"Symbiosis or Death": - Rhodes University
"Symbiosis or Death": - Rhodes University
"Symbiosis or Death": - Rhodes University
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
127<br />
and decreases the pressure on personal consciousness – that biology stands as threat<br />
to culture but f<strong>or</strong> the self-same reason it renders the meaning of the cultural m<strong>or</strong>e<br />
intense” (209). He adds that Livingstone is present in the poems as both a figure of<br />
culture (as scientist, plain pragmatic man, homespun philosopher, poet, romantic lover<br />
and hero, Quixotic knight errant) and as a biological creature which is part of the<br />
evolutionary process (209). He expl<strong>or</strong>es this tension, <strong>or</strong> contradiction as he calls it, seeing<br />
in it the underlying source of Livingstone’s use of language:<br />
I think it is in the pressure of the contradiction produced by the biological and the<br />
cultural that we can begin to see the sources of Livingstone’s engagement with<br />
language. The contradiction manifests itself in the poems in the f<strong>or</strong>m of counter<br />
disciplines. The biological disciplines the cultural by placing it in the long<br />
sequence of time, and the cultural disciplines the biological by lifting it into the<br />
expressive domain. In the biological register generation and extinction are the<br />
primary figures – in the cultural register these reappear as the expression of<br />
individual realization and of loss. The urge to language – of f<strong>or</strong>mal rhythmic<br />
language – arises where these two disciplines encounter each other in the poet.<br />
…<br />
It is impossible to know whether Livingstone’s engagement with language rose<br />
to meet his sense of the challenge which the longue durée of the biological<br />
process posed to him, <strong>or</strong> whether it was a consistently deepening sense of the<br />
power of language which led him to test his talent against the most severe and<br />
demanding of limits. What is, I think, clear, is that the pivot of his w<strong>or</strong>k lies where<br />
biology spells extinction and language spells survival. (209-10, my italics)<br />
M<strong>or</strong>phet thus points to Livingstone’s tentative hope that, through the communicative<br />
power of the language of art, humankind’s ecological destructiveness may be<br />
apprehended, in both senses of the w<strong>or</strong>d. In M<strong>or</strong>phet’s w<strong>or</strong>ds: “the volume reconstitutes<br />
the language of poetry as prime medium f<strong>or</strong> the realization of the w<strong>or</strong>ld” (210).<br />
M<strong>or</strong>phet criticises the sometimes blunt <strong>or</strong> overexplicit tone, but praises the<br />
collection f<strong>or</strong> its “depth at which the poems provide the poet and his readers with a<br />
measure of a life in this place at this time” (210). Duncan Brown, too, refers to the<br />
imp<strong>or</strong>tance of place: “The crucial manoeuvre – evident in his previous w<strong>or</strong>k, but<br />
becoming explicit and pervasive here – is to refigure the place of humans in the broader<br />
context of biologically conceived, but nevertheless spiritual life” (2002: 98).<br />
In his opening paragraph, Peter Sacks calls A Litt<strong>or</strong>al Zone a superb collection<br />
which is as brilliant, versatile and enthralling as it is sober and menaced (1) and so<br />
immediately points to its underlying tensions. He also writes eloquently of Livingstone’s<br />
ecological preoccupation which is m<strong>or</strong>e sharply evident in A Litt<strong>or</strong>al Zone: