, and ‘his
vast retinue of fairies and pixies’ that were ‘considerably more
difficult to kill off’, while also wanting to retain a spiritual cast
of mind (O 65). In ‘Profession of Faith’, an anonymously voiced,
philosophically explorative approach allows for the realisation
that if the spiritual can reside in the ebb and flow of corporeal
existence, then a view of the soul as something ‘bred’ from
matter can be both legitimately argued and sustained. And it is
this knowledge, as Paterson has claimed in interview, that frees
us, with poetry’s guidance, from the notion ‘of a truth we can’t
directly access, but which exists in the hands of some remote
and inscrutable third party, and which we have to guess at.
Poetry shows us as freelance truth-improvisers … it restores our
human independence a little.’31
Machado’s example variously enables the development and
refinement of Paterson’s poetic practice. The Eyes not only
illustrates Paterson’s ability to craft increasingly self-sufficient
poems that combine thought with annealed emotion, adopting
an anonymous poetic voice that attempts to articulate communal
feelings beyond the merely solipsistic. It also finds him
developing original solutions to the tension between his sharply
philosophical, sceptical bent of mind and the counterbalancing
godless spiritualism he refuses to relinquish. ‘Siesta’, the final
poem from God’s Gift to Women that heralded the beginning
of the Machado project, reappears in The Eyes to assert its
importance and centrality in Paterson’s poetic thinking, and
his by now fully fledged commitment to poetry as a mode of
knowledge. At the close of his ‘Afterword’ to The Eyes, Paterson
acknowledges, beyond Machado, the ‘tutelary voice’ and ‘hand
in the dark’ of Emil Cioran (TE 60), an aphorist whose refined
brand of philosophical scepticism Paterson has elsewhere
described as ‘a kind of terrible, insomniac enlightenment. To
read him openly as a Westerner is thus to be a little reprogrammed’
(TBS 195). As was discussed in the prologue, this is precisely
what Paterson espouses as the ‘true’ aim of poetry: ‘risk’, as he
defines it in his ars poetica essay ‘The Dark Art of Poetry’, is that
which ‘makes readers feel genuinely uncomfortable, excited,

57
 don paterson

open to suggestion, vulnerable to reprogramming, complicit

in the creative business of their transformation’.32 It is Cioran,
perhaps as much as Machado, who gives Paterson the nerve
to subscribe to both the composition and reading of poetry as
a unique mode of thinking. ‘Much more than in the school of
philosophers’, Cioran once claimed, ‘it is in the academy of the
poets that we learn the courage of intelligence and the audacity
to be ourselves’.33
Opening on a scene during the eponymous drowsy midday
hour, ‘Siesta’ depicts a still and formal garden where the only
perceptible movements are a ‘fire-fish’ swimming in a pool,
above which the stone statue of a cherub in flight is suspended,
and the ‘poem’ of the cicada, fluttering and ‘ringing hollow
in the elm’. ‘Let us praise the Lord’, announces the poem’s
speaker, ‘who has declared / this silence in the pandemonium’
(SP 74). For a moment, Paterson here quotes Machado’s original
phrasing near-exactly, as he allows the poem to openly relish
the possibility of a God, as conceived in ‘Profession of Faith’,
who is no more or less than the flow of the universe’s matter.
Paterson’s poem is thus in part a tribute to a God who, in some
ways, isn’t a god at all, but a broadly spiritual guarantor of the
wonder of the universe, of understanding and ‘pandemonium’
that exists beyond the perceptual limitations and cognitive
mechanisms of the human mind: ‘the God of absence and of
aftermath, / of the anchor in the sea’, that ‘brimming sea’ that
represents the flux and complexity of the universe, while also
recalling the self-same metaphor for God that was conjured in
‘Profession of Faith’.
But ‘Siesta’ is also a tribute to absence and negation themselves,
as those which secure the possibility of engaged human thought
in the first instance. It is this ‘truant omnipresence’, as it were,
that ‘sets us free / from this world’ of objects, sensations, and
phenomena, onto what Paterson claims, more fervently than
either Trueblood or Bly’s more faithful translations of Machado’s
original, is ‘the one true path’. Machado’s belief, as Trueblood
summarises it, is that ‘by looking hard enough the poet will be
able to see into things, see through and beyond them … and
in the process grasp the nature of their reality and what lies
beyond it’.34 For Paterson, as we shall find in our discussion of
Landing Light in the following chapter, this concept becomes the

58
 not your name, not mine

raison d’être for his poetic composition, as an attuned awareness

of ‘the human dream’ encourages thinking, and in turn poetry,
of ever bolder philosophical speculation:
When the object is allowed to shrug off its name, it begins the long
road back to its own intrinsic mystery – and on finally reaching the
core of its own estranging fire, radiates until the whole world is
unified by it. The paperclip or the rose; either could open the path
back to our awakening. (TBS 13)

A number of Machado’s later poems, ‘Siesta’ included, were

attributed to the invented noms de plume of Abel Martín and
Juan de Mairena. These ‘expressive outlets’, as Trueblood puts
it, were ‘geared to the increasing complexity and subtlety of
his mature thinking’, as well as figuring as a guard, no doubt,
against Machado’s own sense of insufficient qualification as a
philosopher.35 But if we take Michael Wood’s suggestion that ‘in
any liberated form of translation’ such as Paterson’s versioning
of Machado ‘the translated writer can seem a kind of fiction, a
shadowy ancestor haunting the dream prehistory of the work’,36
then, for Paterson, Machado can be seen to serve as that very
figure himself. In taking the example of, and cues from, Machado,
while also partly sheltering under the guise of this unapologet-
ically earnest, intellectually and emotionally challenging Spanish
poet, Paterson has been able to create new poems of his own that
are more than just artistic portraiture, but that have freed him
to fully voice and expound ideas, feelings, and concepts that he
previously approached only with tentative irony, or else evaded.
In this way, The Eyes lays the stylistic and thematic groundwork
for the poems of Paterson’s fourth volume, Landing Light, where
the following aphorism of Machado’s might be seen as the
guiding beams on the runway of Paterson’s poetic imagination:
We are victims, I thought, of a double hallucination. If we look
outward, and concentrate on entering things, our external world
begins to lose solidity, and if we conclude that it exists not in and
for itself, but exists because of us, it ends by dissolving. However,
if, moved by our private reality, we turn our eyes inward, then the
world pushes in on us, and it is our interior world, our being, that
disappears. What to do then? Weave the thread given to us, dream
our dream and live; it is the only way we can achieve the miracle
of growth.37

59
 4

Shrewd Obliquity of Speech:

Landing Light (2003)
Shrewd Obliquity of Speech

While The Eyes marked an undeniable departure in Paterson’s

poetry, allowing him to embrace and assimilate Machado’s
earnestness, philosophical seriousness, and emotional candour,
it could also be argued that, as a collection of poems that
repeatedly takes its points of departure from the Spanish
poet, it nevertheless remains to read as a project, rather than
an achievement in the fullest sense. Landing Light, Paterson’s
fourth volume, represents a more substantial development and
achievement. ‘It is only 10 years since Don Paterson’s much
welcomed debut Nil Nil’, states Bernard O’Donoghue in a review
of the collection, ‘but in the course of that decade he has become
a major presence. The qualities for which his early poems
were praised – hard-edged wit and technical brilliance – have
remained in evidence, but his poetry has increasingly added to
these skills a seriousness and moral urgency.’1 As Sean O’Brien
notes, ‘here, it seems, after the intriguing samples and trailers,
is what Paterson, mezzo del cammin, can actually do’.2
Our previous discussion of an early poem from Nil Nil,
‘An Elliptical Stylus’, revealed the manner in which, as Sarah
Broom suggests, ‘Paterson’s characteristic approach is to grab the
individual reader by the collar and insist upon the idea of the
poem as a personal exchange between poet-speaker and actual
individual reader’.3 Paterson tends to make use of direct address
in his poems as a means of insisting on the reader’s attentive
and active engagement with the poem as a serious piece of
intellectual discourse, however entertaining it might prove. As
Natalie Pollard states, in discussing the intricate associations
between Paterson’s poet-speakers and his audience, ‘for Paterson,

61
 don paterson

the really valuable poem builds not on passive complaisance

but complexity and challenge in its publicly inflected “special
relationship” with readers’.4
In Landing Light, Paterson’s understanding of the complexity
of the relationship between poem, poet-speaker, and audience
is extended to greater depths. A typical Paterson poem is
often extremely conscious of itself, and by extension all poetry,
as necessary fiction, a work of constructed artifice. But, as
Adam Newey has argued, Paterson nonetheless manages to
avoid being ‘trapped by his intellectual labyrinths’. ‘The effect’,
Newey suggests, ‘is to triangulate the position of the self from
its relationship to others’.5 As Pollard states: ‘Paterson’s poems
invite their readers into intimate exchange-relations with poets
and readers across the ages.’6 But the question remains as to
how they succeed in doing so.
The linguistic concept of deixis is an illuminating way of
understanding the time-shifting and -conflating abilities of
Paterson’s verse. In his paper ‘Deixis and the Poetic Persona’,
Keith Green defines deixis as ‘the encoding in an utterance of
the spatio-temporal context and subjective experience of the
encoder’.7 In any utterance, he suggests, there is the relation of
the speaker’s ‘centre’ and a ‘surrounding cognitive environment’;
but, in poetry, because of the absence of extralinguistic elements,
‘actual situation and emotional situation will be compounded’.8
Poems work under the assumption of an addressee and a
decoder, and poets who are especially aware of this arrangement
can dramatise and exploit this, manipulating the different time
frames that may co-exist in the poem: the time frame of the
poet as author, the time frame of the historical persona and
addressee(s), the here-and-now time frame of the poem as it is
experienced by the reader. As Green claims: ‘Language seems
to be designed primarily for face-to-face interaction (that is,
the canonical situation of the utterance); but it is a capability of
humans that they can mobilise discourse beyond this canonical
situation and operate language free of contextual boundaries.’9
Poetry is a pertinent, complex, and unique example of this.
Perhaps more than any other poem in Landing Light, ‘The
Reading’ finds Paterson utilising poetic deixis and direct address
to the reader. The poem does so to self-reflexively illustrate the
shifting, context-warping interactions that lyric poems variously

62
 shrewd obliquity of speech

depend upon – between poet-speaker, addressee, and audience.

It opens with attention-grabbing lines that meet the reader in
medias res, and draw us in with the intimacy of their address:
The first time I came to your wandering attention
my name was Simonides. Poets,
whose air of ingratitude forms in the womb,
have reason at least to thank me:
I invented the thing you now call the commission.
Oh – and one other frivolity
refined by Aquinas, tuned up by Bruno
and perfected by Hannibal Lecter. (SP 99)

This opening stanza does a surprising amount of work in setting

the poem’s complex scenario, character, and tone. The first
two lines invoke a speaker and an audience that encompasses
both individual reader and assumed poet-speaker, drawing
on the time frame of the here-and-now reception of the poem
as it is being read, as well as the prior moment of authorly
composition. But at the same time, they also gesture towards
an author and an audience across time, in harking back to
Simonides of Ceos, the ancient Greek lyric poet, who is, we are
told, the ‘first’ incarnation of the current poem’s fluid speaker.
This poet is the one who comes to your ‘wandering attention’
– the attention, that is, of the shifting audience through time
that a poem must meet, entertain, and convince, in order to
secure its posterity. ‘In reading Paterson, one is accosted by
the diverse ways in which the poem … articulates the fraught
relationships between personal and social, private and public’,
notes Pollard.10 In ‘The Reading’, this dynamic is exposed and
dissected, extending Paterson’s earlier appreciation of Machado’s
example, in attempting to produce poems that resonate both
inside and outside of the self and of time, through a combination
of immediacy and enduring memorability.
Unlike the wholly philosophical and aesthetically minded
poems of The Eyes, however, in ‘The Reading’ the commercial
aspect of lyric poetry – what Pollard describes as the way in
which ‘lyric success depends on making canny socio-economic
moves in front of listening bodies’11 – makes plain the interre-
lation of poetry and trade. ‘I invented the thing you now call the
commission’, boasts the poet-speaker, suggesting that ungrateful

63
 don paterson

poets should be thankful for the money-making opportunities

he has afforded them. But to read such a statement baldly would
be to ignore how ‘The Reading’ implies that the semblance of
financial stability offered in the form of commissioned work – be
it as part of the ancient patronage system, or in terms of modern
requests from organisations and arts-funding bodies – is one of
the few securities available to the lyric poet in the face of poetry
audiences’ capricious interests. What of that ‘other frivolity’ the
poet-speaker cryptically alludes to? ‘All in good time’, we are
told, a canny move to intrigue and keep the audience’s attention,
exemplifying what Michael Donaghy has called a poem’s ‘social
transaction … the give and take between artist and participating
audience in an oral tradition’.12
‘But first to the theme / of this evening’s address: the reading’,
Paterson’s poem continues in its crafted extempore (SP 99). The
remainder of ‘The Reading’ forms a parable of sorts, refash-
ioning an apocryphal ancient Greek tale concerning Simonides,
in which the poet gives a reading of his work for a ‘little king’ at a
feast held in a great hall. The fluid and anonymous poet-speaker
in Paterson’s poem recounts how this performance included a
commissioned poem, supposed to honour the dubious king –
‘not a good poem, if I say so myself’ – that contained so many
references to Castor and Pollux, the mythical twin sons of Leda
(‘I ended up fleshing it out, as you do, / with something I’d found
in the drawer’), that the disgruntled patron offers ‘only one-half
the struck price’. This led the indignant poet to show his anger,
we are told, which only served to leave him floundering in a
disapproving silence, ‘at which point / I thought it a smart move
to drop it’ (SP 100). However:
I fixed each man’s face in my mind,
each man at his rank at the table
(that trick of mine; your coupons, O my rapt listeners,
I’ll have nailed by the end of this poem). (SP 100)

These four lines, falling in the centre of the poem, are crucial
to its argument. They announce the earlier ‘frivolity’ the
poet-speaker made a cryptic reference to – his inventive ability
to visually memorise a scene using the mnemonic device of the
method of loci, otherwise known as the ‘memory palace’, in
which spatial visualisation allows discrete content to be ordered

64
 shrewd obliquity of speech

and successfully recalled. The persuasive memorability of a

poem through its musical and semantic cohesion is a feature on
which Paterson places a particularly high value. In his treatise
The Poem: Lyric, Sign, Metre, he goes so far as to argue that
it is part of poetry’s raison d’être – especially in its original,
mimetic form. Echoing sentiments explored and evinced in the
Machadian poems of The Eyes, poetry, he suggests, ‘has always
been an “aspirant” form, one which seeks to transcend human
limitations of memory. For a long time it seems it was an art
barely distinguishable from song. However, poetry retained a
unique and near-magical property. It is the one art form where
its memory and its acquisition are one and the same thing.’13
Here, Paterson is also making indirect reference to the bardic
tradition of poetry, in which poets served a specific function in
pre-historical communities, making use of poetry’s mnemonic
devices – assonance, alliteration, rhyme, and so on – to commit
intricate oral histories to the collective tribal memory. As well
as being an entertaining yarn about the vagaries of the poet’s
life, and the complex relationship between poet, poem, and
audience that plays out in intimate, public, and commercial
fashion across time, ‘The Reading’ also argues for the power
and authority poets once wielded, and may still do, in telling
you something that you will never forget. But there is muted
anger and aggression in the above-quoted lines, too, in the
eloquent phrasings of Paterson’s direct address to the reader.
Paterson’s approach can often be steely eyed, insistent, and even
threatening. As Peter Howarth states, his narrators make ‘every
would-be casual reader into a sparring partner’.14 The ‘coupons’
that the poet-speaker sinisterly promises to have ‘nailed’ by the
end of the poem might seem a merely metaphorical suggestion
– like a detachable coupon, the poet’s visualising memory trick
will, however disquietingly, simply allow him to keep a record
of his readers. But as well as the aggressive connotations of
the verb ‘nailed’, if we consider that the Latinate etymology of
‘coupon’ is colaphus, meaning ‘a blow with the fist’, the poet’s
promise takes on the feel of a more directly physical threat.
What was assuring in the direct address at the beginning
of the poem here becomes rather disconcerting – even more so
when read in the light of ‘the end of this poem’. As we discover,
the gods are angered on behalf of Simonides and consequently

65
 don paterson

bring down, with a Zeus-like ‘great thunderbolt’, the hall roof

‘on the lot of them’. Just as Simonides was the only one able
to identify the ‘disfigured’ and ‘tenderised menfolk’ for the
grieving wives (‘And the hawknose? / Poor woman: look under
your feet’; (SP 101)), the poem forces us to question how the
poet-speaker will have similarly ‘nailed’ our faces by its close,
and to consider how poets and poems ‘read’ us as much as
we read them. In the final instance, ‘The Reading’ is as much
about the beguiling and complex technique of direct address,
in which poets ensure that their paying audience are suitably
engaged and so stay with them, as it is about the canny and
manipulative means that this selfsame approach can serve. In
wielding power over said readers, the poem’s direct address
ensures that the historically enshrined importance of poetry
is not underestimated, or dismissed as mere entertainment. As
the ‘fixed gaze’ of the dead patron is held by the poet while he
‘knelt in the rafters and carefully counted / the rest of my fee
from his purse’, ‘The Reading’ implies that while readers are
mortal and come and go, the successful poem, and by extension
its speaker, enjoys an immortality through its perennially fresh,
immediate mode of address to new audiences, manipulating
poetic deixis so as to always ensure that an appropriate ‘fee’
is extracted.
Throughout Paterson’s oeuvre, the theme of dividedness –
whether it be truthful paradoxes lurking beneath the seeming
contradiction of conventional opposites, or the unitary illusion
of the self – is an abiding fascination and source of broader
intellectual enquiry. ‘The self is a universal vanishing point’
(BE 51) he claims in one aphorism, as well as noting with a
certain seriocomic intent: ‘No, I’m not obsessed with myself, just
the self; I could be just as easily mesmerised by yours, if it were
as readily available for study’ (BE 22).
In Landing Light, this concept of the divided identity, and
particularly the trope of the doppelgänger, is extended to the
level of Gothic obsession, in which it finds its origins. Writing
in The Gothic Other, Ruth Bienstock Anolik outlines the Gothic
as a literary genre ‘marked by an anxious encounter with
otherness, a dark and mysterious unknown’.15 She goes on to
suggest that the nature of the Gothic veers towards ‘representing
the fearful unknown as the inhuman Other: the supernatural

66
 shrewd obliquity of speech

or monstrous manifestation … that symbolises all that is

irrational, uncontrollable and incomprehensible’. But if all this
gives the impression that the disturbing force of the Other is
bound to a primitive sense of the evil and supernatural, and
can be dismissed in the wake of the Enlightenment and the
birth of modern science, the Gothic literary imagination of the
late eighteenth century and nineteenth illustrates the abiding
purpose and value of such fear: what the Other can tell us about
ourselves, and how it will always ‘relocate to new dark spaces’.16
We might be in possession of a modern, rational self that thinks
it has debunked such fears as the product of irrationality,
adopting scientific accounts of the world as a kind of dogma
– one that ensures, as Alison Milbank has memorably put it,
that the mind ‘remains emperor of its own experience’.17 But
this ‘modern, buffered self’, as Milbank also argues, is exactly
‘the subjectivity the Gothic tale of the doppelgänger seeks to
question, showing that the buffers do not work’.
It is not difficult to see how these ideas map onto Paterson’s
poetic credo. The concept of the ‘buffered’ self, coined by
Charles Taylor in his volume A Secular Age, and with which
Milbank sees the Gothic literary imagination in battle, is in
many ways similar to what Paterson conceives of as ‘the human
dream’. Both gesture towards our near-constant state of anthro-
pocentric arrogance, fostered by our tendency to see everything
in terms of its human use and purpose. As we will later discuss,
Paterson’s poems evince a growing belief that poetry is best
equipped to transcend this delimiting state of mind, so that the
world and its objects are ‘redreamt, they are reimagined, they
are remade’, and so ‘repossess something of their mystery, their
infinite possibility’.18 But first, it is valuable for us to consider
how the poems in Landing Light make specific use of the Gothic
doppelgänger trope, and how, in turn, they reveal anxieties and
fears about the nature of the self, art, and poetic composition.
Whereas a poem such as ‘The Hunt’ (SP 91) concerns a
poet-speaker who comes to recognise the divided nature of his
self – his art enacting a constant tussle between the conven-
tional rationality of his waking mind, and the shadowy ‘Other’
of his disturbing subconscious – a companion poem, ‘A Fraud’
(SP 97), acts out a quasi-confession of an apparently more
deliberate doubling. With its alternately rhymed quatrains

67
 don paterson

in tight metrical form, the poem adopts similar strictures to

‘The Hunt’, though it begins with a much more conventional
quotidian scene. The young poet-speaker is innocently ‘crossing
/ a field near Bridgefoot’, we are told, when his eye happens
to catch ‘something glossing / the toe of his boot’ (SP 97). On
closer inspection, this reveals itself as a ‘tiny wellhead’ in the
rock that, in typical Patersonian fashion, takes on supernatural
characteristics as the narrative begins to segue into the strange,
‘straining through the gap / as a little clear tongue / that
replenished its shape / by the shape of its song’. The appearance
of this tiny fountain has a fairytale-like quality to it – indeed,
the folkloric quality of this and other poems in Landing Light can
be traced back to Paterson’s earlier work. The appeal, as ever,
is the perceptually transformative possibilities such a tradition
allows for, in segueing between the familiar and the uncanny.
In ‘A Fraud’, as elsewhere, this is something that should serve to
put us on our guard, not least when the wellhead begins to talk:
It said Son
I’ve no business with you.
Whatever I own
is the next fellow’s due.

But if I’m his doom

or Castalian spring –
your directive’s the same:
keep walking. (SP 97)

As the poet-speaker goes on to confess, he couldn’t resist the

temptation. The promise of this peculiar wellhead offering itself
up as a Castalian spring – the mythologised source of Ancient
Greek poetic inspiration that lies in the valley beside Mount
Parnassus, the legendary home of the Muses – was enough to
make him ‘drop like a hawk’, and ‘swallow its shout / in the
cave of his breast’. ‘Now two strangers shiver / under one roof’,
he resignedly tells us: one who is the rational self, issuing ‘the
promise’ and ‘proof’, and the other who is the stolen poetic
talent, deployed ‘for the poem or the kiss’ (SP 98).
In spite of this, the poem’s ostensible confession cannot be a
straightforward admission of theft, since its fantastical fairytale
is so clearly one of allegorical significance. Rather, the poem

68
 shrewd obliquity of speech

makes a particular show of inviting us to read in, and unpick

the deeper significance of the figurative storyline it weaves. As
Paterson argues in his ars poetica:
Poetry is as much a mode of reading as writing. The reader must
know they are reading a poem to read-it-as-a-poem, and apply all
the human powers of signification and connection the poem asks of
them. (Some of the most artful poems have the habit of disguising
themselves as far simpler statements than they really are; any reader
who isn’t reading such a poem in an oversignifying mode will most
likely miss the best of it.)19

The suggestion here is that all poems depend upon the reader’s
understanding of poetry as a genre that requires them to ‘read
between the lines’. A poem manipulates language’s tendency
to oversignify, but in order for it to succeed, this has to operate
in conjunction with the human capacity to make imaginative
connections and meaning. We are back to the concept of the
poem as a conversation, or even an ‘act of collusion’, as Paterson
has elsewhere suggested.20
In ‘A Fraud’, the first such invitation for us to read in appears
in the poem’s repeated use of images of water and fountains.
On one level, we might interpret the ‘tiny wellhead’ that the
poet-speaker encounters as a parody of traditional ideas of poetic
‘sources’ of inspiration. Paterson’s practice and critical writing
can often evince a belief in true poetry as arriving, in part, from
an unconscious source. But in his concomitant commitment to
craft and the painstaking apprenticeship of the poet, Paterson
appears to reject Romantic ideals of the Muse, and other sources
of ‘inspiration’ from without. The speaking wellhead in ‘A
Fraud’ is thus a deliberately farcical construct, the embodiment
of what Paterson suggests are outmoded notions of poetic origin
– ‘the Castalian spring’ itself being the origin of all such myths.
But, on another level, the fact that the poem communicates the
poet-speaker’s unshakeable sense that he has somehow stolen
his own talent, in turn lends weight to the persistent truth of
the poet’s disconnection from his bardic abilities. The poem
arises from within rather than without, as the poet-speaker
suggests, yet still he feels detached and divided, as if another
self, a stranger, is ‘deployed / for the poem’ (SP 98). In this way,
‘A Fraud’ speaks of the anxiety that the peculiar and mysterious

69
 don paterson

process of poetic composition engenders, and by extension, asks

us as readers the more broadly significant question of what
authenticity amounts to. The poet may understand that his
negotiations with what Michael Donaghy calls the ‘resistant
medium’21 of poetic form are what enable his unconscious to
come to the fore, giving rise to the illusion of poetic ‘inspiration’
from without; but the intuitive feeling of the poet, of ‘two
strangers’ that ‘shiver / under one roof’, still seems to confirm
this illusion as true. The battle, it seems, is between the ego and
the poem – the ego that wants to own the poem, and the poem
that only emerges unbidden, and of its own mysterious accord,
‘where a tiny wellhead / had broken the rock’. As Paterson notes
in his self-reflective critical essay ‘The Dilemma of the Peot [sic]’:
‘While it’s fine for the ego to drive you to the gig, God help you
if it’s the ego that’s up on stage.’22
As such, ‘A Fraud’ is also in dialogue with some of the
key ideas that we saw Paterson develop in The Eyes, through
Machado’s tutelary example. As we found in critical analysis
of the manifesto-in-miniature ‘Poetry’ in the previous chapter,
Paterson adopts Machado’s line in advocating a kind of transcen-
dental lyricism as the ideal, in which the personal is given over
to the anonymous, as the original emotion that fired the poem is
tempered by deeply philosophical reflection. Images of flowing
water abound in the Machadian versions of The Eyes, as a
symbol of manifest truth and the pursuit of truth: recall how
‘Poetry’ invokes the ‘pure verse’ as sounding like ‘a mountain
spring, anonymous and serene’ (SP 71), while ‘Song’ maps onto
the imagery of ‘A Fraud’ even more closely, with its instruction
to listen for ‘the water in the rock’ (TE 46). With all this in
mind, it might be said that, for Paterson, the all-too-human
self-centredness of the poet is often the obstacle to the poem,
and the most problematic part of the process. ‘An algorithm for
poetry would be incredibly complex, but not infinitely so’, notes
Paterson in The Poem, ‘and its detachment from such catastroph-
ically overvalued, sentimental constructs as “the individual
voice” could be just the thing to see the cultural return of
anon., or even propel us into a new era of Classicism, should
we desire or require such things’.23 But in spite of this highly
speculative suggestion that we might one day dispense with
the poet altogether, Paterson’s is a flawed, keenly felt, and – for

70
 shrewd obliquity of speech

all its unblinking frankness – humane poetry, that refuses to

abandon humanity even as it frequently despairs at what it is
to be human. Paterson’s line on the ‘illusory’ condition of being
a poet smacks of modest overstatement: ‘I might feel like a poet
after the poems are written, but since I’m no longer writing
them, I can’t be; it’s just self-congratulation’, he once claimed.24
But the manner in which such an apparently self-chastising
approach attempts to place the poem before the poet, also
serves to increase said poem’s likelihood of achieving what we
have previously outlined as Paterson’s sense of poetry’s raison
d’être: to reach beyond the habitual, blinkered perspective of the
subjective consciousness – which is to say, the human dream
– in the hope of apprehending and appreciating the complex
nature of reality.
In ‘A Fraud’, it is this moment of genuine poetic inspiration
– what Alice Oswald calls the ‘invisible’ subject of the poem
presenting itself, ‘the one you can’t choose, the one that writes
itself’25 – that fires the poet-speaker’s feelings of being a thief,
as he ‘steals’ the poem from his own subconscious in the
process of its systematic interrogation. The ‘two strangers’ that
make up the one self in ‘A Fraud’ are, in essence, the two
sides necessary for poetic composition: the intellectually and
artistically manipulative conscious mind, and the unbidden
spontaneity and imagination of unrehearsed sensibility. The
uneasiness that underpins this particular sense of a divided
self is what primarily informs another poem in Landing Light,
‘The Rat’.
The subject of this ingenious meta-poem is ‘a poem about a
rat’ written by an anonymous ‘young man’ (SP 102). The poem
is so good that the precocious talent’s assumed literary elders,
including the narrator, are amazed by and envious of it in equal
measure. ‘It was the best poem ever written about a rat’, the
poem’s second line declares, creating an identical end-rhyme
with the first line that serves to emphasise the dumbfounding
brilliance the poem has had on the poet-speaker: ‘To read it was
to ask the rat to perch / on the arm of your chair until you turned
the page’ (SP 102). After stumbling on this seeming literary
genius and finally extracting more poems from him, however,
it turns out that the poem about a rat was something of a fluke,
and the other work was ‘not much good’. At which, the assumed

71
 don paterson

jury of established poets take it upon themselves to offer him

advice, about ‘his tropes and turns, his metrical comportment’,
and instruct the young man to write more poems like The Rat.
‘All we got was cheek from him. Then silence’, the poet-speaker
indignantly states: ‘We gave up on him’. But the ‘green arrogance’
and ‘one lucky strike’ of the young writer of The Rat is one
thing – the poem itself, quite another. When Paterson’s poem
shifts to the present day and the poet-speaker tells how ‘today
I read The Rat again’, it is as good as he remembers, the young
man’s writing brimming with those two most valuable poetic
qualities, at least as Paterson sees them: musical memorability,
and the ability to conjure the illusion of the present moment.
When combined, these seem to ensure The Rat’s longevity, and
sound a painful warning to the poet-speaker:
Its reek
announced it; then I saw its pisshole stare;
line by line it strained into the air.
Then it hissed. For all the craft and clever-clever
you did not write me, fool. Nor will you ever. (SP 102)

The Rat’s jeering prophecy to the poet-speaker is one that

picks up on ideas discussed in ‘A Fraud’. In his advice to the
inexperienced young man who has penned The Rat, the literary
elder is keen to offer advice on ‘the wedding of the word to the
event’. But the irony that Paterson knowingly conjures is that
his own poem, ‘The Rat’, is no more than a poem about a poem
called The Rat. It cannot succeed in pulling off the trick that
the young man’s poem does so effortlessly, making word and
object appear as one and the same. For all the ‘craft and clever-
clever’ – which is to say, for all the consciously manipulative and
intelligent wordsmithery – ensures the good consistency of an
experienced poet’s writing, the truly excellent and unforgettable
poem can still sometimes arrive, through freak alignment of
individual imagination, time, place, circumstance, and so on, in
the mind of a relative amateur. The Rat is thus the product of
an unrehearsed sensibility, a lyric innocence and imagination
that cannot be learnt or taught. While ‘A Fraud’ speaks of the
anxiety created by the mysterious process of poetic composition,
‘The Rat’ gives a pertinent example of this in action: a poet who
devotes their life to the craft and learning of poetry might never

72
 shrewd obliquity of speech

write a single poem that ranks alongside the ‘one lucky strike’
of an amateur.
As plainly humorous as the witty meta-poem of ‘The Rat’ is,
it also probes further into the nature of the self – something
that poems such as ‘The Hunt’ and ‘A Fraud’ suggest are the
inevitable work of poetry, but that Paterson’s poems achieve in
ways that are both unusually frank and perceptive. Speaking
in seriocomic fashion of the various life stages of the poet,
Paterson has claimed that a poet’s first life is that of ‘lyric
innocence’, much as the young man in ‘The Rat’ exhibits –
‘when they believe the word and its object to be perfectly
interchangeable’ (TBS 83). This is followed, apparently, by a
second life in which they ‘wake up to the fact that a poet is
someone whom words continually fail’. It is then that he decides
(and it is indeed described, perhaps in tellingly confessional
fashion, as a ‘he’) to ‘leave the tiny house of the poem to
inspect the façade, and learn something of the architectural
mysteries he once had no desire to penetrate’ (TBS 84). It is
this acute awareness of the problems of poetry as an art form,
alongside its unique capacity to shed light on the complexities
of the human condition, which informs Landing Light’s poems,
especially those that evince some of Paterson’s most complex
poetic-philosophical thinking.
It is the principal underlying theme of Paterson’s poetry
that guarantees both his oeuvre’s consistency and originality.
The stylistic shifts from collection to collection, particularly
the serious play with dramatis personae and the adoption of a
more anonymised poetic voice, set Paterson apart from many
of his contemporaries, especially those whose consistent poetic
voice has become the hallmark of their uniqueness. But it is
the purpose to which Paterson’s stylistic arsenal is utilised that
singles him out: namely, Paterson’s increasing commitment to
poetry as a powerful means of intellectual enquiry, one that
might be ranked alongside science and philosophy in its unique
ability to reimagine and remake our understanding of the
world. In so many instances, the poetry’s target and focal point
is that of our habitually dulled, perceptually restricted human
perspective. Which is to say that the poems look to interrogate –
time and again and with increased sophistication and awareness
– the false divide between our routine encounters with the

73
 don paterson

world, and the sense that the complex nature of reality lies
beyond the boundaries of everyday perception.
‘Poetry is the paradox of language turned against its own
declared purpose’, Paterson has claimed, ‘that of nailing down
the human dream’.26 In the final poem of Landing Light, Paterson
can be found attempting to articulate this poetic-philosophical
thesis as a kind of all-encompassing treatise. ‘I have never
opened a book in my life, / made love to a woman, picked up
a knife’: so begins ‘The White Lie’, with a series of emphatic
declarations that suggest themselves to be patently untrue
(SP 114). ‘Nor could I put a name to my own face’, confesses
the speaker, at which point we can be in no doubt, surely, that
we have been lied to. But then, as the poem proposes, what
can we say with any real authority that we ‘know to be the
case’? ‘Everything … draws its signal colour off the sight /
till what falls into that intellectual night / we tunnel into this
view or another’. By invoking the ‘eye-beam’ of ancient Greek
understanding – the Aristotelian idea that a beam generated
by the eye is responsible for sight – the poem offers up both
a falsehood and a truth in the very same instance. For while
modern science has long proven that the eye in fact receives
rather than projects light, the outmoded Greek perspective of
the eye-beam is not without its own figurative resonance. ‘The
light indeed pours from our eyes’, writes Paterson in The Blind
Eye, echoing the ‘tunnel’ vision proposed in ‘The White Lie’: ‘its
little, dim, narrow human light: we stand before the world like
a projectionist behind his dusty cone of shadows, illuminating
only what we already know’ (BE 27).
Like ‘The Ferryman’s Arms’ before it, ‘The White Lie’ is on
one level a poem that finds Paterson engaging with the nature of
perceptual paradox: what appears to be a falsehood, it suggests,
can just as likely turn out to be a paradoxical truth. But where
‘The Ferryman’s Arms’ ends on this note of brief perceptual
awakening, its departing speaker leaving his other self ‘stuck
in his tent of light’, ‘The White Lie’ takes this observation as
its broader starting point. As such, the poem goes on to launch
a poetic-philosophical enquiry into the nature of the human
dream it proposes we inhabit, and how poetry might be able to
expose, and even briefly transcend, this habitual state. The poem
continues with a prayer: ‘when I stand between the sunlit and the

74
 shrewd obliquity of speech

sun / make me glass’ (SP 114). Here, the speaker hopes to find a
means of recovery from the distortive effects of consciousness
on his perception. The solution proposed is a familiar one – in
achieving a certain detached anonymity, the self becomes a kind
of transparency. It should come as no surprise that the poem
goes on to describe a sexual encounter, that at first recalls the
spiritually redemptive, self-transcending qualities of genuine
love and intimacy argued for in ‘Letter to the Twins’, in which
the absent father of Romulus and Remus offers his sons tender
advice on ‘the honouring of your lover’ (SP 95). Throughout
Paterson’s oeuvre, sexual intimacy often suggests itself as a
possible means of spiritual enlightenment and redemption.
As Edward Larrissy has noted of Paterson’s love poetry: ‘for
Paterson, love is not merely sex: these poems attempt to describe
the strangeness of the encounter with another, an encounter
of which sexual discovery forms part’.27 Yet, in spite of the
poet in ‘The White Lie’ finding ‘the girl look up at me and
through / me with such a radiant wonder, you / could not read
it as a compliment’, in the end the moment of intimacy fails,
and ‘the light / stalled between us like a sheet, a door, a wall’
(SP 114). Neither committed to the moment’s subjective intensity
nor capable of transcending it, the speaker can only offer a
‘halfhearted opacity’.
‘But consider this’, the poem’s speaker goes on to posit, in a
direct address to the reader that announces renewed intent, a
perspectival shift in the face of its prior account of apparently
failed erotic transcendence. ‘When we leave the room, / the chair,
the bookend or the picture-frame / we had frozen by desire or
spent desire / is reconsumed in its estranging fire’. Devoid of
human presence, the objects of a room, the poem suggests, shrug
off the imposition of their narrow human meaning. We might
note also that the poem’s invocation of fire as a catalytic image
of ‘estranging’ imaginative rebirth echoes Paterson’s use of the
Promethean ‘ashless blaze’ in The Eyes (SP 72). In ‘The White
Lie’ as in ‘Promethean’, fire figures as a means both of reigniting
and of constantly shifting lifeless and delimiting perspectives.
But while the ‘room’ in question may be the intimate theatre of
the poet-speaker and his lover, it equally invokes the immediate
and arresting presence of this room that you likely find yourself
in right now, reading the poem. The poem’s conjuring of the

75
 don paterson

illusion of the present moment thus draws us into, and makes

universal, its forceful philosophical argument. If we were to
‘slip back’ to this room ‘too long asleep to feel our human tread’
(SP 115) we might witness its objects anew, and in turn recognise
that all things possess an abundance of possible meanings and
functions beyond those imposed by the dead metaphors of
human language.
The argument that ‘The White Lie’ puts forward illustrates
how we are not passive receivers of an objectively verifiable
reality (‘the conducting element’), but rather ‘the source’
of all such meaning in the world, since we can’t help but
project our subjective reality into it. As such, the poem invites
productive comparison with the radical aesthetic philosophy of
Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, particularly their concept of
deterritorialisation. Broadly speaking, deterritorialisation is the
decontextualising of a fixed set of relations between objects,
ideas, or individuals, allowing them to be reimagined, realigned,
rethought. The idea is one of an intellectual-imaginative process
that is more metamorphic than metaphoric, in which there is no
longer the illusion of ‘any proper sense or figurative sense, only
a distribution of states that is part of the range of the word’.28 In
this desire to de- and re-codify, Deleuze and Guattari appear to
align philosophy closely with literature, just as Paterson aligns
literature, and specifically poetry, with philosophy. ‘We are born
into a condition of metaphor’, Paterson has claimed, detailing
what he considers to be one of underpinning features of the
human dream: ‘a metaphor really being a contextual restriction
of sense. We are attuned only to a small part of the electro-
magnetic spectrum, and the universe our senses conjure up for
us is not the universe’.29 In this fashion, the poetic-philosophical
project to which Paterson’s verse appears to be increasingly
directed is a process of deterritorialisation – interrogating routine
encounters with the world, through the revivifying pressure of
poetic language, so as the complex nature of wider reality begins
to reveal itself. Rather than aspiring to the traditional poetic
concept of metaphor in which one thing is shown to be similar
to another, ‘The White Lie’ proposes a poetry that aspires to the
metamorphosis of things actually taking from, feeding into, and
‘becoming’ one another, in the absence of any reified meanings.
‘The point is never to leave the in-between’, writes Niall Lucy

76
 shrewd obliquity of speech

of Deleuze and Guattari’s philosophy, ‘affirming the importance

of coming and going rather than starting and finishing’.30 The
summary could as well serve as a pithy description of Paterson’s
ars poetica, and his imaginative, demanding, perceptually
transformative poems.
Where ‘The White Lie’ departs from the anarchic propositions
of Deleuze and Guattari’s deterritorialisations is in its closing
musings. These seem to return us to ‘The Ferryman’s Arms’,
and its hesitant recognition that any process of perceptual
realignment – an apprehension of the human dream world
through which we blunder – remains a necessarily partial
one. In ‘The White Lie’, this is articulated with much greater
verve and conviction, insisting that ‘no one at one with all
the universe / can touch one thing’ (SP 115). Despite the
powerful knowledge with which poetic thought’s exposure of
the human dream can supply us, ‘we must’, the poem argues,
‘stay partly lost to find each other’. But if this is the case,
as the narrator rightly questions, what ‘earthly use are we’
in saving one another? Occupying the ‘supreme divorce’ in
which one isolated consciousness must necessarily remain from
another, it is difficult to see how, as O’Brien puts it, we can use
‘consciousness to redeem us from, well, consciousness’.31 In the
final quatrains of ‘The White Lie’, Paterson proposes that the
possible solution to this dilemma lies in paradox: the paradox of
poetry itself. ‘Only by this – this shrewd obliquity / of speech,
the broken word and the white lie, / do we check ourselves’,
the poem theorises (SP 115). Referring to ‘this’ very instance
of poetic discourse, merging the twin deixis of ‘this’ moment
of poetic composition and realisation with ‘this’ moment in
which you, the reader, encounter the poet’s words on the page,
the poem announces its final thesis in the kind of self-aware,
reflexive, direct register that defines so many of Landing Light’s
poems. It is through poetry, that uniquely analytic means of
tangentially approaching and imaginatively re-encountering
ourselves and the world, that we can manage to more fully
inhabit the divided state of mind necessary for responsible and
meaningful understanding and action. This allows everything
to be ‘reconsumed in its estranging fire’, while also retaining an
anchoring sense of scale and order, ‘that everything might keep
the blackedged look / of things’ (SP 116).

77
 don paterson

In the development of his oeuvre, Landing Light might be

summarised as a volume that finds Paterson advancing his
sense of poetry as a mode of knowledge in two ways. Its poems
seek to define the problematic nature of human consciousness
in the concept of ‘the human dream’, but they also reflexively
assess and consciously enact poetry’s capacity to successfully
negotiate the riven state of being human. It is in Rainer Maria
Rilke’s vision of the lyric god Orpheus that Paterson attempts to
find ‘the ideal resolution to this potentially intolerable schism’
(O 69).

78
 5

Breath, You Invisible Poem:

Orpheus (2006)
Breath, You Invisible Poem

The philosophical treatise of Landing Light’s ‘The White Lie’ is

in many ways the culmination of what Paterson has called ‘his
long and at times painful conversion to scientific materialism’
(O 65). Yet this conversion is never quite complete for a poet
who continues to value the imaginative intellectual potential of
the broadly spiritual, alongside the rational rigours of scientific
thought. ‘Accomplishing this gave me some satisfaction’, admits
Paterson, ‘but it left the room terribly quiet. I then sought some
text I might get in my head as a vade mecum, whereby I could
simply remember what I now held to be most true’ (O 65). In
this spirit, Paterson’s fifth volume, a comprehensive translated
‘version’ of The Sonnets to Orpheus from the German of Rainer
Maria Rilke, is something like a personal, secular holy book.
‘In Rilke, as in Machado’, Sean O’Brien has suggested, ‘Paterson
is drawn to a poet for whom … poetry is an inimitable mode
of knowledge’.1 Just as Paterson found in Machado a poet
thinking on matters both aesthetic and philosophical – poetry
as anonymous and pure lyric utterance; faith as grounded
conviction in the world’s natural wonder – in Rilke, he sees a
not dissimilar lyric ally. ‘I was rather dismayed to discover the
Sonnets’ recent recruitment to the cause of “spiritual literature”’,
writes Paterson in the ‘Afterword’ to Orpheus:
These days, this tends to denote a genre with no practical application
beyond the invocation of a sort of difficult and torpid sense of
well-being. Despite their continual invocation of the Singing God,
and the vague pantheism Rilke occasionally conjures as symbolic
of the connection we have lost to the Earth, the Sonnets are a

79
 don paterson

strongly non-religious work, and easily capable of an anti-religious

interpretation. Though Rilke’s myth – all half-light and demiurge –
smacks of Gnosticism, he was not religious, and strove to locate all
his spiritual wonder in the life we lead now. (O 66)

Again, Paterson is found delineating between religion and

spirituality, restrictive dogma and imaginative wonder. For
Paterson, Rilke is not the intense, distant, idiosyncratic, and
often impenetrable poetic voice that English language readers
have previously found him to be in translation. His own version
of The Sonnets to Orpheus – fifty-five poems composed by Rilke
in two weeks, that the German poet himself described as the
‘dictation’ of an ‘inner impulse’, and ‘no intended or expected
work’2 – emerges from a desire to restore to the poems their
rewarding modern complexity. But the version also succeeds
in its lucidity and human warmth, that blend of thought and
feeling in verse that Paterson has increasingly been drawn
to since The Eyes. It is what Mark Doty has described, in a
review of Paterson’s Orpheus, as ‘a true sense of an inhabited
skin, a pulsing body responding to the life of the senses’.3
These sonnets are also a crucial project in Paterson’s stylistic
development, given their specifically formal nature. As Hugh
Haughton suggests, in an essay addressing what he dubs the
‘Patersonnet’, the sonnet form in Paterson’s Orpheus ‘produces
a strong sense of renewal, in which Paterson develops his own
speculative ontology’.4 As in The Eyes, Paterson’s intention in
Orpheus is one of poetic reimagination. This takes the form of
a dialogue between the spirit of the original and the imperative
of lyric unity, which is to say the infusion of sound and
sense that, for Paterson, is at the heart of the creation of any
lyric poem, perhaps especially the sonnet. As Robert Vilain
states: ‘If Paterson’s poems are versions they are therefore also
replacements – not only in the sense of substitutes, but almost
literally “re-placements.”’5
The stylistic hallmark of Orpheus lies in its attempt to fully
uncover the poetic utility of the sonnet. More than mere
exercise, Paterson versions Rilke as a means of evincing his
sense of the form as an inevitable necessity. While Orpheus
announces Paterson’s first extended engagement with the
sonnet, we have already seen how the form establishes
itself as a persistent fascination from the beginnings of his

80
 breath, you invisible poem

poetry. ‘Nobody can say for certain where or when the sonnet
originated’, Paterson has argued in an extended essay on the
form, ‘but if some thirteenth-century Italian hadn’t “invented”
the sonnet, someone else would have: we would have arrived
at the sonnet as we arrived at the wheel, out of evolutionary
necessity’.6 For a form that can typically seem quite markedly
artificial, this is a bold and not uncontroversial claim to make,
but it is one that Paterson expounds upon with considerable
argumentative rigour. In many ways, it should not surprise
that the sonnet has such powerful appeal for a poet who holds
musical memorability and semantic cohesion as two of the most
important features of the successful poem. His contention with
regard to the sonnet’s inevitability, and its success, is that the
‘visual appeal of an approximately square field of black text on
a sheet of white paper’ must have been ‘impossible to resist’ as
poetry moved from the oral tradition of folklore to the printed
page.7 ‘Which is what the sonnet is, first and foremost’, Paterson
states, ‘a small square poem’ – one that, through virtue of its
attempts to embody unity of meaning in a medium that can
often resist such unity, also makes it a ‘paradox, a little squared
circle’.8
The underlying spiritual connotations of Paterson’s concept
of the sonnet as ‘squared circle’ are worth dwelling on. The
specific notion and ancient puzzle of squaring the circle has
long since proven to be an impossible geometrical task, but as a
more broadly imaginative and symbolic idea, it has continuing
ramifications. These are manifest in our human attempt to map
the transcendent (with the symbol of the circle traditionally
representing infinity and the divine) through the manmade
(wherein the square represents structure and mechanical order),
in the hope of bringing the natural world and the human world
into realignment. The concept is referenced in much world
literature: a pertinent example is in Dante’s Paradiso, where an
attempt to combine the divine and the human finds the poet
struggling with an act that, the poem suggests, may be beyond
human comprehension: ‘As the geometer his mind applies / To
square the circle, nor for all his wit / Finds the right formula,
howe’er he tries, / So strove I with that wonder’.9 On the evidence
of his critical writings and many of the versioned sonnets after
Rilke in Orpheus, Paterson’s ambition appears to be a similar one,

81
 don paterson

striving to somehow locate that ‘spiritual wonder’, as he puts it,

‘in the life we lead now’ (O 66).
Taking Rilke’s lead, Paterson’s ‘Breath’, his version of the first
sonnet in Part Two of the Sonnets, is a manifestly elemental
poem. It begins by addressing breath itself, the life force that
makes speech and song possible, but that which is also being’s
‘counterbalance’, a phenomenon that can equally take life away
(SP 127). The natural rhythm and occurrence of breath makes
it an apt subject to reflect Paterson’s belief in the sonnet form’s
organic development. Breath is described as an ‘invisible poem’
no less, and one that is – uniquely to Paterson’s reimagining –
‘sister to silence’. The significance of the specific addition of this
image emerges when considered alongside one of the ‘Fourteen
Notes on the Version’, included in the appendix to Orpheus:
Charles Simic once memorably said that poems are translations
from the silence. For a version to be any kind of real poem, it must
first reinhabit that extralinguistic silence the original poem once
itself enjoyed – which is to say the poem must make a symbolic
exit from language altogether. In this meditative space, its pattern of
idea and image is reconsumed by its own strangeness, and when it
re-emerges into language rediscovers itself in original speech. (O 75)

On one level, Paterson is here proposing that all ‘real’ poems –

whether they be versions or more purely original compositions
– can only come into existence if the poet is able to access
‘that extralinguistic silence’, which is to say the mysteriously
subconscious realm from which he believes the true poem tends
to emerge, explored in poems such as ‘The Rat’ and ‘A Fraud’
in Landing Light. But on another level, just as the poem is able
to combine mystery with sense through this simultaneously
conscious and unconscious process, he is also suggesting that
poems are especially well placed to combine the spiritual with
the rational, to make a monistic whole of world and human.
‘What estates, // what vast spaces have already poured through
my lungs?’ asks the poet: ‘The four winds / are like daughters
to me’ (SP 127). The suggestion is that even the simple act of
breathing can deliver a striking new knowledge of the interre-
lation of our human selves and the wider world, if due attention
and poetic reimagination are brought to bear upon it. And so,
suddenly, the ‘slow wave’ of breath is the ‘ocean I accumulate

82
 breath, you invisible poem

/ by stealth’, an unbroken connection between our breathing

selves and the whole troposphere. As Stephen Mitchell notes
in the foreword to his translations of Rilke: ‘By the end of The
Sonnets, Rilke is no longer addressing Orpheus, the primal
poet. He has become Orpheus and can speak to his personal
self from the centre of the universe. The cycle is completed.
Life resolves in a single breath.’10 Certainly, ‘Breath’ looks to
briefly square the circle in its metaphorical doubling: breath
is a passport to commune with the universe, and it is also
a guarantor of the poem, of language, and the individual’s
subjective apprehensions. But in a fashion as much Patersonian
as Rilkean, the moment of pure transcendence, the promise of
the isolated human consciousness achieving oneness with the
matter of the universe, is still inevitably, necessarily, indefinitely
deferred. ‘So do you know me, air, that once sailed through
me?’ enquires the poet (SP 127). The air might once have been
‘the leaf and rind’ of every word the poet has spoken, but there
is always a disconnection between the thinking matter of our
being and the incomprehensible indifference of invisible forces,
swirling across the globe.
Paterson’s version of the fifth sonnet of Part Two, ‘Anemone’,
can be read as an attempt to map this disconnection. The poem
reads as an extended metaphor, exploring the human fear that
stems from our self-preserving inability to fully transcend the
perceptual limitations of the human dream. The eponymous
flower of the poem begins by ‘creaking open to the dawn’,
nourished by photosynthesis. But it is not long before the sun’s
intensity ‘floods her white lap till she drowns’, given the ‘tiny
muscle’ at the personified flower’s centre, which is, we are told,
‘tensed to open to the All’ (SP 128). Paterson’s version agrees
with Rilke’s original insofar as it suggests that the anemone’s
is a pure receptivity, one that humankind has become largely
incapable of despite our superior ability to thrive and survive.
‘In our violence, we outlive her’, Paterson claims. ‘But which new
life will see us flower / and face the skies, as true receivers?’
What Paterson’s poem rearticulates through Rilke is exactly
this recognition – of the delimiting price of our cynical and
manipulative human exploits, and consequent detachment from
the universe. We might ‘outlive’ the anemone, but at what
cost? The implication is that a shorter life of truer and more

83
 don paterson

meaningful connection with the natural world may in fact be

preferable, especially since our ‘violence’ will prove ultimately
destructive to ourselves, and not to the indifference of an eternal
universe of which we are a fleeting part. It is this human fear that
Paterson’s poem knowingly projects onto the anemone when the
speaker claims ‘she barely heeds the sunset’s call // or finds the
willpower to refurl / her petal-edges’. We cannot understand the
seeming abandon of the anemone, the poem suggests, which is
‘open to the All’ in spite of the risks such openness involves. But
as a poem that refashions a Rilke original, ‘Anemone’ can also be
read as Paterson paying homage to Rilke’s own sensibility and
artistic resolve. As the German poet wrote in a letter at about
the time of the Sonnets’ composition: ‘I am like the anemone
I once saw in a garden in Rome … in the dark meadow, wide
open, still taking everything in … and alongside, all its prudent
sisters, each one closed.’11 In its correlation with his sense of the
poet as one engaged in the dangerous business of interrogating
their own unconscious and sensory perceptions, Paterson clearly
admires this personal characteristic, and the way it announces
itself in Rilke’s Sonnets. Through Paterson’s understanding of
Rilke, the sonnet form emerges as ‘a box for the poet’s dreams’12
that, like the anemone, is capable of closing around ‘its small
measure of profusion’, but also of ‘opening to the All’ (SP 128).
Rilke’s sonneteering even leads Paterson to suggest that it sets
the poet apart as a prophet of sorts:
In an earlier age we would have had no trouble in describing
the Sonnets – in the manner of their composition, their lucid
vision of the future, their oracular turn of phrase – as a prophetic
book. Which would make Rilke a prophet of sorts; perhaps a fair
description, if what you mean by prophet is someone so sensitive
that they become not only a lightning rod for all the crackling
static of the culture, but also a satellite-dish, a ‘receiver’ (to use a
Rilkean favourite) for things a less precisely attuned and calibrated
sensibility would never be aware of. These individuals possess no
supernatural powers, but do have an abnormally strong sense of
what’s on the wind for us. (O 62–3)

Orpheus as a collection is perhaps best understood as Paterson’s

personal, secular holy book. Extending his unique take on the
via negativa, first outlined in God’s Gift to Women’s ‘Prologue’

84
 breath, you invisible poem

and The Eyes’ ‘Profession of Faith’ (alongside the distinction

these poems draw between the restrictions of religious dogma
and the possibilities of spiritual wonder), the versioning of
Rilke’s Sonnets clearly offered Paterson a means of further
scrutinising the nature of the human dream, and the existential
conundrum of being human. ‘The two principle religious errors
seem to me beautifully refuted in the Sonnets’, Paterson writes
in the ‘Afterword’ to the volume. ‘The first is to think of truth
as being in possession of an inscrutable third party, whose
knowledge and intentions can only be divined’ (O 66). This
reallocation of meaning-making and agency from unspecified
deity to ourselves – a stance warranted by the fact that, as
Paterson argues, ‘we are all the thinking that matter is doing
in this part of the universe’ – is one that we have already seen
broached elsewhere. The notion that any truly meaningful
sense of reality effectively resides in the eye of the beholder,
a world-making imaginative power that can serve as both
blessing and curse, is further explored in a number of Paterson’s
Orpheus poems.
This ties in with the second ‘religious error’ that Paterson
argues the Sonnets neatly refute. This is essentially the idea
that whatever afterlife we are apparently bound for is the truly
miraculous state, while our current life on Earth is demoted
to the mere status of ‘existential preamble’ (O 67). Paterson’s
argument is that much organised religion is responsible for
further cementing the human dream in this way. If we are
encouraged to fully project ourselves into a future beyond our
deaths, this can only serve to damage our sense of responsibility
to the here and now. ‘Religion acts as if it holds the copyright
on the miraculous’, Paterson chides, ‘and yet it is dedicated
to eradicating the real wonder from the human experience’
(O 67–68).
This ‘real wonder’, in Paterson’s take on the Sonnets, is what it
is to be here, making sense of the everyday mystery of the world
through pushing our cerebral faculties to the limits of their
emotional and intellectual understanding. If there is a medium
through which such efforts can be fully focused and maximised,
for Paterson it is poetry. Criticising the manner in which poems
have been increasingly viewed, since Modernism’s heyday in
the 1920s, as completely unparaphrasable works that must be

85
 don paterson

painstakingly interpreted in and of themselves, he suggests

that the poem is unfortunately ‘now rarely treated as a direct
and trustworthy form of human discourse’ (O 64). For Paterson,
however, ‘the Sonnets, for all their occasional obscurity, make a
great deal of plain sense’, and it is this sense that he wants to
see ‘placed at heart of any discussion if the poems are actually
to be useful to us, and perhaps at the heart of all discussion of
poetry if we are to both legitimise and encourage its original
thinking as well as its original speech’ (O 65). Poetry as a fully
fledged mode of knowledge, no less.
‘The Double Realm’, Paterson’s version of Rilke’s sonnet VI
from Part One of the Sonette, is a poem that finds Orpheus as the
‘true emblem’ of this imaginative endeavour (O 8). Discussing
what he views as the ‘informing insight of the Sonnets’, Paterson
outlines that ‘Man is probably unique amongst the mammals
in that he has conscious foreknowledge of his death’ (O 68).
As such, ‘knowing he will die means he acts, in part, as if he
were already dead’. In Rilke’s Sonnets, the mythic Orpheus,
descending to the Underworld only to return to the land of
the living, is the ‘man who has found the perfect balance
between death and life, eternity and the living present’: what
Paterson summarises as ‘the ideal possessor of the “double
realm”’ (O 69). It is this transgressive condition of ghosthood
that Paterson suggests might ‘inform our behaviour’ in both
positive and negative ways – it is our human choice, in other
words, in the meaning we make of the world through our
imaginative faculties, and in choosing to explore the mysteries
of that tangible world and our part in it. ‘Does he belong here?’
the speaker asks us of Orpheus in ‘The Double Realm’: ‘No, his
spacious nature / had its birth in both realms’ (O 8). Orpheus is,
like all of us, a person divided, but as the lyric god, he is also
especially capable of bridging that divide, an example to the rest
of us. As the poem suggests: ‘But he can raise the dead, / and
conjured through his half-transparent lids / confuses that dark
land in everything’. As such, the sudden magical properties of
‘earth-smoke’ and ‘meadow-rue’ appear to Orpheus ‘as real as
their bright bloom’ – the human dream is both recognised and
briefly transcended, so that the human sense, but also the wider
mystery, of each object is revealed. As Paterson speculates in
an aphorism from The Book of Shadows: ‘If the object is allowed

86
 breath, you invisible poem

to shrug off its name, it begins the long road back to its own
intrinsic mystery’ (TBS 13).
In this way, the poem proposes that we might partly emulate
the lyric god, despite lacking his supernatural powers, and
so more widely understand ourselves and the world around
us. To quote Antonio Porchia, outlined in previous chapters
as a significant influence on Paterson’s poetic thinking: ‘The
shadows: some hide, others reveal’; elsewhere, Porchia has
gnomically claimed that ‘sometimes at night, I light a lamp so
as not to see’.13 As we have seen throughout Paterson’s oeuvre,
the darkness can often harbour strangely illuminating truths
– certainly as many as the cold light of day. Through Rilke’s
example, ‘The Double Realm’ suggests Orpheus as the exemplar
of this discerning awareness: ‘whether lifted from the hearth or
the cold clay’, he is apparently capable of reimagining, and so
reigniting the possibility within, ‘pitcher, torque and ring’ (O 8).
This Orphic, stereoscopic view of life is one that is even more
emphatically championed elsewhere in Orpheus.
‘The thirteenth sonnet of the second part is for me the
most valid of all’, Rilke proclaimed in a letter to Katharina
Kippenberg: ‘It includes all the others, and it expresses that
which – though it still far exceeds me – my purest, most final
achievement would someday, in the midst of life, have to
be.’14 Rilke died shortly after the composition and publication
of the Sonette, and on Paterson’s reading and versioning of
this especially significant sonnet in Orpheus, the controversial
suggestion is that this should, in some ways, come as no
surprise. Extending his belief in Rilke’s prophetic sensibility
and attunement, Paterson argues that the German poet ‘was
flying his kite in a thunderstorm’:
Certain kinds of art practice are constitutionally dangerous. We
are real objects in the universe, and so just as affected by vibration
as anything else; however, we continually act as if we’re immune,
and tend to dismiss the ‘sufferings of the artist’ as either mere
drama-queenery or, at best, neurotic excess. They can be both
those things, certainly; but artists also put themselves in the way
of a dangerous kind of sympathetic resonance. Who knows what
remote and inhuman harmony Rilke inadvertently conducted in
their composition; but my hunch is that, even mediated, tamed and
humanised by his great formal mastery, it probably still killed him,

87
 don paterson

even if the effects were delayed: the mind is part of the body, and
they share one another’s ills. (O 63)

We have already seen how Paterson’s poems and critical writings

demonstrate a sense of the mortal perils of composing an authentic
poetry, one that is committed to the active, interrogative pursuit
of renewed understanding. For Paterson, the close scrutiny of
one’s own unconscious, combined with the jolting perceptual
realignment that even a brief escape from the comforts of
the human dream can provide, puts the poet ‘in the way of a
dangerous kind of sympathetic resonance’. In Rilke, he appears
to find an example of this taken to its extreme, unguarded,
almost foolhardy conclusion – and nowhere is Rilke’s personal
fate more apparent than in the argument put forward by sonnet
XIII from Part Two. It certainly seems prescient of Rilke to have
identified the poem as his ‘final achievement’ – in the sense that
it is a major poem within the sequence, but more so in the grave
sense of being a poetic last will and testament.
Paterson’s version is titled ‘The Passing’, a reference both to
the intensely felt yet paradoxically passive resolve that Rilke’s
original advocates as a state of being, but also to the German
poet’s impending mortal demise. ‘Be ahead of all departure’,
Paterson writes, ‘learn to act / as if, like the last winter, it was
all over’ (SP 130). Comparing the opening quatrain of Paterson’s
version to that of Stephen Mitchell’s translation of Rilke’s original
points up some telling distinctions. Rather than opting for the
more nuanced meaning of ‘the last winter’ as Paterson does,
announcing an aptly grave finality, Mitchell renders Rilke’s
lines as simply referring to ‘the winter that has just gone by’.15
Moreover, while Mitchell and Paterson talk similarly of the
‘exact’ winter that Rilke’s poem suggests must be withstood,
Mitchell renders Rilke as proposing that this will ensure the
heart simply ‘survives’, whereas Paterson’s version finds the poet
announcing that ‘your heart will last for ever’. The pertinence of
these differences is best understood in the distinction between
the act of translation and the act of imaginative versioning. ‘This
is not a translation, but a version’, writes Paterson in ‘Fourteen
Notes on the Version’, a short essay in the appendix to Orpheus:
‘A translation tries to remain true to the original words and their
relations … It glosses the original, but does not try to replace it.

88
 breath, you invisible poem

Versions, however, are trying to be poems in their own right’

(O 73). While we might variously disagree over the degree to
which translations harbour an always exacting felicity to the
original, and to which versions succeed as fully fledged poems,
this statement is nevertheless useful in understanding Paterson’s
significant departure from Rilke’s original in the case of ‘The
Passing’. Whereas Mitchell’s translation project is framed by its
attempt to smoothly transpose Rilke from German to English
as the inferred poet-speaker of the Sonnets, Paterson’s Orpheus
announces its distinctive multiplicity of address, one that finds
its origins in his especially complex understanding of direct
address and poem–reader relations, illustrated in discussion of
Landing Light in the previous chapter.
From the volume’s title – Orpheus – we therefore infer that
these are poems spoken with a timeless and anonymous lyric
voice, sonnets as much ‘to’ Orpheus as they are ‘to’ Rilke and
to the anticipated variety of listeners they might encounter,
as well as poems that occasionally speak on behalf of Rilke.
They are poems that look forward but that also listen back,
inhabiting the ‘double realm’ through keeping one eye on the
living present – their immediacy of address; their modern
adaptation of Rilke’s ever-relevant thematic concerns – and
one eye on the past: not least the strange circumstances of the
original sonnets’ composition. In this manner, Paterson’s version
of ‘The Passing’ is both a reflection of Rilke’s philosophy, but
also a sceptical commentary on the extremes to which Rilke’s
sacrifice to lyric drive and inspiration would lead. As such,
‘The Passing’ amplifies the tone of the original, giving the clear
sense of a voice in the grip of prophetic – but also potentially
self-annihilating – enlightenment. The dubious immortality that
Paterson has the poem’s speaker promise us – ‘your heart will
last for ever’, but also the instruction to ‘die’, ‘that you might
pass / into the pure accord’ – is one example of this (SP 130).
Another is the imperative to ‘be the glass / that shatters in the
sound of its own ringing’. In the ‘Afterword’ to Orpheus, it is
telling that Paterson confesses to having considered rendering
Rilke’s original phrase of zerschlug – meaning something like
‘shattered’ or ‘smashed’ – as ‘shiver’ or ‘tremble’, on account that
‘a shattered glass is no use to anyone’ (O 63). There is obvious
concern on Paterson’s part in regard to the Rilkean willingness

89
 don paterson

to ‘unwisely’ put oneself in the way of too much ‘sympathetic

resonance’.
In the event, ‘The Passing’ emerges as a poem that approves of
Rilke’s philosophy, but with an important reservation. Paterson
espouses Rilke’s view that we should sing with the ‘sound of
our own ringing’ (SP 130); like the poetic-philosophical treatise
outlined in Landing Light’s ‘The White Lie’, this invokes an
imaginative detachment from the restrictions of sense that the
human dream imposes, allowing for a partial reconnection
with our elemental, earthly home. Yet much as ‘The White Lie’
outlines the importance of poetry as perceptual reawakening
with a concomitant commitment to the structure of sense and
order – ‘the poets’ beautiful tightrope-walk … the one between
sense and mystery’16 – it is Rilke’s apprehension of Orpheus’s
dual view of life and death, a more balanced perspective,
of which Paterson approves. Where Rilke veers towards the
potentially self-destructive abandon proposed in certain
Sonnets, Paterson is less convinced. ‘Take all of nature, its one
vast aggregate’, ‘The Passing’ advises in its final lines, ‘jubilantly
multiply it by / the nothing of yourself, and clear the slate’. On
the one hand, through the example of Rilke’s bold assertions,
Paterson is further advocating the loss of self – which is to say
that of the narrowly human – to the monistic world at large. But
on the other, the finality of the phrase ‘clear the slate’ infers the
danger of embracing a full departure from our evolutionarily
conditioned means of engaging with the world, and with one
another. The complete erasure offered by the death realm, an
Orphic Underworld that is ‘fully honoured’, is simply pure
annihilation, which Paterson suggests is ‘no use to anyone’.
In discussion of the sonnet ‘Poetry’ – the manifesto-in-
miniature at the heart of The Eyes – we found Paterson first fully
aligning himself with the aesthetics of poetic anonymity. The
exploratory play with personae in God’s Gift to Women, moving
beyond T. S. Eliot’s conscious workshopping of the self towards
a poetry that inevitably undoes the self, saw Paterson’s poetry
establish a new emotional urgency and seriousness for itself
through adopting Machado’s example. ‘Poetry’ suggests that
the communal medium of language itself, in which the initial
feeling that ignites the poem is tempered and universalised,
should be the primary agent in poetic discourse, allowing

90
 breath, you invisible poem

for poems that both speak of and manage to invoke shared

emotion, underpinned by sharp critical thinking. The result,
when successful, is a poetry that combines felt immediacy – the
powerful illusion of the present moment, and a present speaker
– with timeless poetic intelligence and wisdom. Increasingly,
this appears to be the ambitious aim of Paterson’s verse, what
Sean O’Brien describes as ‘a shedding of particulars in pursuit of
a final adaptability’.17 It is an attempt, in other words, to extract
the resonant moment of existential revelation and perceptual
clarity from the otherwise irrelevant aspects of circumstance
and modernity that surround it.
In Orpheus, Paterson uncovers Rilke as a poetic ally in his
sense of verse’s transcendental potential. ‘Ultimately there is
only one poet’, Rilke wrote in 1920, ‘that infinite one who makes
himself felt, here and there through the ages, in a mind that can
surrender to him’.18 For Rilke, it is clearly the case that the ‘one
poet’ is Orpheus, the lyric god who, through the captivating
medium of song, charms all creatures through the musical
truth of his lyre – a musical truth, and way of being, that Rilke
sought to emulate in his Sonette. As Paterson’s ‘Leaving’ puts it,
echoing Rilke’s original lines: ‘Orpheus, we say / wherever the
true song is manifest’ (SP 119). But for Paterson, the troublesome
issue remains in the fate that met with Rilke, in seeming to
surrender himself to – and so confuse himself with – the lyric
god. ‘Rilke knew he was singing more clearly than he ever had’,
as the ‘Afterword’ states, ‘and – feeling himself so strongly in the
god’s grip, one appointed to praise – at times conflates himself with
the singing god almost unthinkingly. This is self-astonishment
as much as it is arrogance, and we forgive this as easily as we
forgive Dante his vanities in the Commedia’ (O 61). What Paterson
is primarily looking for in Rilke, and in the figure of Orpheus,
is a means of inhabiting something of what he sees as the ‘true
song’, but one with a more level-headed, recognisably human
message.
‘A God’, Paterson’s version after sonnet III of Part One of the
Sonette, is a poem about the difficulty of imitating a deity like
Orpheus. But it also departs from Rilke’s original, in clearly
addressing the dangers of such imitation. What the poet might
learn from Orpheus’s example is one thing; the damage of
confusing oneself with the lyric god is quite another. ‘A god can

91
 don paterson

do it. But will you tell me how / a man can enter through the
lyre’s strings?’ implores the poet-speaker in Stephen Mitchell’s
broadly faithful translation of Rilke’s original.19 In Paterson’s ‘A
God’, the question is put rather differently: ‘But how can a man
follow, / will someone tell me, through the narrow lyre?’ (O 5).
This sounds a note of incredulity at Rilke’s endeavour, but also
suggests a historical awareness of the fate that, in Paterson’s
view, met with Rilke as a result of the Sonnets’ ‘dictation’.
Similarly, the answer in ‘A God’ is much more definite than
the original: ‘His mind is cloven. No temple to Apollo / can rise
at such a crossroads’ (O 5). Man and god are simply different
creatures, with different capabilities.
In spite of the pronounced scepticism in the poem’s opening
lines, rejecting the plain imitation of Orpheus, the remainder
of ‘A God’ serves to outline what the mortal poet can learn
from the lyric god, acting as an extension of the ars poetica
first outlined in ‘Poetry’ from The Eyes. ‘Song is not desire; so
you taught’, the speaker announces: ‘Nor is it courtship, nor is
it courtship’s prize. / Song is being’ (O 5). We have returned,
in part, to the Machadian territory of the ‘bright coal’ of the
poet’s love as it ‘begins to smoulder’, smothering the deeply
reflective anonymity of the ‘pure verse’ in an excess of personal,
‘boastful’ feeling (SP 71). But what Paterson also uncovers in
‘A God’, through Rilke’s commune with Orpheus, is a clearer
distinction between the ‘kinds of breath’ that are the life force
of ‘true singing’, which is to say the true poem, balanced
between sound and silence. ‘Youth – / don’t fool yourself that
love unlocks this art’, the poet-speaker reprimands the would-be
poet in the sonnet’s decisive turn, as if suddenly channelling
the voice of Orpheus himself (O 5). The suggestion is that, while
the poet might conjure verse from ‘the sudden songs’ that come
with ‘love’s voice’, these are inauthentic and fleeting: ‘They’ll
end’. ‘True singing is another kind of breath’, the poem quietly
concludes of lasting verse: ‘A breath of nothing. A sigh in a
god. A wind.’
The purpose to which Paterson’s individual take on the via
negativa has long been directed appears to reach its pinnacle in
the terseness of this Rilkean revelation. As was first mooted in
the concluding lines of ‘A Private Bottling’ in God’s Gift to Women,
where the speaker admonishes himself to keep the ‘sentimental

92
 breath, you invisible poem

residue’ of experience sharply in view while raising the ‘purely /

offertory glass that tastes of nothing / but silence’, for Paterson,
as for Rilke, it is in contemplation of absence, of the sound and
sensation of nothing itself, where poetic clarity and truth resides
(SP 36). It is here, Paterson suggests, that our perceptions are
able to briefly escape the blinkered concerns of the individual
self. Song – the combination of lyric and music that is ‘unique’
to humankind, offering ‘a stay against time’s passing’20 – is being:
an awareness of the self, and its mortality, in the here-and-
now of the universe and time’s flow towards nothingness, to
entropy’s absolute absence. Gesang ist Dasein: in so versioning
Rilke’s phrase, Paterson creates a concise aphorism for that
which has preoccupied his poetry from the outset – the nature of
existence and human consciousness, understood in both broadly
spiritual and scientific-materialist terms; and how to develop an
ontology to make fuller sense of that very existential dilemma
through the medium of poetry. The answer, it appears, is in
the singing line that conflates sound and sense, allowing for
the extralinguistic perceptual transformation that can conjure
a presence out of absence, finding sustaining meaning where,
outside of our human perception, there is none. As Paterson
argues in The Poem: ‘For its ability to unite our choppy and
fragmented perception by singing across the gaps, song has long
been our aspirational archetype … Orpheus used song to cross
the ultimate dividing border, and defy death itself.’21 But such
‘songs’ as lyric poems must be precisely calibrated and carefully
weighted, if they are to utilise language to reach for emotion and
understanding beyond language itself. ‘He who tells the truth
says almost nothing’, Antonio Porchia once claimed, while also
suggesting that ‘only a few arrive at nothing, because the way
is long’.22 It is the pared-back clarity and minimalist diction of
the most successful poems in Paterson’s sixth volume, Rain, that
illustrate these maxims in action. Here the very act of poetry
becomes an enterprise and art form to be continually suspected,
queried, and stripped back.

93
 6

None of This Matters:

Rain (2009)
None of This Matters

In his collection of aphorisms The Book of Shadows, Paterson

outlines the ‘four lives’ of the poet – or rather, the stages
through which he suggests the lyric poet passes in their
increasing understanding of the art. Having first shed their ‘lyric
innocence’, we are told that they then awaken to the fact that a
poet is ‘someone whom words continually fail’ (TBS 83). Landing Light
showed Paterson entering the third stage of this chronology:
by now thoroughly suspicious of his art, the poet decides to
‘leave the tiny house of the poem to inspect the façade, and
learn something of the architectural mysteries he once had no
desire to penetrate’. Piercing enquiries into the nature of poetic
composition and the self, alongside the interrogative assessment
of poetry’s imaginative capacities as a unique means of exploring
the human condition, are characteristic of Landing Light as a
whole. In its varying forms, tonal shifts, and artistic scope, the
collection undoubtedly stands as Paterson’s most wide-ranging.
Yet rather than an intensification of this expansiveness, the
‘fourth stage’ that Paterson identifies in the poet’s life suggests a
return, perhaps wishfully, to the innocence of that original ‘lyric
muse’ – an innocence that Paterson suggests must be ‘conscien-
tiously, even cynically defended’ (TBS 83).
Whether or not this seriocomic aphorism rings true is one
thing; what it might imply as a personal reflection on the unusual
trajectory of Paterson’s career is another. Rain, Paterson’s sixth
volume, can be viewed as a book that reveals his poetry entering
into this ‘phase’ of lyrical clarity. The experienced poet can
never hope to unthink the knowledge that a long apprenticeship
in the art of poetry brings, but where a poet as able as Paterson is

95
 don paterson

concerned, said knowledge can have a curious effect on the style

of their writing. After all, the marked stylistic shifts between
Paterson’s collections, alongside his unusual understanding and
application of poetry as a unique mode of knowledge, are what
mark him out among his contemporaries. In her review of Rain,
A. E. Stallings suggests that we might expect an ‘easy breeziness,
a breathiness’ in a poet’s later work. Instead, as she observes,
‘Paterson’s poems have become more grounded … and have a
noon-day clarity with sharp shadows.’1
‘Only the rarest artists move towards simplicity’. So Paterson
has claimed, stating that ‘the rest progress, which invariably
means complication, as if you measured your advance by
the number of readers you leave behind’ (TBS 42). While not
explicitly inferring his own work in this statement, Paterson
is nevertheless outlining a particular, and doubtless personal,
artistic ambition – one that he has set about attempting to fulfil.
In his ars poetica, this notion is given a broader critical footing, in
a tripartite outline of what Paterson views to be poetry’s ‘most
powerful mnemonic devices’: brief speech, patterned speech,
and original speech. ‘Brevity of speech is the poem’s most basic
formal strategy; originality of speech, its most basic literary
virtue; patterned speech, its most basic identifying feature’, he
argues, before going on to suggest that ‘the mere act of making
brief speech often produces both original and patterned speech’.2
It is this call for clarity and brevity that finds its apogee in
the poems of Rain. Given Paterson’s acute awareness of poetry’s
shortcomings – how the poem’s inventive utilisation of the
flawed medium of language can often serve, in the end, only to
outline how ‘the word, in fact, falls terribly short of the world’
(TBS 83) – combined with his bold ambition to realise poetry
as a means of intellectual enquiry, the shift in style seems to
announce a natural progression. ‘Only the best poets can risk
simplicity’, Paterson reiterates in an aphorism from The Blind Eye:
‘The rest of us are merely exposed by it. Only those same poets
can risk complexity too: the rest invariably fail to realise the
greatly increased responsibility towards clarity that it demands’
(BE 27). Brevity and clarity, in other words, are in Paterson’s
view essential components of a poetic aesthetic that seeks not
only to uncover the myriad complexities of the human condition
and the universe we find ourselves situated within, but to also

96
 none of this matters

make useful sense of them, equipping both poet and reader with
the ability to reconceptualise, reimagine and so, on some level,
remake the world before them.
In charting the stylistic development of Paterson’s oeuvre,
we have uncovered poetic form (and the imaginative processes
it can enable) as an abiding fascination. Paterson’s frequent
adherence to poetic forms – whether conventional, adapted, or
self-invented – rarely find him paying mere lip service to some
misguided notion of tradition. Rather, his sense and use of
form is an active, purposeful, and energising one, what Michael
Donaghy once called the ‘serendipity provided by negotiation
with a resistant medium’.3 Briefly freeing the poet from conscious
thought, it is this approach that enables the kind of intellectually
and emotionally transformative effects that Paterson prizes so
highly, in his commitment to the poem as a means of generating
new understanding.
‘The Lie’, a haunting poem in Rain that describes an invented
but strangely tangible creature called The Lie, at first invites
a straightforward reading. Its sophisticated use of end-rhyme,
employing only two rhymes throughout its five quatrains and
final two lines, gives plainspoken voice to a narrator who is
found confessing to a disturbing ritual. Each day, we are told,
he rises ‘before the house had woken’ to attend to the ‘drip’ and
secure the ‘shackles’ of The Lie, who, it transpires, is secretly
locked up in his basement. Practised as he is in this ‘chore’, the
speaker coolly states that he had ‘counted maybe thirteen years
or more / since last I’d felt the urge to meet his eye’ (SP 146).
However, during one such routine inspection, he accidentally
catches the gag of The Lie, tearing it away. At this, The Lie is
revealed to be ‘a boy of maybe three or four’, sickly and grim,
who asks – in a tone that may suggest knowing accusation as
much as apparent innocence – ‘Why do you call me The Lie?’
Dumbfounded or else appalled, the narrator tells how he ‘could
make him no reply’, before he hurriedly retied the gag ‘as tight
as it would tie’ and ‘locked the door and locked the door and
locked the door’.
The poem’s subject matter appears to be psychological
repression. Given the fictional, figurative nature of ‘The Lie’, the
obvious implication is that the narrator has something terrifying
locked up in his psychic basement, the traumatic memory of a

97
 don paterson

past experience that he cannot forget or rid himself, finding its

symbolic and literal embodiment as a creature he must dutifully,
and sometimes painfully, attend to. As Sean O’Brien has argued:
‘Perhaps the force of this strange, powerful, terrible poem arises
from the strategy of not revealing what the story behind the
secret is: the imprisoned Lie can seem to speak to anyone.’4
There is certainly a disturbing open-endedness to the poem’s
unusual use of metaphor: rather than the conventional processes
by which we might expect a lyric poem to suggestively describe
one thing in terms of another, inviting a renewed apprehension
of both things, ‘The Lie’ seems more allegorical. Its symbolic
figure of the eponymous Lie comes to represent whatever awful
self-torment or unspeakable self-deception the reader’s mind
inevitably projects into it.
In this way, the poem can be seen to make use of, and support
the case for, Paterson’s argument that intelligible meaning ‘just
isn’t in residence anywhere’, whether that be in poems or in other
instances of discourse.5 Rather, as ‘The Lie’ serves to manipulate
and illustrate, meaning is instead generated, produced by our
active and intelligent engagement, and occurs in poems within
‘the dynamic flux of our reading and rereading’.6 In the absence
of any clear outline of what The Lie might specifically represent,
the poem invites the reader’s thoughts to rush in and fill the void
it has created. Whether real or imagined, we all have our version
of The Lie, and ‘The Lie’ calculates for that very fact, manipu-
lating our tendency to read in and seek out meaning. What the
reader gets for their trouble, like the poet, is a stark awakening
to whatever sinister personal torment might be concerning
them, before the poem mercifully silences it, and attempts to
lock up the mind’s cellar.
Yet, as one critic has argued, it is likely ‘too simple and
clinical to say that this poem deals only with repression and
the dawning of some horrified self-awareness’.7 Paying attention
to the poem’s formal qualities as well as its inferred thematic
content might equally suggest that ‘The Lie’ is a poem about
‘the lie’ of poetry itself. A Paterson poem is unusually and
intelligently conscious of itself, and by extension all poetry, as
a necessary fiction, a manmade work of inevitable artifice. But
while many of Paterson’s poems serve to sharply illustrate the
ever-present gap between our everyday use of language and the

98
 none of this matters

complexities of the physical world beyond human perception,

they are also demonstrably committed to serving a real-world
purpose. This is most apparent in Paterson’s sense of the art
form as a means of imaginatively turning language against
its original purpose of staid conceptual division, bridging the
divide between our linguistically shaped encounters with the
world, and the mysterious nature of reality beyond ‘the human
dream’. As Paterson has claimed in interview: ‘Poetic language
has two functions; to make things clear and distinct where
they weren’t, and to join them back up again when they were
broken apart. It’s a natural function of language, and the way
that language, certainly, redeems itself.’8
It is this key tension – between poetry’s promise as a genuine
mode of knowledge, and the poet’s inevitable resort to sleights
of hand in what is, fundamentally, the poem’s manufactured
text-world – that appears to have driven so much of Paterson’s
composition over the years. In the process he has become, as one
critic has noted, ‘both pursuer and pursued’, a poet of such a
calibre that his fate is, perhaps, to be ‘chased offstage by the art
he once chased’.9 In ‘The Lie’, there are numerous suggestions
that propose that it is the very craft of poetry itself that is
‘locked’ in the psychic basement of the poet-speaker’s mind. The
‘shackles’ that bind The Lie and that the narrator is at pains to
keep secure despite the creature’s obvious lack of resistance, find
their equivalence in the steady iambic pentameter of the poem
(SP 146). Though the situation is a strange one – both in the
sense of the narrator’s entrapment of The Lie, and in the peculiar
act of the reader’s engagement with the poem – everything is
apparently under control, both literally and metrically. After
all, the speaker is ‘so practised’ in the ‘chore’ of revivifying and
otherwise attending to The Lie (‘his drip changed’), that he has
‘counted maybe thirteen years or more’ since he last met ‘his
eye’.
In many ways, the ‘rapport’ between the two is like that of the
accomplished poet’s relationship with his craft: something they
may be able to engage with so routinely that they fall into the
habit of versifying in an altogether habitual, non-interrogative
manner. The speaker’s testing of the ‘ligature’ binding The Lie
reinforces this interpretation, if we consider that, as well as
defining the act of tying and binding in a literal sense, ‘ligature’

99
 don paterson

also more figuratively refers to anything that unifies or bonds

together – the lyric unity of the poem, no less. But if, as the
poem suggests, this unity becomes mere rehearsal, and no more
than a forced and habitual process such as that of the narrator’s
relationship with The Lie, it serves to be both emotionally
inauthentic (refusing to look at oneself, and one’s poetic practice,
with clear-eyed perspicacity) and even abusive. At best, it is
nothing more than a ‘chore’ – for the narrator checking on his
Lie, morning after morning, and for author and reader alike. A
poet might possess the two sides of the self that are necessary
for true poetic composition: the manipulative conscious mind
and the unbidden spontaneity of unrehearsed sensibility. But
unless the poet remains vigilant and sufficiently demanding of
their writing, their verse in time might simply turn into tired
habit.
Remaining authentic to the vocation of poet is, for Paterson,
to feel ‘the urge to meet the eye’ of whatever is locked deep
in the unconscious, to entertain Rilke’s example of the Orphic
path, and to ‘access those darker corridors of the memory and
imagination from which we might recover the true poem’.10 It
is the poet-speaker’s sudden reawakening to this fact, and the
consequent fear that this instils, that determines his reaction to
The Lie’s question: ‘Why do you call me The Lie?’ He cannot make
a reply because it is a fair question and he knows it: The Lie may
be a fiction in so far as he is the product of the poet-speaker’s
imagination, but he is an altogether real torment, as real as the
poem to which he gives his name, and as real as its disturbing
effects. As Paterson has long claimed, if we accept that the way
we look at the world is all there is of the world (at least as we
know it), then rather than being distinct from it, ‘the imagination
is how we correct reality for error’.
The Lie ends up being one such correction, a reminder of
why the poet can sometimes ‘hate the very poem that they are
writing’, as Dan Chiasson has claimed, ‘in language brilliant and
moving enough to convey how useless and phony the language
of poetry is’.11 The crafted, complexly end-rhymed quatrains
of the poem, the deftly controlled metre and lyric poise, only
serve in the end to undermine themselves and the poet-speaker,
collapsing from crafted elegance and structured order into a
frantic rush to ‘lock the door’ of the poem shut, before The Lie

100
 none of this matters

‘could say more’ (SP 146). In this manner, ‘The Lie’ can be seen
to suggest that the more capable, committed, imaginatively, and
formally resourceful the poet, the more apparent to them the
shortcomings of any form of poetic craft are. This leaves them
chastened and uncertain, but also with a peculiarly advanced
understanding of the art form’s claims to authenticity, and its
limitations.
Paterson has a keenly metaphysical interest in the dilemma
of human consciousness. His work assesses the challenges
that the human dream poses for a poetry whose purpose
and ambition is to ‘articulate new concepts that the language
can’t yet accommodate’.12 As our discussion of ‘The White Lie’
revealed, ‘only by this … shrewd obliquity / of speech’ can we
hope to ‘check ourselves’ (SP 115). Poetry is a unique means of
weighing our evolutionarily conditioned means of engagement
(‘the blackedged / look of things’) against the often inaccessible
nature of a reality beyond such habitual perception, as the world
is ‘reconsumed in its estranging fire’ through the transformative
force of poetic language (SP 114).
In Rain, Paterson exploits this understanding, and his
consequently ambitious sense of poetry’s purpose to its fullest
heights, in poems that make a virtue of both verse’s knowledge-
generating capabilities and its inevitable shortcomings. A poem
such as ‘The Lie’ manages both to convincingly assert and
undermine poetry’s potential – in its form, its necessary artifice,
its structures and fractures, and in its musically dependent
meaning-making. As an accomplished jazz guitarist of many
years, it is unsurprising that musicality and song – which are
central to his appreciation of Rilke’s adaptation of the Orpheus
myth – should figure so strongly in Paterson’s concept of the
lyric poem. ‘The lovely thing about music’, he once stated in a
radio interview, ‘is that it is a pure medium – all you need is the
air and some silence. Whereas poetry has a problem because its
medium is language, so it’s kind of a meta-art if you like, it has
to ride on the structure of language for its meaning.’13
By these lights, music appears to be the superior art form,
at which point one might ask why an able musician who
believes this would choose to write poetry at all. But while
Paterson argues the case for music as a more effective means
of making immediate emotional sense, he clearly believes that

101
 don paterson

poetry, however compromised it may be by language’s intrinsic

shortcomings, is the only cerebral means to bridge what he calls
‘the epistemic asymmetry between the inner and outer realms’,14
which is to say the distorted perceptual divide between the
isolated self and the wider world. In his ars poetica treatise The
Poem, this process is outlined as one dependent on the concept
of ‘trope’. As Paterson suggests, the term ‘trope’ is commonly
used to refer to ‘a figurative or metaphorical expression’, while
in rhetoric it describes ‘a word or phrase that “turns” from its
normal use’.15 Here the term is adapted to a specifically poetic
purpose, however, to ‘describe the way in which one idea
turns towards or into another – and in doing so, creates an
original expression to reflect this new or composite thought’.16
In other words, tropes are the conventional means by which
the poet makes innovative use of the existing structures of
language, to permit new ideas and unexperienced feelings a
new expression in the language. As Derek Attridge suggests,
‘tropes are machinery which make possible the operation of
inventiveness in the domain of meaning’.17 They exist because,
in Paterson’s phrase, we are ‘walking trope-generators’, which
is to say we must always generate wider meaning from the
information we can gather ‘in our perceptually reduced circum-
stances’.18 We might usefully view the human condition itself as
a kind of existential trope, a condition of metaphor or metonymy,
‘depending on whether you regard your experience of the world
as false or partial’.19 To view it as accurate, however, as any
reader who has paid sufficient attention to Paterson’s disori-
enting and perceptually reimaginative poetry can attest, is not
an option.
‘The human trope’ is what Paterson views as the ‘symbolic
accommodation’ that defines the human dream.20 But it is
also the means by which language’s function as a delimiting
facilitator of human utility is turned against itself, the destabi-
lising and alternative ‘poetic function’ of language that Paterson
believes is poetry’s raison d’être. ‘Many of us have an inkling
that this human dream is … false or partial, and take steps to
correct it’, he claims. ‘This is the position occupied by human art,
whose principal function is to join us to what we are not, and in
doing so accomplish two beautifully contrastive things: restore
something of the mystery of the wider world to our narrow

102
 none of this matters

human perception, and bring some of its hidden connections

to light.’21 As such, the skilled poet is able to manipulate our
‘astonishing capacity for oversignifying, for “reading in”’22 in
order to create a new conceptual domain – that of the poem
itself, which allows the profound linguistic articulation of a
new idea or feeling.
‘Two Trees’ is one such poem, a narrative that appears to
speak in strangely disguised metaphorical terms. It begins with
the story of one ‘Don Miguel’, who wakes up one morning
with the unbidden and novel idea of ‘grafting his orange to his
lemon tree’ (SP 139). The process of doing so is painstaking:
‘It took him the whole day to work them free’, we are told,
and even once they were lashed together, ‘for twelve months,
from the shame or from the fright / they put forth nothing’.
Eventually, however, ‘two lights’ appeared in the tree’s leaves,
and over the years the two trees appeared as one, a ‘magic
tree’ giving a ‘double crop’ (SP 139). This entire first stanza
knowingly invites a particular metaphoric reading. In consisting
of twelve full-rhymed lines of iambic pentameter – six couplets
that almost appear to be missing a seventh, which would make
for a variant sonnet – it encourages the reader to view Don
Miguel’s difficult but successful attempt to combine ‘two trees’
as a metaphor for poetic conception. Like the poet negotiating
two different conceptual domains to produce new meaning
and feeling through inventive use of extended metaphor, Don
Miguel is engaged in making ‘magic’ out of two seemingly
incompatible things. But where the reader might expect the final
lines of the sonnet to make a happy conclusion of this successful
imaginative enterprise, instead the stanza breaks into a second,
offering a disturbing turn in its tale:
The man who bought the house had had no dream
so who can say what dark malicious whim
led him to take his axe and split the bole
along its fused seam, then dig two holes.
And no, they did not die from solitude;
nor did their branches bear a sterile fruit;
nor did their unhealed flanks weep every spring
for those four yards that lost them everything
as each strained on its shackled root to face
the other’s empty, intricate embrace.

103
 don paterson

They were trees, and trees don’t weep or ache or shout.

And trees are all this poem is about. (SP 139)

This second stanza cleverly shifts the metaphorical meaning

we have been encouraged to develop in our reading of the
first, simultaneously affirming it while denying it. When Don
Miguel sells his house, the man who buys it has had ‘no dream’,
implying he is not one engaged (nor even much interested) in the
enterprise and imaginative efforts of the previous incumbent. He
is not a poet or a reader, in other words, with a mind sensitive
to the various ways of connecting and reimagining the world.
The human dream, to which this ‘man’ appears to be beholden,
is all, a sense of order he seems to want to re-impose when he
separates and divides the magic tree on a ‘malicious whim’. In
this manner, the digging of ‘two holes’ not only refers literally
to the act of separately replanting the trees, but figuratively
suggests the everyday dead metaphors of the lemon tree and the
orange tree, comfortably re-labelled and re-compartmentalised.
But this image of the dug hole also evokes, disconcertingly,
a much more human burial. This is encouraged by the poem’s
insistent but deliberately unconvincing attempts to deny any
kind of pathetic fallacy that we might impose on the separated
trees. ‘No, they did not die from solitude’, the poem claims,
second-guessing our meaning-making in typical Patersonian
fashion, before ratcheting up the negatively defined emotional
intensity: ‘nor did their unhealed flanks weep every spring
/ for those four yards that lost them everything’. In the end,
apparently, the trees are what they are: trees, and whatever
human thoughts or feelings we might project onto them are
simply the product of anthropocentric arrogance – something
that the poem has manipulated, but for which, it is implied, we
as readers are also responsible. And yet – the trees are not just
trees, not in a poem that so clearly utilises them to affecting
metaphorical ends. As A. E. Stallings notes of the speaker’s
emphatic but unconvincing dismissal:
The denial rings both true and false – and hints at more pain than
would a glib exploitation of trees as metaphor. Though he has
invoked the human comparison only to reject it, the comparison
remains invoked, like an unresolved dissonance throbbing in the
air.23

104
 none of this matters

The technique is one that exploits the way in which metaphor

functions in order to assert a feeling so powerful it can often
only be expressed indirectly: grief. As such, the two trees of
the poem emerge as two separated lovers. Their painful parting
is made more manageable for the lovelorn speaker by the
metaphorical tale of the trees, which allows the poem to honour
the initial ‘magic’ of their love, which ‘over the years’ got so
‘tangled up’ its force seemed to change the shape and texture of
the very world around them: ‘not one kid in the village’ didn’t
know about it. But the metaphor also achieves the surprising
effect of allowing the speaker both to deny his lingering feelings
of anguish in the consequent break-up (insisting it is not a
metaphor, but a purely literal story about two trees), while at
the same time expressing and communicating something of
that very anguish, in a poem that the poet knows, as well as
reader, will be read as the extended metaphor it so clearly and
affectingly is. If this sounds complicated, it is because the poem
achieves these intellectually and emotionally transformative
effects in a way that resists critical and analytical explanation.
The poem’s Machadian combination of difficult thought and
feeling, through the medium of remarkably simple yet poetically
charged language, conjures a precise sense of grief and loss that
is without full articulation outside of the poem itself.
As one critic remarked: ‘in Rain, what matters is children,
friends, and work. But what also matters, it turns out, is matter,
matter driven by the uncompromising laws of matter.’24 The
poems variously deal with complex personal negotiations and
relationships – between lovers, the living and the dead, a poet
and their work. But this emotive, everyday subject matter draws
the reader into the poem only to give way to complex poetic-
philosophical thinking – on the nature of human consciousness,
forms both manmade and organic, and the mysterious forces
governing the universe. Ever since Nil Nil’s ‘The Ferryman’s
Arms’, where the planetary alignment of balls on a pool table
found that ‘physics itself becomes something negotiable’ (SP 3),
the matter of the universe and our engagement with it has
materialised as a recurrent interest throughout Paterson’s
oeuvre. In Rain, this interest has developed into an all-pervasive
concern, not least given his by now heightened awareness of
what he terms in The Blind Eye as ‘the universal defining error of

105
 don paterson

the doomed intelligence’: the manner in which humankind has

‘mistaken its dream for its element’, divorcing the human and
the natural (BE 120). As another critic has noted: ‘That awareness
of the viewing, thinking self is evident throughout Rain’, a
feature that illustrates how the book is primarily concerned
‘with a kind of Platonic inquiry into the self and its relation to
the physical world’.25
Perhaps the most avowedly philosophical poem in Rain is the
‘The Day’. Here, Paterson makes resourceful use of the literary
trope of metonymy, whereby a poem’s imaginative sugges-
tiveness within a given semantic category ‘allows us to apply
the same rule to many subjects in any arbitrarily law-governed
context’.26 This enables the poem to encourage the reader to
extrapolate from its specific scenario towards wider truths about
consciousness and the universe in which it finds itself. We will
shortly address the purpose to which metonymy appears to be
put in the poem, but first it is worth discussing the narrative
tenor and argumentative trajectory that Paterson employs in
‘The Day’, and whereabouts this finds its origins.
‘The Day’ begins with a stark axiomatic statement, designed
to immediately puncture any sentimentally religious view of the
world: ‘Life is no miracle’ (SP 156). In this way, the poem sets
out Paterson’s stall, his brand of spiritually attuned scientific
materialism locating wonder and mystery not in the alleged
uniqueness of the human condition, but in the possibility that,
rather than being ‘chosen’ by some unspecified and dubious
deity, we are simply ‘too far apart / to know ourselves the
commonplace we are’. We are instead, the poem argues, ‘as
precious only as the gold in the sea: / nowhere and everywhere’,
a claim whose simile does not exactly refute the astonishing
nature of human life, but sensibly suggests that in the incompre-
hensible vastness of the universe, or ‘even in our own small
galaxy’, there is, in all possibility, life on another planet that we
might recognise as such, were we ever able to access it.
Yet, of course, it is only through the human imagination,
and the promise of perceptual transformation that the poem
offers, that we can access this alien realm. ‘So be assured’, the
poem encourages us, drawing the reader into its hypothetical
yet suddenly tangible setting. If we choose to accept it, there
is indeed ‘another town’ that, through the poem’s deictic force,

106
 none of this matters

is much like that which anonymous narrator and reader find

themselves, but one so distant that its ‘today-light / won’t reach
a night of ours till Kirriemuir / is nothing but a vein of hematite’
(SP 156). In familiar Patersonian style, it is the imaginative
occasion of the poem that will serve to transcend the limitations
of conventional human perception, asking us to entertain its
intuitively reasoned scenario. And so the reader is presented
with two alien creatures – ‘say hairless, tall and dark, / but
still as like ourselves as makes no odds’ – who are ‘pushing
their wheeled contraptions through the park’, in a town that
appears as a mirror to a settlement in modern-day Scotland,
but is in fact located on some immeasurably distant planet.
Noting again the poem’s title and its dedication ‘for Maureen
and Gus’, we are invited to infer that these alien characters are
the extraterrestrial equivalence to a newlywed couple here on
Earth, who are presumably friends of the poet. On one level, the
poem is an epithalamium. But it is also an occasion to meditate
on intelligent life itself, and how connections between isolated
consciousnesses must negotiate the vast gaps they are presented
with – between intention and interpretation, perception and
meaning, and across the physical realm of matter itself.
In the manner in which it proposes a scientific-materialist
thesis and makes argument the engine of the poem, but also in
its pared-back diction and natural speech rhythms framed by
poetic form, ‘The Day’ recalls ‘West-Running Brook’, a poem by
the American poet Robert Frost. Frost is undoubtedly a profound
influence on Paterson’s later work, and Paterson himself would
doubtless credit ‘West-Running Brook’ as the rhetorical model
for ‘The Day’. In a lecture he gave entitled ‘Frost as a Thinker’,
he presents Frost as a metaphysical and philosophical poet,
who uses natural language to surprise the reader with complex
ideas. This serves to align the American’s work, both stylistically
and thematically, with what we know to be Paterson’s own
aesthetic ambitions: the poem as brief, patterned, and original
speech, a trustworthy piece of human discourse that is capable
of proposing complex ideas in simple yet musically charged
language, thus generating new meaning and knowledge in its
dialogue with the reader. Speaking about ‘West-Running Brook’
in particular, Paterson argues it is a poem ‘about getting your
bearings in the whole cosmos … a semi-scientific polemic that is

107
 don paterson

a quite explicit poem in its argument, but one that naturalises its
rather austere thesis through the natural speech of its interlocu-
tors’.27 Here, it is not difficult to imagine that he could as well
be talking about his own poem as about Frost’s.
Having set its scene, most of ‘The Day’, like ‘West-Running
Brook’, is given over to a playful, argumentative back-and-forth
between the couple at its centre, who, ‘sceptic of their laws
and gods’, are seen to make them ‘witness to their given word’
(SP 156). Whereas Frost’s poem is a kind of humanist creation
myth about human consciousness, however, finding its poetic
symbol in the eponymous brook that flows west while all others
flow east, ‘trusting itself to go by contraries’,28 ‘The Day’ is much
more concerned with the isolated nature of said consciousness,
and those aforementioned gaps – between self and other, but
also those across the vast stretches of the universe – which it
must face. ‘They talk, as we do now, of the Divide’, the poem
continues, as it brings human couple and alien couple, but also
anonymous speaker and reader, into conversational alignment,
before proposing that they ‘set apart one minute of the day /
to dream across the parsecs’, in the hope of achieving a kind
of ‘cosmic solidarity’ (SP 156). In this way, the poem offers up
its ambitious aim: to not only find wonder, but also a measure
of comfort, in a clear-eyed discussion about the immense body
of impersonal, indifferent matter in which conscious emotional
creatures such as ourselves find themselves situated.
The conversation that ensues between the couple is playful
and at times entertainingly comic, but it is primarily one that
takes its bearings with sad recognition. ‘“Think: all of us / as
cut off as the living from the dead”’, the husband proposes
to his new wife, ‘“It’s the size that’s all wrong here. The
emptiness”’ (SP 157). For the husband, it is the fact that ‘“the
biggest flashlight we could put together / is a match struck in the
wind out here”’ which is the source of existential distress, in the
seemingly endless latticework of the universe. ‘“We’re lost”’, he
wearily concludes, a statement that illustrates the poem’s clever
and repeated use of literary metonymy – or more specifically
synecdoche, in which the part stands for the whole. For while
the personal pronouns in ‘The Day’ refer to the plural ‘we’ of the
couple engaged in their talk, they also refer to the anonymous
narrator and reader, who are engaged in a not dissimilar process

108
 none of this matters

of collaborative meaning-making. Taking into account this

inference and the poem’s sweeping subject matter, the poem
encourages us to interpret that plural ‘we’ as also referring to
humankind in general, as well as possible variations on our
form of conscious life dotted about the galaxies. The personal
pronoun oscillates between the specific scenario of the poem,
its illusion of a singular present moment, and the timeless and
space-defying expanse of our combined perceptual experiences.
Paterson’s inventive manipulation of metonymy ensures that the
poem is both an appealingly personal encounter between two
lovers, as well as an all-encompassing, Rilkean philosophical
enquiry into being itself.
It is impressive that the poem manages to be so emotionally
affecting, in spite of the inevitable coldness of its philosophical
focus. This is most apparent in the wife’s replies to her husband,
whose character she clearly understands and enjoys gently
mocking, but also comforting. ‘“We talk, make love, we sleep
in the same bed – but no matter what we do, you can’t be
me”’, she states in po-faced fashion, knowingly encouraging
her husband’s bleak outlook: “‘We only dream this place up in
one head.”’ His reply, as anticipated, is even more despairing:
‘“Thanks for that … You’re saying that because / the bed’s a
light-year wide, or might as well be, / I’m even lonelier than I
thought I was?”’ At this, the wife’s tone softens, as she suggests
that he has misunderstood her, and that our inventions of ‘souls
and gods and ghosts and afterlives’ aren’t a ploy to ‘bridge
eternity’, but rather ‘“just the gap” – / she measures it – “from
here to here”’ (SP 157).
This instance of genuine and felt intimacy gives way to the
final conclusion that one offers to the other, and that the poem
offers to the reader: the only way to assuage the loneliness
of the human situation is, as the wife suggests to her new
husband, ‘“that you trust me with it all”’. In ‘The Day’ we find
the suggestion that it is through love, the genuine connection
of felt human intimacy, that we can transcend the isolated
nature of the self. It is love, the poem proposes, that offers a
defence against our apprehension of what another poem in Rain,
‘Motive’, labels that which ‘hurries on its course / outside every
human head’ (R 39), which is to say the indifference of a godless
and unfeeling universe. Consequently, ‘The Day’ alights on a

109
 don paterson

note of powerful imaginative reconceptualisation that is also

profoundly moving. The wedding rings that married couples
exchange are not part of an empty tradition, it suggests, but a
powerful metonym themselves, a symbol of the fact that ‘even
in this nothingness I found you; / I was lucky in the timing of my
birth’ (SP 158).
Throughout this study we have seen how paradox and contra-
diction have come to define the poetic-philosophical arguments
enacted by Paterson’s verse. An especial paradoxical tension
in Paterson’s writing is that between presence and absence.
Rain continues Paterson’s project of interrogating the human
dream, and its accompanying illusion of definitive, verifiable
truth. The volume variously demonstrates, in coolly analytical
yet also redemptive fashion, the ways in which the presence of
meaning, thought, and emotion are in fact wholly absent from
the world beyond our waking dream, projected by the mind
and the eye into an indifferent universe. But if, as Dai George
notes, ‘opposed to this human eye is a larger metaphysical eye,
an embodiment of the “void” underlying human life’,29 for the
poet the challenge remains as to how the felt presence of human
thought and emotion can successfully negotiate the absences
that it must realistically face – a world without transcendental
meaning, but also one in which all things eventually come
to nothing, what Jan Schreiber describes as ‘the bass note’
of Rain: ‘what we most love we must lose’.30 As a means of
enquiry, philosophy may long have been established on a purely
intellectual footing, but as we have seen, for Paterson poetry is
a unique mode of knowledge that requires the infusion of both
thought and feeling. It is, at bottom, a more openly intuitive
means of improvising truth, one that ‘most fundamentally …
is just a couple of monkeys talking to each other’.31
With this is mind, the project of elegy in Rain is never solely
one of commemorating the life of a friend or loved one who has
departed. It is also a metaphysical enquiry into complex interre-
lations of presence and absence, as poetic-philosophical a subject
matter as any other that the book’s deeply reflective, percep-
tively interrogative poems address. ‘The Swing’ is one such
poem, negotiating painful feelings of loss within a clear-eyed
metaphysical apprehension of the nature of existence and reality.
It begins innocuously, with the poet engaged in DIY handiwork:

110
 none of this matters

The swing was picked up for the boys,

for the here-and-here-to-stay
and only she knew why it was
I dug so solemnly

I spread the feet two yards apart

and hammered down the pegs
filled up the holes and stamped the dirt
around its skinny legs (SP 141)

These quatrains open the poem with the kind of everyday

quotidian setting that, given the manner in which Paterson’s
verse serves to estrange the ordinary in imaginative ways,
should prepare the reader for a perceptual transformation of
their subject matter. The lines hint at unspoken absence and
painful regret: not only is the speaker found digging ‘solemnly’,
his sons, ‘the boys’, are described as ‘the here-and-here-to-stay’,
a peculiar definition of their existential presence that begs the
question as to what precisely isn’t here to stay. These mysterious
details draw our attention alongside the plain sense of the poem,
which is to say the swing and its construction, which supplies
the poem’s central focus and what T. S. Eliot would call its
‘objective correlative’.
For Eliot, the ‘objective correlative’ is the only means of
expressing emotion in art. It functions by finding ‘a set of
objects, a situation, a chain of events which shall be the formula
of that particular emotion’.32 Michael Donaghy suggests a revised
version of the concept in his essay ‘Wallflowers’, in which he
discusses how
modern poets often build their poems about a single point of
emotional focus analogous to a point of optical focus in photographs
– often represented by a single object held, like Yorick’s skull, in the
poet’s hand, a magician’s prop toward which we direct our attention
so that the magic can proceed by sleight of hand.33

Just as we have seen how the trees in ‘Two Trees’ cannot simply
be considered as trees alone, the swing in ‘The Swing’ is not
merely what it seems. Paterson is acutely aware of the ways in
which any poem invites the reader to read in, allowing the poem
to productively oversignify. In ‘The Swing’ this is no different,
though the poet-speaker also appears to occupy this readerly

111
 don paterson

position himself, comprehending the ‘poem’ of the swing as

a representation of something else. As such, having ‘fixed the
yellow seat’, he stands back to admire his work, but instead sees
its ‘frail trapeze’ as a haunting symbol of ‘the child that would
not come / of what we knew had two more days / before we
sent it home’ (SP 141). Suddenly, the painful emotional subtext
of the poem hits us: there will be an abortion.
Like the unassuaged, almost unspeakable grief in ‘Two Trees’,
‘The Swing’ harbours a metaphoric truth that the poet-speaker
can only attempt to deny: ‘I know that there is nothing here /
no venue and no host’. In trying to reassure the reader as much
as himself, the speaker claims it is ‘the honest fulcrum of the
hour / that engineers our ghost’, which is to say that the occasion
of building the swing, its centrality, has made it into a vessel
for the unassuaged feelings that he harbours: the ‘ghost’ of the
unborn, and soon-to-be terminated, child. However the poet
tries to convince himself that ‘the bright sweep’ of the swing’s
‘radar-arc’ is simply ‘the human dream / handing us from dark
to dark’, from one state of unknowing to another, he cannot see
the swing as anything other than a physical representation of
the aborted child, and the terrible weight of his feelings about
it. ‘For all the coldness of his creed’, he cannot ‘weigh the ghosts
we are / against those we deliver’ (SP 142). In the end, the
intense knowledge that comes from philosophical meditation,
from piercing enquiries into the nature of self and other – the
understanding that poetry itself has brought to the speaker – is
of little use or comfort in the face of death and grief.
Lost and bereft, all the poet-speaker can do is give ‘the empty
seat a push’, an act that is quietly heart-breaking, and supplies
the poem with a profound emotional force. But it also serves to
bring the speaker (and poet and reader) some unexpected relief,
as ‘nothing made a sound / and swung between two skies to
brush / her feet upon the ground’. As one critic has noted, ‘the
paradox behind that simple-seeming phrase, “nothing made a
sound”, can be read two ways – is there no sound, or is there a
sound that is made by “nothing”?’34 This duality of meaning is
one that, from one angle, delivers the poem’s painful emotional
resonance, but from another, also supplies us with a sense of
poetry’s ability to briefly transcend death. In this sense, the
poem has indeed made a ‘sound’ out of ‘nothing’: its lyric song

112
 none of this matters

has transformed the absence of the child into a powerfully felt

presence. As such, ‘The Swing’ is a tenderly expressed leave-
taking, but it is also a portrayal of poetry’s ability to remake a
painfully real absence into a lasting presence. This is the case
even as it is inevitably confined to the poem’s conjured illusion
of the present moment, given the way in which ‘time is a little
collapsed into no-time, as we lose some sense of its passing’
(O 69).
Rain comes to a close with its title poem. A songful paean
to the speaker’s love of ‘all films that start with rain’, it claims
that any cinematic piece incorporating this atmospheric feature
serves to absolve it of unintentionally comic deficiencies in plot,
characterisation, and performance (SP 168). ‘However bad or
overlong’, the poem announces, ‘such a film can do no wrong’.
This is because, we discover, the poet reads in to the rain, much
as we found the speaker in ‘The Swing’ did, and much as the
poems in Rain illustrate what readers cannot help but do time
and again, in embracing art’s productive over-signification. As
such, ‘Rain’ offers up an interpretation of the rain as a kind of
post-religious absolution, a cleansing of all the grief, pain, effort,
and suffering that any attempt to perfect life or art necessarily
invites:
forget the ink, the milk, the blood –
all was washed clean with the flood
we rose up from the falling waters
the fallen rain’s own sons and daughters

and none of this, none of this matters. (SP 169)

In a radio interview, it was suggested to Paterson that ‘it sounds

like you’ve taken yourself out of religion, but religion hasn’t
taken itself out of you’.35 His reply was that this was ‘a terrifying
thought’, before he went on to state: ‘If you believe yourself to be
infected with original sin, then why wouldn’t you want shot of
it? Why wouldn’t you want to consider it a construct? Of course
you would.’36 At this, the interviewer suggests that, rather than
being a ‘theoretical and cultural’ aspect of ‘the Scottish soul’ as
Paterson proposes, it is one that is in fact part of his personal
‘DNA’. ‘Well, that’s the worry isn’t it’, Paterson replies: ‘if it’s
all from mother’s milk, there’s nothing to be done, the game’s

113
 don paterson

over’.37 It is at this point the interviewer arrives at the critical

revelation: ‘Maybe there is nothing to be done, maybe it’s out
of the fact there’s nothing to be done that you make the poetry.’
Paterson cannot help but agree. If Rain is a collection that
illustrates the many successes of his refinement of poetry as
a unique mode of knowledge, it also knowingly highlights
the inevitable failures of the art form. Like any means of
intellectual enquiry, it cannot hope to permanently release us
from ongoing struggles between self and other. But as we
have seen throughout our discussions of Paterson’s work, what
separates poetry from other forms of knowledge is its ability to
place the larger conceptual domain of the human dream – which
is to say the ‘blind tyranny’ of our habituated perspective38 –
under linguistic challenge and interrogation. As Rain shows,
the poet who recognises this can make the poem into a site
for highly memorable new meaning-making. In the merging of
sound and sense, and in brief, patterned, and original speech,
the poems of Rain therefore argue that poetry can, in small but
significant ways, remake reality itself. This is the truest meaning
of poetry as a mode of knowledge.

114
 Coda:
40 Sonnets (2015)
and Zonal (2020)
Coda

In illustrating the considerable stylistic developments of Paterson’s

poetry, alongside the ways in which his work distinguishes
verse as a unique mode of knowledge, this study appears to find
itself in broad agreement with Sean O’Brien’s suggestion that
‘few poets can have covered as much ground in twenty years
as Don Paterson’.1 The chronological nature of this study will, I
hope, have allowed readers both familiar with and new to this
major poet’s work to gain a fuller appreciation of its singular
development, from the precocious promise of Nil Nil, through
to the magnum opus of Rain. Given the poetry’s remarkable
imaginative reach, tonal range, and musical memorability, but
also its self-reflecting capacities, its reflexive commentaries on
poetry itself, and its poetic-philosophical enquiries into the
nature of the human condition, Paterson surely now ranks
among the most significant English-language poets currently
writing.
Rain presents Paterson’s most accomplished and ambitious
work to date. As the then Poet Laureate Carol Ann Duffy
remarked on its publication: ‘To read this book is to have the
privilege of seeing a world-class talent assert itself, as Seamus
Heaney did with North.’2 The book’s poems extend previous
developments in Paterson’s oeuvre – particularly the manner in
which the Rilkean versions in Orpheus gave license to be both
prophetic and more explicitly philosophical – to produce a full
enactment of Paterson’s sense of poetry as a unique means of
intellectual enquiry. In poems that exploit the literary tropes

115
 don paterson

of metaphor and metonymy in innovative ways, Rain emerges,

under critical scrutiny, as a collection that not only uncovers
poetry as ‘the reflexive turn language makes against its own
project of conceptual division’,3 but one that also manages,
through the imperative of its elegiac project, to fully combine
the emotive, the spiritual, and the compassionate with the
shrewdly philosophical approach of a materialist outlook, one
that ‘doesn’t make the world any less wonderful … but does
afford a more distant perspective … on human affairs, petty
kinds of struggle’.4
Paterson’s achievement in Rain is to have produced poems
that serve to distinguish poetry from other modes of enquiry,
including science and philosophy, as a distinctive mode of
knowledge. In doing so, the book sets his work apart from that
of his contemporaries. Poetry, through Paterson’s particular
example, requires the infusion of both thought and feeling,
providing a more openly intuitive means of improvising truth.
Not only does it make the reader ‘excited, open to suggestion,
vulnerable to reprogramming’,5 but in repeatedly exposing
the ways in which “‘we only dream this place up in one
head”’ (SP 157) – which is to say, how reality is shaped by the
neural computation of sense data and the compartmentalising
functions of language ‘nailing down the human dream’6 –
it serves to make poetry into a site for remaking that very
reality, offering renewed understanding and generating new
knowledge.
Having achieved this, and given the diverse adaptability
that is his work’s stylistic hallmark, Paterson’s poetry has since
taken a characteristically unpredictable turn. At the same time,
these more recent poems also return to forms and themes
that will be familiar to Paterson readers. A seventh volume,
40 Sonnets, demonstrates perhaps the poet’s fullest exploration
of a form that has long fascinated him, having previously
delivered some of his strongest beliefs and convictions about
the art form in general, and having generated some of his most
rewarding poems. From Nil Nil with its studies in desolation
and aftermath, to the serious play with personae in God’s Gift
to Women and the existential hymns for the poet’s twin sons
in Landing Light, the sonnet abounds throughout Paterson’s
oeuvre. Nowhere more so than in Orpheus, where it proved

116
 coda

crucial in Paterson’s stylistic development, given its specific

formal shaping. In negotiating between the spirit of Rilke’s
originals and the imperative of lyric unity, the infusion of
sound and sense emerges as the guiding principle behind
Paterson’s composition of the lyric poem. Rilke also enabled
him to illustrate his sense of the sonnet form as an evolutionary
necessity, as his highly musical mnemonic versions propose the
way in which the ‘uniquely human business’ of song7 can offer
‘a stay against time’s passing’ (O 69).
At a relatively early stage in his career as poet and
commentator, however, Paterson had already showcased the
sonnet’s rich history in editing a popular anthology. The
longevity of 101 Sonnets: From Shakespeare to Heaney (1999) has
had as much to do with the range of sonnets it contains as its
entertaining and deeply thoughtful introduction. Even then,
the poet could be found arguing for the sonnet as ‘one of the
greatest achievements of human ingenuity’, a ‘box for dreams’
that ‘represents one of the most characteristic shapes human
thought can take’.8 Whatever an individual reader makes of his
thesis, it remains compelling, grounded in the unifying and
sense-making powers of rhyme and metre, the sonnet’s loose
adherence to the proportions of the golden section, and his
deep admiration for what the best sonneteers can do with this
little ‘squared circle’, a resistant medium that allows poets to
‘trick a logic from the shadows’ of unconscious thought.9 Much
like his layman’s guide Reading Shakespeare’s Sonnets (2010), it is
a fascinating but also original work, not least given his interest
is also that of the accomplished practitioner.
In this sense, a collection comprising fourteen-liners should not
have come as a surprise. Moreover, after the austere undertaking
of Rain, Paterson must have been on the lookout, in a practical
sense as much as any other, for a more various way back into
writing verse. In 40 Sonnets, Paterson sets about illustrating the
form’s versatility, but also its enduring appeal. Delivering exactly
what it promises, it is an especially slight collection, even from
an author known for championing brevity. Where many of his
contemporaries exhibit a trend towards publishing collections of
poetry that far surpass 40 Sonnets in length, however, Paterson’s
icy intelligence, imagination, and painstaking craft make for
disproportionately substantial reading:

117
 don paterson

I must quit sleeping in the afternoon.

I do it for my heart, but all too soon
my heart has called it off. It does not love me.
If it downed tools, there’d soon be nothing of me.
Its hammer-beat says you are, not I am.
It prints me off here like a telegram.
What do I say? How can the lonely word
know who has sent it out, or who has heard? (40S 3)

From the everyday setting of an afternoon nap to intimations

of mortality, the book’s opening poem, ‘Here’, offers a fully
Patersonian meditation on identity as linguistic gesture. It is
delivered in crisp and exact language, with heart-thumping
end rhymes that feel natural and unforced. As we have seen,
it is this command of poetry’s musicality combined with lucid
philosophical thinking that has come to define Paterson’s poetry.
A familiar spirit of questing and questioning makes for some of
the most memorable and accomplished sonnets in the collection.
‘Souls’, for instance, takes the numinous aspects of our selves
and expresses them as an aberration from the physical, a world
where ‘space is stone, and time a breackneck terror’ (40S 42),
while in ‘The Air’, the element we take for granted becomes a
mysterious abstraction, ‘an empty datastream’ that is ‘nowhere’
and ‘never’, a powerful reminder that we are but a brief chapter
in the universe’s narrative (40S 5). It is poems such as these
that have raised Paterson’s stature to that of one of the most
significant English-language poets currently writing. If they
might sometimes exhibit a slight over-earnestness, and wear
their author’s European influences too heavily for certain
contemporary tastes (both Antonio Machado and Rainer Maria
Rilke remain as lingering presences), they fully demonstrate the
rare value of a poetry of assertion and argument. Poetry as a
mode of knowledge, no less.
However, unlike the unwavering focus of Rain’s exacting
bleakness, it is the stylistic, thematic, and tonal variety of
40 Sonnets that comes to define the volume, presenting a bravura
performance. Picking up where Landing Light’s ‘Waking with
Russell’ and ‘The Thread’ left off in their meditative approach to
fatherhood, ‘The Roundabout’ is perhaps the most beautiful of
Paterson’s poems to his twin sons, finding poet-speaker looking
up ‘at a sky so clear / there was nothing in the world to prove

118
 coda

our turning’ (40S 44). Elsewhere, ‘Requests’ and ‘To Dundee

City Council’ offer fine examples of Paterson’s cutting poetic
humour: both are damning indictments of the artless and inept,
the former addressed to a blathering poet on stage, the latter to a
council presiding over a local library where ‘poor folks go to die
/ or download porno on the free wifi’ (40S 28). In stark contrast,
‘Funeral Prayer’ is a warm, frank yet simple elegy that one can
imagine being read at many an actual service (40S 14), while
‘Mercies’, the tale of having a beloved pet put down, similarly
evinces and continues Paterson’s unfashionable sense of poetry
as a moral project, intent on connecting with readers through
precise language in order to communicate deeply complex
emotion (40S 43). As a slender book of surprising emotional,
intellectual, and tonal range, 40 Sonnets ultimately cements
Paterson’s standing as a poet who shows that poetic form is
precisely what you make of it. As William Boyd has claimed,
the book ‘breathes vivacity into an ancient format, showing that
poetic structures are no impediment to emotional intensity’.10
At the time of writing, Paterson’s eighth volume of poems,
Zonal, has only recently appeared, billed as an ‘experiment
in science fiction and fantastic autobiography’. It advances
Paterson’s keen sense of poetry’s artifice – especially its trick
of conjuring coherent, real, and seemingly present speakers –
put to characteristically serious yet playful ends. Initial critical
responses have observed that the volume’s long and loosely
metrical lines represent something of a stylistic departure for
a poet hitherto known for deftly combining the rhythms of
everyday speech with exacting formal structure. But as one
critic has remarked, ‘the subject matter of Zonal indicates that
Paterson is still playing the same high-stakes thematic games,
writing about “death, doubles and the void”, to use his own
words’.11 ‘Don’t think for a second that Death loves his work’,
states the speaker in the volume’s opening narrative, relating a
parable in which a self-deceiving salesman tries to buy off the
grim reaper (Z 9). In ‘Lazarus’, what initially looks like a comic
retelling of the Biblical tale as opportunity for self-improvement
soon meets an altogether darker, distinctly Orphic contem-
plation of the void: ‘a dead man walking was a grand thing to
be if you’d already died: alive, but done with the fear of death’
(Z 68). However imaginative and inventive the various poetic

119
 don paterson

strategies he employs, it seems that Paterson is always destined

to return to those fundamental thematic concerns that, as we
have seen, dominate and define his oeuvre to date.
This study can only really end on that speculative note, but
whatever path Paterson’s poetry takes in the future, it will likely
be an unexpected and rewarding one, for poet and reader alike.
As the poet himself states in How Poets Work:
I’m terrified of repeating myself, and have evolved various strategies
to try and counter this – well one, really: keep altering the strategy.
The great danger, for me, is to continue to mine a seam long after
it’s yielded up the last diamond … after a while, you’re not even
bringing up coal anymore, just dirt … but now there’s a tiny
village near the pithead, with a grocer’s and a sub-post office, and
it’s twinned with some crap sonnet sequence in Normandy; and
as laird of the estate, you’re often the last person to admit it’s no
longer a viable concern. So I’ve evolved this rather daft solution,
which obviously has its own hazards; I’ll try and mine tin one week,
uranium the next, jade the week after, and so on … I’d hate to think
I was writing the same poem twice. I like the idea of the poem as
a self-contained universe, the national anthem of a wee vernacular
Atlantis whose laws, customs, geography and weather could all be
derived from its close study.12

120
 Notes
notes

PROLOGUE

1. Dai George, ‘Degrees of Sight’, Boston Review (September 9, 2010),

<http://www.bostonreview.net/george-degrees-of-sight> [accessed
April 2020].
2. Edna Longley, The Bloodaxe Book of 20th Century Poetry (Tarset,
Northumberland: Bloodaxe, 2000), 363.
3. A. S. Byatt, comment included on the paperback edition of Don
Paterson’s Landing Light (London: Faber, 2004).
4. Paul Muldoon, comment included on the paperback edition of Don
Paterson’s Rain (London: Faber, 2010).
5. Sean O’Brien, ‘Don Paterson: Rain, Etc’, Poetry Review, 99:4
(Winter 2009), 61.
6. Don Paterson, ‘The Dilemma of the Peot [sic]’, How Poets Work, ed.
Tony Curtis (Bridgend, Wales: Seren, 1996), 155.
7. The via negativa – Latin for ‘negative way’, also known as apophatic
theology – is a theology that attempts to describe the divine by
negation; it speaks only in terms of what may not be said about God
in an attempt to understand what He is. In Chapter 3 this concept,
and Paterson’s unique poetic-philosophical adaptation of it, will be
outlined and discussed in further detail.
8. Jorge Luis Borges, ‘Borges and I’, Labyrinths, trans. by James E. Irby
(London: Penguin, 1970), 283.
9. Antonio Porchia, Voices, trans. by W. S. Merwin (Washington:
Copper Canyon Press, 2003), 101.
10. T. S. Eliot, ‘Tradition and the Individual Talent’, The Sacred Wood
(1920; London: Faber, 1997), 44.
11. Ibid.
12. Paterson, The Poem: Lyric, Sign, Metre (London: Faber, 2018), 11.
13. Paterson, ‘Leading Light’, an interview with Nicholas Wroe, The
Guardian (November 25, 2006), <http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/
2006/nov/25/featuresreviews.guardianreview7> [accessed May 2020].
14. Ibid.

121
 notes

15. Ibid.
16. Paterson, The Poem: Lyric, Sign, Metre, 14.
17. Ibid.
18. Ibid., 13.
19. Charles Simic, cited in Paterson, ‘Fourteen Notes on the Version’,
Orpheus: A Version of Rilke’s Die Sonette an Orpheus (London:
Faber, 2006), 75.
20. Alan Gillis, ‘Don Paterson’, The Edinburgh Companion to Contemporary
Scottish Poetry, eds Matt McGuire and Colin Nicholson (Edinburgh:
Edinburgh University Press, 2009), 186.
21. Ibid., 175.
22. O’Brien, 72.
23. Victor Shklovsky, ‘Art as Technique’, Russian Formalist Criticism: Four
Essays, ed. and trans. by Lee T. Lemon and Marion J. Reis (Lincoln,
NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1965), 12.
24. Paterson, ‘The Dark Art of Poetry’, T. S. Eliot Lecture (October 30,
2004), reproduced in The Guardian (November 6, 2004), <https://
www.theguardian.com/books/poetry/features/0,12887,1344654,00.
html> [accessed May 2020].
25. Paterson, ‘Introduction’, New British Poetry, ed. with Charles Simic
(Minneapolis: Graywolf Press, 2004), xxv.
26. Ibid., xxxiii.
27. John Keats, ‘On the Aims of Poetry: Letter to J. H. Reynolds,
3 February 1818’, <http://www.poetryfoundation.org/learning/essay/
237836?page=2> [accessed April 2020].
28. Paterson, in ‘Private Enterprise for the Public Good: John Stammers
Interviews Don Paterson’, Magma, 12 (Spring 1998), <http://
poetrymagazines.org.uk/magazine/recordcae4.html?id=3524>
[accessed April 2020].
29. Gillis, 175.
30. O’Brien, 62.
31. Crotty, ‘Between Home and Rome’, Times Literary Supplement
(December 12, 2003), 5.
32. Michael Wood, ‘Other Ways to Leave the Room’, London Review of
Books, 21:23 (November 25, 1999), 25–6.
33. Robert Crawford, ‘Deep Down in the Trash’, London Review of Books,
19:16 (August 21, 1997), 26.
34. O’Brien, 63.
35. Stéphane Mallarmé, letter to Henri Cazalis (April 1866), Selected
Letters of Stéphane Mallarmé, ed. and trans. by Rosemary Lloyd
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988), 60.
36. Dan Chiasson, ‘Forms of Attention’, The New Yorker (April 19, 2010),
116.

122
 notes

CHAPTER 1: FOR THE HELL OF IT: N IL N IL (1993)

1. Gillis, 173.
2. Ibid., 175.
3. Louis MacNeice, ‘Charon’, Collected Poems, ed. Peter McDonald
(London: Faber, 2007), 593.
4. ‘To begin thinking about time, we might / take all the verbs we like
to think we do // to time, and turn those verbs on us, and say / that
times wastes us, and time saves and buys us, / that time spends us,
and time marks and kills us.’ William Matthews, ‘Time’, Time and
Money (New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1995), 14.
5. Gillis, 175.
6. Ibid., 174.
7. Edward Thomas, ‘The Other’, Collected Poems (London: Faber, 2004),
12.
8. W. B. Yeats, ‘Anima Hominis’, Per Amica Silentia Lunae (Norwood:
Norwood Press/The Macmillan Company, 1918), 29.
9. Jean Moréas, ‘Le Manifeste du Symbolisme’, Le Figaro (September 18,
1886), <http://www.ieeff.org/manifestesymbolisme.htm> [accessed
April 2020].
10. Timothy Donnelly, ‘Nothing, in Other Words: On the Poetry of
Don Paterson’, Verse, 20:2/3 (2004), <http://www.cstone.net/~poems/
essadonn.htm> [accessed April 2020].
11. Sarah Broom, Contemporary British and Irish Poetry (Basingstoke:
Palgrave MacMillan, 2006), 35.
12. Vicki Bertram, Gendering Poetry: Contemporary Women and Men Poets
(London: Pandora Press, 2005), 188.
13. Gillis, 178.
14. Ian Sansom, ‘Excess Its Own Reward’, Poetry Review, 87:2
(Summer 1997), 44.
15. Adam Thorpe, ‘Antiseptic Sceptics’, The Observer (August 29, 1993),
53.
16. Seamus Heaney, ‘Digging’, Death of a Naturalist (1966; London:
Faber, 1999), 3–4.
17. Broom, 34.
18. Heaney, ‘Digging’, Death of a Naturalist, 3.
19. Gillis, 178.
20. Broom, 34.
21. Paterson, in ‘Private Enterprise for the Public Good: John Stammers
Interviews Don Paterson’, Magma, 12 (Spring 1998).
22. Jorge Luis Borges, ‘Borges and I’, Labyrinths, trans. by James E. Irby
(London: Penguin, 1970), 283.
23. Gillis, 178.
24. Paterson, in Raymond Friel’s ‘Don Paterson, Interviewed’, Talking

123
 notes

Verse, eds Robert Crawford, Henry Hart, David Kinloch, and

Richard Price (St Andrews: Verse, 1995), 193.
25. Gillis, 178.
26. Ibid.
27. Paterson, ‘The Dark Art of Poetry: T. S. Eliot Lecture, 2004’.
28. Adolf Zeising, trans. in Richard Padovan, Proportion: Science,
Philosophy, Architecture (London: Taylor & Francis, 1999), 306.
29. George Markowsky, ‘Misconceptions about the Golden Ratio’,
College Mathematics Journal, 23:1 (January 1992), 2.
30. Entropy may be defined as the tendency exhibited by thermo-
dynamic systems – which is to say, all things – towards disorder and
chaos, as well as the process that leads to this. The concept is best
understood in relation to the second law of thermodynamics, which
the German physicist Rudolf Clausius (1822–88), who proposed
the first mathematical version of entropy, summarised as follows:
‘The entropy of the universe tends to a maximum.’ In essence,
while the world appears to the naked human eye in its narrow and
habitual guise of a vast collection of apparently solid objects, it is
in fact always evolving towards thermodynamic equilibrium, and
the eventual complete absence of form and shape. The ramifications
of this concept can be seen to underpin Paterson’s poem ‘Next to
Nothing’, but also Nil Nil as a collection.
31. Porchia, Voices, 33.
32. Ibid.
33. Crotty, 5.
34. To clarify: this scientific hypothesis is essentially an extension of
the concept of entropy already discussed, as determined by the
second law of thermodynamics. The theory proposes that, given
entropy, the universe will eventually reach a state in which there
is no thermodynamic free energy; hence it will no longer be able to
sustain any processes that consume energy. In discussions of the
ultimate fate of the universe, this theory is usually referred to as the
‘heat death’ hypothesis, attributed to the mathematician, physicist,
and engineer William Thomson, 1st Baron Kelvin.

CHAPTER 2: WHICH MAN I AM: GOD’S GI F T TO

WOM EN (1997)

1. Bertram, 193.
2. Peter Robinson, Twentieth Century Poetry: Selves and Situations
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 6–7 [my italics].
3. Paterson, ‘Introduction’, New British Poetry, xxx.

124
 notes

4. Paterson, in ‘Private Enterprise for the Public Good: John Stammers

Interviews Don Paterson’, Magma, 12 (Spring 1998).
5. William Scammell, ‘I’ll See You in Church, Jimmy’, The Independent
(May 4, 1997), 38.
6. Conor O’Callaghan, ‘Al Dente’, Metre, 3 (Autumn 1997), 40–2.
7. Keith Bruce, ‘Inspiration from his Own Law’, The Glasgow Herald
(May 3, 1997), 12.
8. Robert Potts, ‘Reflected Glare’, Times Literary Supplement (September 12,
1997), 21.
9. Scammell, 38.
10. Eliot, ‘Tradition and the Individual Talent’, The Sacred Wood, 41.
11. Ibid., 44.
12. Ibid., 48–9.
13. Paterson, in Raymond Friel’s ‘Don Paterson, Interviewed’, Talking
Verse, 194.
14. Eliot, ‘Tradition and the Individual Talent’, The Sacred Wood, 49.
15. Ibid., 48.
16. Maud Ellman, The Poetics of Impersonality (Brighton: Harvester
Press, 1987), ix.
17. Abbas Ibn Al-Ahnaf, Birds Through an Alabaster Ceiling: Three
Abyssinian Poets – Arab Poetry of the Abbasid Period, trans. by
G. B. H. Wightman Abudlla Udhari, and A. Y. Al-Udhari
(Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1975), 36.
18. Paterson, ‘The Dark Art of Poetry: T.S. Eliot Lecture, 2004’.
19. John Keats, ‘This Living Hand, Now Warm and Capable’, Selected
Poems (1819; London: Penguin, 2007), 237.
20. Stéphane Mallarmé, ‘Crise de Vers’, La Revue Blanche
(September, 1895); trans. by Rosemary Lloyd in Mallarmé: The Poet
and his Circle (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1999), 55.
21. Mallarmé, letter to Eugène Lefébure, February 1865, in Selected
Letters of Stéphane Mallarmé, trans. by Rosemary Lloyd (Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1988), 48.
22. Roland Barthes, ‘The Death of the Author’, Image – Music – Text,
trans. by Stephen Heath (London: Fontana, 1977), 143.
23. Paterson, ‘The Dilemma of the Peot [sic]’, How Poets Work, 155.
24. Michael Wood, ‘Other Ways to Leave the Room’, London Review of
Books, 21:23 (November 25, 1999), 26.
25. Robert Crawford, ‘Deep Down in the Trash’, London Review of Books,
19:16 (August 21, 1997), 26.
26. Bertram, 189.
27. Ibid., 188.
28. John Donne, ‘Community’, The Complete English Poems (1971; London:
Penguin, 1996), 48.

125
 notes

29. Judith Butler, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity
(London: Routledge, 1990), 136.
30. Ibid., vii.
31. Ibid., 139.
32. O’Brien, ‘Don Paterson: Rain, Etc’, Poetry Review, 64.
33. Paterson, ‘The Dilemma of the Peot [sic]’, How Poets Work, 157.
34. Paterson, ‘Leading Light’, interview with Nicholas Wroe, The Guardian
(November 25, 2006), <http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2006/nov/
25/featuresreviews.guardianreview7> [accessed May 2020].
35. John Donne, ‘To Sir Edward Herbert, at Juliers’, The Complete English
Poems, 218–19.
36. Crawford, ‘Deep Down in the Trash’, London Review of Books, 26.

CHAPTER 3: NOT YOUR NAME, NOT MINE: T H E EY ES (1999)

1. Peter Forbes, Introduction to Paterson’s work in ‘Seven Years On:

The New Generation’, Poetry Review, 101:1 (Spring 2001), 7.
2. John Burnside, ‘Spanish Eyes’, Poetry Review, 89:3 (Autumn 1999), 71.
3. Ibid., 70–1.
4. Alan S. Trueblood, Introduction to Antonio Machado: Selected Poems,
trans. by Alan S. Trueblood (1982; Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press, 2003), 17.
5. Paterson, in Marco Fazzini’s ‘Interview with Don Paterson’, 2009,
7, <http://www.donpaterson.com/files/interview1.htm> [accessed
April 2020].
6. Jamie McKendrick, ‘The Player of Zero-sum Games’, Times Literary
Supplement (January 14, 2000), 31.
7. Mallarmé, ‘Crise de Vers’, La Revue Blanche; trans. by Rosemary
Lloyd in Mallarmé, 55.
8. Trueblood, Introduction to Antonio Machado: Selected Poems, 39.
9. Ibid., 14–15.
10. A direct crib from the original Spanish of ‘Parábolas: IV Consejos’
reads as follows:
Be happy to wait, and wait for the tide to flow –
a beached boat doesn’t worry about waiting.
If you wait, and look, then victory is yours,
since life is long and art simply a toy.
And if life is short
and the sea doesn’t reach your little boat,
go on waiting, without worry or expectation,
for art is long and, besides, it does not matter.
11. Trueblood, ‘Parables: IV Advice’, Antonio Machado: Selected Poems,
149.

126
 notes

12. Porchia, Voices, 63.

13. W. S. Merwin, ‘A Note on Antonio Porchia’, Voices, ix.
14. William Wordsworth, Preface of 1800, with a collation of the
enlarged preface of 1802, in Lyrical Ballads, ed. W. J. B. Owen (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 1969), 173.
15. Machado, Obras. Poesia y prosa, eds Aurora de Albornoz and
Guillermo de Torre (Buenos Aires: Losada, 1964), 714.
16. Trueblood, Introduction to Antonio Machado: Selected Poems, 40–1.
17. Thanissaro Bhikkhu (trans.), ‘35.85: Suñña Sutta: Empty’, Samyutta
Nikaya, <http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.085.
than.html> [accessed April 2020].
18. Michael Wood, ‘Other Ways to Leave the Room’, London Review of
Books, 21:23 (November 25, 1999), 25–6.
19. Eliot, ‘The Metaphysical Poets’, Homage to John Dryden: Three Essays
on Poetry of the Seventeenth Century, in The Hogarth Essays, 218.
20. McKendrick, ‘The Player of Zero-sum Games’, Times Literary
Supplement, 31.
21. Eliot, ‘The Metaphysical Poets’, Homage to John Dryden: Three Essays
on Poetry of the Seventeenth Century, in The Hogarth Essays, 218.
22. Robert Bly, ‘A Few Notes on Antonio Machado’, Times Alone: Selected
Poems of Antonio Machado, trans. by Robert Bly (Middletown, CT:
Wesleyan University Press, 1983), 2.
23. Bly, ‘A Few Notes on Antonio Machado’, Times Alone: Selected Poems
of Antonio Machado, 4.
24. Trueblood, ‘The Eyes’, Antonio Machado: Selected Poems, 205–6.
25. William Scammell, ‘Like Guitar Music Transcribed for the Piano’,
The Independent (February 20, 2000), 13.
26. Machado, Juan de Mairena, ed. J. M. Valverde (Madrid: Castalia, 1971),
172.
27. Trueblood, Introduction to Antonio Machado: Selected Poems, 14.
28. Ibid., 32.
29. Paterson, in Marco Fazzini’s ‘Interview with Don Paterson’, 12.
30. Trueblood, ‘Parables: V Profession of Faith’, Antonio Machado: Selected
Poems, 149.
31. Paterson, in Marco Fazzini’s ‘Interview with Don Paterson’, 9.
32. Paterson, ‘The Dark Art of Poetry: T.S. Eliot Lecture, 2004’.
33. Emil Cioran, ‘The Parasite of Poets’, A Short History of Decay (1949;
London: Penguin, 2010), 103–4.
34. Trueblood, Introduction to Antonio Machado: Selected Poems, 61.
35. Ibid., 17.
36. Wood, ‘Other Ways to Leave the Room’, London Review of Books,
25–6.
37. Machado, cited in Bly, Times Alone: Selected Poems of Antonio Machado,
79–80.

127
 notes

CHAPTER 4: SHREWD OBLIQUITY OF SPEECH:

L A N DI NG LIGH T (2003)

1. Bernard O’Donoghue, ‘Dante’s Peak’, The Independent (September 27,

2003), 38.
2. O’Brien, ‘Don Paterson: Rain, Etc’, Poetry Review, 66.
3. Broom, 35.
4. Natalie Pollard, ‘Don Paterson: On the Money’, Speaking to You:
Contemporary Poetry and Public Address (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2012), 221–2.
5. Adam Newey, ‘Flints and Sparks’, The Guardian (November 15, 2003).
6. Pollard, 218.
7. Keith Green, ‘Deixis and the Poetic Persona’, The Language and
Literature Reader, eds Ronald Carter and Peter Stockwell (Abingdon:
Routledge, 2008), 127.
8. Ibid., 130.
9. Ibid., 135.
10. Pollard, 217.
11. Ibid., 218.
12. Michael Donaghy, ‘Wallflowers: A Lecture on Poetry with
Misplaced Notes and Additional Heckling’, The Shape of the Dance:
Essays, Interviews and Digressions, eds Adam O’Riordan and Maddy
Paxman (London: Picador, 2009), 4.
13. Paterson, The Poem: Lyric, Sign, Metre, 9–10.
14. Peter Howarth, ‘Degree of Famousness etc’, London Review of Books,
35:6 (March 21, 2013), 31.
15. Ruth Bienstock Anolik, ‘Introduction: The Dark Unknown’, The
Gothic Other: Racial and Social Constructions in the Literary Imagination,
eds Ruth Bienstock Anolik and Douglas L. Howard (North Carolina:
McFarland, 2004), 1.
16. Ibid.
17. Alison Milbank, ‘Gothic Fiction Tells us the Truth about our
Divided Nature’, The Guardian (November 27, 2011), <http://www.
theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/nov/27/gothic-fiction-
divided-selves> [accessed April 2020].
18. Paterson, ‘The Dark Art of Poetry: T.S. Eliot Lecture, 2004’.
19. Paterson, The Poem: Lyric, Sign, Metre, 17–18.
20. Paterson, ‘Introduction’, New British Poetry, xxx.
21. Donaghy, ‘Wallflowers’, The Shape of the Dance, 16.
22. Paterson, ‘The Dilemma of the Peot [sic]’, How Poets Work, 165.
23. Paterson, The Poem: Lyric, Sign, Metre, 670.
24. Paterson, ‘The Dilemma of the Peot [sic]’, How Poets Work, 155.

128
 notes

25. Alice Oswald, cited in The Bloodaxe Book of Poetry Quotations, ed.
Dennis O’Driscoll (Tarset, Northumberland: Bloodaxe Books, 2006),
30.
26. Paterson, ‘The Dark Art of Poetry: T.S. Eliot Lecture, 2004’.
27. Edward Larrissy, ‘No-Score Drawing: Postmodern Games in Don
Paterson’, Don Paterson: Contemporary Critical Essays, ed. Natalie
Pollard (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2014), 56.
28. Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, Kafka: Towards a Minor Literature,
trans. by Dana Polan (Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota
Press, 1986), 22.
29. Paterson, ‘The Dark Art of Poetry: T.S. Eliot Lecture, 2004’.
30. Niall Lucy, Postmodern Literary Theory (Oxford: Blackwell
Publishers, 1997), 199.
31. O’Brien, ‘Don Paterson: Rain, Etc’, Poetry Review, 67.

CHAPTER 5: BREATH, YOU INVISIBLE POEM:

OR PH EUS (2006)

1. O’Brien, ‘Don Paterson: Rain, Etc’, Poetry Review, 69.

2. Rainer Maria Rilke, letter to Countess Margot Sizzo-Noris-Crouy,
April 12, 1923, cited in ‘Notes’ to Duino Elegies and The Sonnets
to Orpheus, ed. and trans. by Stephen Mitchell (New York:
Vintage, 2009), 249.
3. Mark Doty, ‘The Singer Sung’, The Guardian (November 11, 2006),
<http://www.theguardian.com/books/2006/nov/11/featuresreviews.
guardianreview26> [accessed April 2020].
4. Hugh Haughton, ‘Music, Translation and the Patersonnet’, Don
Paterson: Contemporary Critical Essays, 43.
5. Robert Vilain, ‘Song is Being’, Times Literary Supplement (January 19,
2007).
6. Paterson, 101 Sonnets: From Shakespeare to Heaney (London:
Faber, 1999), xv.
7. Ibid., xvi.
8. Ibid.
9. ‘Qual è ‘l geomètra che tutto s’affige / per misurar lo cerchio, e non
ritrova, / pensando, quel principio ond’ elli indige, / tal era io a
quella vista nova’. Dante, Paradiso, Canto XXXIII, ll. 133–5.
10. Stephen Mitchell, ‘Notes’, in Duino Elegies and The Sonnets to Orpheus,
xix.
11. Rainer Maria Rilke, letter to Lou Andreas-Salomé, June 26, 1914,
cited in ‘Notes’ to Duino Elegies and The Sonnets to Orpheus, 262.
12. Paterson, 101 Sonnets, xxvii.

129
 notes

13. Porchia, Voices, 47, 61.

14. Rainer Maria Rilke, letter to Katharina Kippenberg, April 2, 1922,
cited in ‘Notes’ to Duino Elegies and The Sonnets to Orpheus, 265.
15. Rilke, ‘Zweiter Teil (Second Part): XIII’, Duino Elegies and The Sonnets
to Orpheus, 159.
16. Paterson, ‘The Dark Art of Poetry: T.S. Eliot Lecture, 2004’.
17. O’Brien, ‘Don Paterson: Rain, Etc’, Poetry Review, 61.
18. Rainer Maria Rilke, letter to Nanny Wunderly-Volkart, July 29, 1920,
cited in ‘Notes’ to Duino Elegies and The Sonnets to Orpheus, 252.
19. Rilke, ‘Erster Teil (First Part): III’, Duino Elegies and The Sonnets to
Orpheus, 87.
20. As Paterson argues: ‘Song, though, is a uniquely human business.
As beautiful as they are – or rather ‘as we find them’ – whale-song
and bird-song are largely concerned with territory and sexual
selection, and are barely analogous to the signature twitter of our
speech, never mind Winterreise or ‘Woodstock’. Human song is
double: it binds an exclusively human system that we have carefully
developed to a universal one, based on physical law, that we have
merely learned to manipulate. Fused to music, our speech becomes
self-transcending, immediately part of a primal and universal
realm in which it can symbolically and literally participate’ (The
Poem: Lyric, Sign, Metre, 6–7). This argument rings philosophically
sound, but in its seeming opposition to conventional wisdom and
sentiment, it is one that Paterson has perhaps unsurprisingly been
moved to defend on a number of occasions, particularly when an
earlier version of this statement first appeared in the periodical
Poetry Review, attracting certain criticisms. ‘What I was saying’,
clarified Paterson, ‘is that “song” is music and language. The “song”
in “birdsong” is a metaphor. Besides, the beauty that we find in the
music of birdsong is something we project into it, and to presume
that the bird shares our feelings of its charm and expressiveness
is an act of horrific anthropocentrism – not the act of empathy
or fellow-feeling some folk think it is. None of this makes it any
less beautiful, of course’ (‘Letter to the Editor’, Poetry Review, 97:4
(Winter 2007/8), 126).
21. Paterson, The Poem: Lyric, Sign, Metre, 7–8.
22. Porchia, Voices, 25, 51.

130
 notes

CHAPTER 6: NONE OF THIS MATTERS: R A I N (2009)

1. A. E. Stallings, ‘Poetry for Grown-ups’, Poetry (May 2010), <http://

www.poetryfoundation.org/poetrymagazine/article/239286>
[accessed April 2020].
2. Paterson, The Poem: Lyric, Sign, Metre, 11.
3. Donaghy, ‘Wallflowers’, The Shape of the Dance, 15–16.
4. O’Brien, ‘Don Paterson: Rain, Etc’, Poetry Review, 69.
5. Paterson, The Poem: Lyric, Sign, Metre, 108.
6. Ibid.
7. Jan Schreiber, ‘Don Paterson’s Improbable Distances’, Contemporary
Poetry Review (June 6, 2011), <https://www.cprw.com/don-patersons-
improbable-distances> [accessed May 2020].
8. Paterson, ‘Night Waves’, an interview by Philip Dodd, BBC Radio
4 (October 3, 2012), <http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01n1s4q>
[accessed May 2020].
9. Chiasson, ‘Forms of Attention’, The New Yorker, 116.
10. Paterson, Introduction to Don’t Ask Me What I Mean: Poets in
Their Own Words, eds Clare Brown and Don Paterson (London:
Picador, 2003), xi.
11. Chiasson, 116.
12. Paterson, The Poem: Lyric, Sign, Metre, 112.
13. Paterson, ‘Night Waves’, an interview by Philip Dodd, BBC Radio 4.
14. Paterson, The Poem: Lyric, Sign, Metre, 111.
15. Ibid., 106.
16. Ibid.
17. Derek Attridge, ‘Don Paterson’s Ars Poetica’, Don Paterson:
Contemporary Critical Essays, 26.
18. Paterson, The Poem: Lyric, Sign, Metre, 111.
19. Ibid.
20. Ibid.
21. Ibid., 112.
22. Ibid.
23. A. E. Stallings, ‘Poetry for Grown-ups’, Poetry (May 2010).
24. Chiasson, 116.
25. Adam Newey, ‘Review: Rain by Don Paterson’, The Guardian
(September 19, 2009), <http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/
sep/19/rain-don-paterson-review> [accessed April 2020].
26. Paterson, The Poem: Lyric, Sign, Metre, 136.
27. Paterson, ‘Frost as a Thinker’, a lecture given at the twenty-
second Aldeburgh Poetry Festival, November 2010, audio from the
Poetry Foundation, <http://www.poetryfoundation.org/features/
audioitem/2880> [accessed May 2020].

131
 notes

28. Robert Frost, ‘West-Running Brook’, The Poetry of Robert Frost, ed.
Edward Connery Lathem (1971; London: Vintage, 2001), 258.
29. Dai George, ‘Degrees of Sight’, Boston Review (September 9, 2010).
30. Jan Schreiber, ‘Don Paterson’s Improbable Distances’, Contemporary
Poetry Review (June 6, 2011), <http://www.cprw.com/don-patersons-
improbable-distances> [accessed April 2020].
31. Paterson, The Poem: Lyric, Sign, Metre, 109.
32. Eliot, ‘Hamlet and His Problems’, The Sacred Wood, 85.
33. Donaghy, ‘Wallflowers’, The Shape of the Dance, 27–8.
34. Newey, ‘Review: Rain by Don Paterson’, The Guardian.
35. Paterson, ‘Night Waves’, an interview by Philip Dodd, BBC Radio 4.
36. Ibid.
37. Ibid.
38. Paterson, The Poem: Lyric, Sign, Metre, 336.

CODA

1. O’Brien, ‘Don Paterson: Rain, Etc’, Poetry Review, 61.

2. Carol Ann Duffy, cited in ‘Best Books of 2009’, The Guardian
(November 28, 2009), <https://www.theguardian.com/books/2009/
nov/28/christmas-book-choice-review> [accessed April 2020].
3. Paterson, The Poem: Lyric, Sign, Metre, 112.
4. Paterson, ‘Night Waves’, an interview by Philip Dodd, BBC Radio 4.
5. Paterson, ‘The Dark Art of Poetry: T.S. Eliot Lecture, 2004’.
6. Ibid.
7. Paterson, The Poem: Lyric, Sign, Metre, 6.
8. Paterson, 101 Sonnets, xxvii.
9. Ibid., xxv.
10. William Boyd, ‘Books of the Year’, New Statesman (November 21,
2015), <https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/books/2015/11/
books-year-essential-ns-reading-list> [accessed April 2020].
11. John Phipps, ‘Lamps in Videogames Use Real Electricity’, The London
Magazine (March 31, 2020), <https://www.thelondonmagazine.org/
review-zonal-by-don-paterson-if-all-the-world-and-love-were-
young-by-stephen-sexton> [accessed April 2020].
12. Paterson, ‘The Dilemma of the Peot [sic]’, How Poets Work, 161.

132
 Select Bibliography
Select Bibliography

Works by Don Paterson

Poetry
Nil Nil (London: Faber, 1993).
God’s Gift to Women (London: Faber, 1997).
The Eyes: A Version of Antonio Machado (London: Faber, 1999).
The White Lie: New & Selected Poems (Minneapolis: Graywolf Press, 2001).
Landing Light (London: Faber, 2003; Minneapolis: Graywolf Press, 2004).
Orpheus: A Version of Rilke’s Die Sonette an Orpheus (London:
Faber, 2006).
Rain (London: Faber, 2009; New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2010).
Selected Poems (London: Faber, 2012).
40 Sonnets (London: Faber, 2015; New York: Farrar, Straus and
Giroux, 2017).
Zonal (London: Faber, 2020).

Prose
The Book of Shadows (London: Picador, 2004).
The Blind Eye: A Book of Late Advice (London: Faber, 2007).
Best Thought, Worst Thought: On Art, Sex, Work and Death (Minneapolis:
Graywolf Press, 2008).
Reading Shakespeare’s Sonnets: A New Commentary (London: Faber, 2010).
Smith: A Reader’s Guide to the Poetry of Michael Donaghy (London:
Picador, 2014).
The Poem: Lyric, Sign, Metre (London: Faber, 2018).
The Fall at Home: New and Collected Aphorisms (London: Faber, 2018).

Essays/Lectures
‘The Dilemma of the Peot [sic]’, How Poets Work, ed. Tony Curtis
(Bridgend, Wales: Seren, 1996), 155–66.
‘The Dark Art of Poetry’, T. S. Eliot Lecture (October 30, 2004),
reproduced in The Guardian (November 6, 2004). <https://www.
theguardian.com/books/poetry/features/0,12887,1344654,00.html>
[accessed May 2020].

133
 select bibliography

‘The Lyric Principle’, Poetry Review, 97:2 and 97:3 (Summer and
Autumn 2007), 56–72; 54–70.
‘Frost as a Thinker’, a lecture given at the twenty-second Aldeburgh
Poetry Festival, November 2010. Audio from the Poetry Foundation,
<http://www.poetryfoundation.org/features/audioitem/2880>
[accessed May 2020].
‘The Domain of the Poem’, Poetry Review, 100:4 and 101:1 (Winter 2010
and Spring 2011), 81–100; 71–95.

Edited Works
Last Words: New Poetry for the New Century, ed. with Jo Shapcott
(London: Picador, 1999).
101 Sonnets: From Shakespeare to Heaney (London: Faber, 1999).
Robert Burns: Selected Poems (London: Faber, 2001).
Don’t Ask Me What I Mean: Poets in Their Own Words, ed. with Clare
Brown (London: Picador, 2003).
New British Poetry, ed. with Charles Simic (Minneapolis: Graywolf
Press, 2004).
Train Songs: Poetry of the Railway, ed. with Sean O’Brien (London:
Faber, 2013).
The Zoo of the New: Poems to Read Now, ed. with Nick Laird (London:
Penguin, 2017).

Critical Studies

Bertram, Vicki, Gendering Poetry: Contemporary Women and Men Poets

(London: Pandora Press, 2005).
Broom, Sarah, Contemporary British and Irish Poetry (Basingstoke:
Palgrave MacMillan, 2006).
Corcoran, Neil, ed., The Cambridge Companion to Twentieth-Century
English Poetry (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007).
Dósa, Attila, Beyond Identity: New Horizons in Modern Scottish Poetry
(Amsterdam: Editions Rodopi, 2009).
Fazzini, Marco, ed., Alba Literaria: A History of Scottish Literature (Venice:
Amos Edizioni, 2005).
Mackay, Peter, Edna Longley, and Fran Brearton, eds, Modern Irish and
Scottish Poetry (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011).
McGuire, Matt, and Colin Nicholson, eds, The Edinburgh Companion
to Contemporary Scottish Poetry (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University
Press, 2009).
Parini, Jay, ed., British Writers: Supplement XVII (Michigan:
Gale-Cengage, 2011).

134
 select bibliography

Pollard, Natalie, Speaking to You: Contemporary Poetry and Public Address

(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012).
——, ed., Don Paterson: Contemporary Critical Essays (Edinburgh:
Edinburgh University Press, 2014).
Sampson, Fiona, Beyond the Lyric: A Map of Contemporary British Poetry
(London: Chatto & Windus, 2012).
Schoene, Berthold, ed., The Edinburgh Companion to Contemporary Scottish
Literature (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2007).
Watson, Roderick, The Literature of Scotland: The Twentieth Century, 2nd
edn (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007).

Interviews

Blyth, Caroline, ‘One All: An Interview with Don Paterson’, Oxford

Poetry, III.3. <http://www.oxfordpoetry.co.uk/texts.php?int=viii3_
donpaterson> [accessed May 2020].
Dodd, Philip, ‘Night Waves: Don Paterson’, BBC Radio 4 (October 3,
2012). <http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01n1s4q> [accessed
May 2020].
Dosa, Attila, ‘Don Paterson: The Music of Consciousness’, Beyond
Identity: New Horizons in Modern Scottish Poetry (Amsterdam:
Rodopi, 2009), 147–66.
Friel, Raymond, ‘Don Paterson, Interviewed’, Talking Verse, eds
Robert Crawford, Henry Hart, David Kinloch, and Richard Price
(St Andrews: Verse, 1995), 192–8.
Patterson, Christina, ‘Playing the Beautiful Game’, The
Independent (January 9, 2004). <http://www.independent.co.uk/
arts-entertainment/books/features/don-paterson-playing-the-
beautiful-game-572418.html> [accessed May 2020].
Seaton, Matt, ‘It’s a Slow Process’, The Guardian (January 21, 2004).
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2004/jan/21/poetry.tseliotprize
forpoetry> [accessed May 2020].
Stammers, John, ‘Private Enterprise for the Public Good’, Magma,
12 (Spring 1998), 32–42. <http://poetrymagazines.org.uk/magazine/
recordcae4.html?id=3524> [accessed May 2020].
Wareing, Laurence, ‘Reading between the Lines’, The Glasgow Herald
(August 30, 2003), 13.
Warner, Ahren, ‘I Think Clarity is the Way to Go’, Poetry London, 74
(Spring 2013), 35–8.
Wroe, Nicholas, ‘Leading Light’, The Guardian (November 25, 2006).
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2006/nov/25/featuresreviews.
guardianreview7> [accessed May 2020].

135
 select bibliography

Useful Websites

Paterson’s official website is located at: http://donpaterson.net/

Includes biographical and bibliographical information, plus assorted
links to other online material.

The Scottish Poetry Library holds an extensive digital entry on

Paterson: https://www.scottishpoetrylibrary.org.uk/poet/don-paterson/
Includes a number of poems from across Paterson’s oeuvre to date,
freely available to read.

A manuscript collection of notebooks and papers is held by the National

Library of Scotland (July 2007). Acc. 12689. Inventory can be found at:
http://www.nls.uk/catalogues/online/cnmi/inventories/acc12689.pdf

136
 Index
Index

Al-Ahnaf, Ibn 33–4 Butler, Judith 39–40

Anolik, Ruth Bienstock 66–7 Byatt, A. S. 2
anonymity 2, 3, 7, 9, 30–1, 36,
46–8, 50–1, 52, 70, 75, 90 Cambridge School, the 8
see also personae Castor and Pollux 64
see also poetic voice Cavafy, C. P. 8
anthropocentrism 6, 67, 93n20, Chiasson, Dan 12, 100
104 Christianity 41
see also human dream, the Cioran, Emil 57–8
aphorisms/aphoristic 2, 3, 11, 59, class 6, 18–24
66, 87, 93, 95–6 Clausius, Rudolf 26n30
Arabian Nights, The 38 confessional/confessionalism 4, 55
Aristotle 74 Crawford, Robert 11, 37, 44
Armitage, Simon 2
ars poetica 4, 7, 13, 35, 36, 48, 54, Dante Alighieri 14, 81, 91
57, 69, 77, 92, 96, 102 defamiliarisation 7, 16, 25, 31, 40
Attridge, Derek 102 deixis 62, 66, 77
audience see readers/readership Deleuze, Gilles, and Félix
autobiography/autobiographical Guattari 76–7
6, 29, 33–4, 119 deterritorialisation 76–7
Dickinson, Emily 8
Barthes, Roland 36 direct address 3, 7, 12, 23, 28, 33,
Baudelaire, Charles 17 35, 42, 61, 62, 65, 66, 75, 89
Bertram, Vicki 29, 37–8 dissociation of sensibility 52
Bly, Robert 53, 54, 58 Donaghy, Michael 64, 70, 97, 111
Borges, Jorge Luis 3, 21 Donne, John 39, 42, 52–3
Boyd, William 119 see also Metaphysical poets, the
brevity 96, 117 Donnelly, Timothy 18
Broom, Sarah 19, 61 doppelgängers/doubles 14–15,
Browning, Robert 52 66–7
Buddhism 43, 51–2 Doty, Mark 80
Burnside, John 45 Duffy, Carol Ann 2, 115

137
 index

elegy 12, 110, 116, 119 human trope, the see poetic
see also grief trope
Eliot, T. S. 3, 30–1, 33, 36, 46,
52–3, 90, 111 imagination/imaginative
see also dissociation of transformation 7, 9–10, 15, 32,
sensibility 37, 39, 42, 47, 59, 67, 69, 71, 72,
see also objective correlative 75, 76–7, 79–80, 81, 82, 85, 86,
Ellman, Maud 33 90, 95, 97, 99, 100, 102–4, 106–7,
entropy/second law of thermody- 110, 111
namics 26, 26n30, 27n34, impersonality see anonymity
93
Escher, M. C. 47 Keats, John 9, 35–6

fathers/fatherhood 6, 19–22, 29, Larkin, Philip 2, 16

40–1, 75, 118 Larrissy, Edward 75
Forbes, Peter 45 Leda 64
form/formalism 6, 12, 38, 40, 51, Longley, Edna 2
58, 65, 67–8, 70, 80–2, 84, 87, loss see grief
95–101, 107, 116–19 Lucy, Niall 76
see also sonnets lyric tradition, the 6, 8, 10, 33, 37,
Forward Prize 1 38, 43, 45, 46–55, 62–5, 70, 72–3,
Frost, Robert 8, 107–8 78, 79–80, 89, 91–3, 93n20, 95,
98, 100, 101, 117
gender 37–40
see also sex/sexuality Machado, Antonio 2–3, 10, 37,
George, Dai 110 45–59, 61, 63, 65, 70, 79, 90, 92,
Gillis, Alan 6, 13 105, 118
golden section/golden ratio 25, MacNeice, Louis 2, 14
117 Mairena, Juan de 59
Gothic, the 66–7 Mallarmé, Stéphane 12, 36, 46
Green, Keith 62 Markowsky, George 25
grief 6, 12, 53, 103–5, 112, 113 Martín, Abel 59
see also elegy Matthews, William 14
McKendrick, Jamie 46, 53
Harrison, Tony 23 meaning 12, 21, 49, 55, 69, 75–7,
Haughton, Hugh 80 81, 85–6, 93, 98, 101–4, 107,
Heaney, Seamus 19, 115, 117 108–9, 110, 114
Heidegger, Martin 22 memorability 4, 12, 63, 64–5, 72,
Howarth, Peter 65 81, 96, 114, 115, 117
human dream, the 5, 10, 11, 21–2, metaphor 11, 19, 32, 38, 50, 58,
55, 59, 67, 71, 74, 76–8, 83, 85, 65, 76, 83, 93n20, 98, 102–5, 112,
86, 88, 90, 99, 101–2, 104, 110, 115–16
112, 114, 116 Metaphysical poets, the 39,
see also anthropocentrism 52–3
see also philosophy see also Donne, John

138
 index

metaphysics/metaphysical 5, 9, Nil Nil 1, 10, 13, 16, 17, 18, 21,

12, 16, 28, 43, 45, 56, 101, 107, 24, 26–7, 28, 31, 40, 41, 61,
110 105, 115, 116
see also philosophy Orpheus 1, 11, 79, 80, 81, 82,
metonymy 102, 106, 108–9, 84, 85, 87, 88, 89, 91, 115,
115–16 116
middle class see class Rain 1, 5, 11, 12, 93, 95, 96,
Milbank, Alison 67 97, 101, 105–6, 109, 110, 113,
mimesis 24 114, 115–16, 117, 118
mise en abyme see mise en Zonal 1, 119
abyme 40 Sonnets 1, 116, 117, 118
Mitchell, Stephen 83, 88–9, 92 prose volumes
Modernism 3, 4, 30, 85 The Blind Eye: A Book of Late
morality 4, 5, 9, 13, 23, 24, 31, 48, Advice 74, 96, 105
61, 119 The Book of Shadows 11, 86, 95
Moréas, John 17 see also aphorisms/
Muldoon, Paul 2 aphoristic
music 6, 19, 91, 93, 101 The Poem: Lyric, Sign, Metre
4, 65, 70, 93, 93n20, 102
Newey, Adam 62 see also ars poetica
Nietzsche, Friedrich 43 Reading Shakespeare’s Sonnets
noms de plume 27–8, 59 117
edited works
objective correlative 111 101 Sonnets: From Shakespeare
O’Brien, Sean 2, 7, 11, 41, 61, 79, to Heaney 117
91, 98, 115 essays/lectures
O’Donoghue, Bernard 61 ‘The Dark Art of Poetry’
Oswald, Alice 71 (T. S. Eliot Lecture) 7–8, 57
see also ars poetica
paradox/paradoxes 2, 7, 14, 16, 23, ‘The Dilemma of the Peot
25–6, 27, 28, 29, 33, 46, 47, 56, [sic]’ 70
74, 77, 81, 110, 112 ‘Frost as a Thinker’ 107
Paterson, Don poems
poetry collections ‘Advice’ 48–50
The Eyes 1, 2, 10, 37, 45–6, 47, ‘The Air’ 118
48, 53, 54, 57, 59, 61, 63, 65, ‘Amnesia’ 41
70, 75, 80, 85, 90, 92 ‘Anemone’ 83–4
God’s Gift to Women 1, 10, 30, ‘Breath’ 82–3
31, 33, 37, 38, 40, 41, 43, 45, ‘Candlebird’ 33–7, 46, 48
46, 50, 53, 55, 57, 84, 90, ‘The Day’ 106–10
92, 116 ‘Death’ 119
Landing Light 1, 4, 10, 58, 59, ‘The Double Realm’ 86–7
61, 62, 66, 67, 68, 71, 73, 74, ‘To Dundee City Council’ 119
77, 78, 79, 82, 89, 90, 95, ‘An Elliptical Stylus’ 18–24,
116, 118 28, 29, 42, 61

139
 index

‘The Error’ 5 ‘The White Lie’ 74–7, 79, 90,

‘The Eyes’ 53–5 101
‘The Ferryman’s Arms’ ‘11:00: Baldovan’ 31–3
13–16, 17, 24, 31, 40, 54–5, ‘from 1001 Nights: The Early
74, 77, 105 Years’ 38
‘A Fraud’ 67–71, 72, 73, 82 Pentecostalism 11
‘Funeral Prayer’ 119 personae 4, 6, 7, 23, 28, 29, 30–7,
‘A God’ 91–3 38, 40, 42, 46, 48, 62, 73, 90,
‘Here’ 118 116
‘The Hunt’ 67–8, 73 see also anonymity
‘Imperial’ 38–40, 42, 52 see also poetic voice
‘Lazarus’ 119 personal identity and the self 6,
‘Letter to the Twins’ 75 12, 13, 15, 18, 24, 29, 31, 33, 36,
‘The Lie’ 97–101 46–7, 51, 62–3, 66–7, 73, 75, 90,
‘Marginal Notes’ 54 93, 95, 100, 106, 109
‘Mercies’ 119 philosophy 3, 5–7, 10–12, 17, 22,
‘Morning Prayer’ 17–18, 28, 39, 45–6, 54–9, 61, 70, 73–8,
24 79, 89–90, 105–6, 109–10, 112,
‘Next to Nothing’ 24–6 115, 116, 118
‘Nil Nil’ 27–8 see also human dream, the
‘On Going to Meet a Zen see also metaphysics/
Master in the Kyushu metaphysical
Mountains and Not Plato 106
Finding Him’ 43 poetic trope/tropes 102–3, 106,
‘The Passing’ 88–90 115–16
‘Poetry’ 2–3, 4, 50–1, 70, 90, see also metaphor
92 see also metonymy
‘A Private Bottling’ 53, 55, 92 poetic truth 10, 21, 46, 100
‘Profession of Faith’ 55–6, poetic voice 2, 6, 7, 12, 30, 31,
58, 85 46–8, 50, 57, 73, 80
‘Prologue’ 41–3, 52, 84 see also anonymity
‘Promethean’ 75 see also personae
‘Rain’ 113 Pollard, Natalie 61–2, 63
‘The Rat’ 71–3, 82 Porchia, Antonio 3, 26, 49, 87,
‘The Reading’ 62–6 93
‘Requests’ 119 postmodernism/postmodernist 6,
‘The Roundabout’ 118–19 8, 37–8, 45, 47, 50
‘Siesta’ 37, 57–9 Postmoderns see Cambridge
‘Song’ 70 School, the
‘Souls’ 118 Potts, Robert 30
‘The Swing’ 110–13 Pound, Ezra 3
‘A Talking Book’ 3–4, 10–11 presence/absence 25–7, 29–30,
‘The Thread’ 118 35–6, 43, 46, 51–2, 53, 55–6, 58,
‘Two Trees’ 103–5, 111–12 75–6, 93, 98, 110–13
‘Waking with Russell’ 118 Prynne, J. H. 8

140
 index

Queen’s Gold Medal for Poetry 1 Symbolist movement, the 12, 17,
36
readers/readership 4, 8, 9, 18, 23, see also Mallarmé, Stéphane
24, 29, 30, 34–5, 42, 47, 48, 56, see also Moréas, John
57, 61–6, 69, 89, 96, 119 see also Rimbaud, Arthur
religion and spirituality 6, 10,
11–12, 41–4, 45–6, 53, 55–8, 75, Taylor, Charles 67
79–82, 85, 93, 106, 113, 116, Tennyson, Alfred 52
118 Thomas, Edward 15
Rilke, Rainer Maria 8, 11, 78, Thomson, William 27n34
79–93, 100, 101, 109, 115, 117, translation/translations 5, 10, 11,
118 17–18, 33–7, 45–6, 49, 54, 56, 58,
Rimbaud, Arthur 17–18 59, 79–80, 82, 88–9, 92
Robinson, Peter 29–30 Trueblood, Alan 46, 48, 49, 51,
Romanticism 46, 50, 69 54, 55, 56, 58, 59
T. S. Eliot Prize 1
Scammell, William 30, 54
Schreiber, Jan 110 United Reformed Church 41
scientific materialism 11, 55–6,
79, 93, 105–7, 118 versions/versioning see
self-abnegation/self-cancellation translation/translations
see anonymity via negativa 3, 3n7, 43–4, 55, 84–5,
sex/sexuality 6, 10, 34, 37–40, 92–3
75 Vilain, Robert 80
Shklovsky, Victor 7
Simic, Charles 5, 82 Wood, Michael 10, 37, 52, 59
Simonides of Ceos 63–6 Wordsworth, William 50
song see lyric tradition, the working class see class
sonnets 2–3, 11, 27, 33–5, 50–1,
55–6, 79–92, 103, 116–19, 120 Yeats, W. B. 16, 53
Spinoza, Baruch 52
Stallings, A. E. 96, 104 Zeising, Adolf 25

141