Kelsey Conkright
Dr. Aaron Moe
ENTL 109W
In-Class Essay #3
October 29, 2015
Poetry as the Reinvention of Language
As defined by the Oxford Dictionary, energy is the strength required to sustain life.
Without energy, nothing would exist. The sun, a necessary energy, allows for the continuation of
life. Energy is vital to life, not only on Earth but also for mental and physical activities within a
single individual. Reading a poem, for example, is a source of energy. “A poem is stored energy”
(Rueckert, 74). New powers and creativity come from this great foundation.
The above introduction shows how language can become very monotonous. At times, the
same styles of writing are overused and become quite dull. Defining a word by the Oxford
Dictionary is a commonly used introduction. It bores the reader, as the reader has read it many
times and the concept in itself is extremely unoriginal. Imagination and creativity bring new
thoughts and ideas into language, creating a space for energy to profoundly shape the mind of the
audience.
Much like language, fossil fuels are used widely across the world today. These resources,
commonly known as nonrenewable resources, will eventually become depleted. Crude oil, one of
the common fossil fuels, takes many years to create. The breakdown of animal remains takes
hundreds, sometimes even thousands of years. Today’s society is very dependent on these
resources. Much would not function without the sustained energy found in fossil fuels. What
could possibly be done to combat this situation? Scientists across the world continue to research
new, imaginative ways to find energy.
Language is very much like that of a nonrenewable resource at times. If writers expressed
themselves in the same style of writing and use of language, readers would not experience such
great, profound levels of energy. Language, in that case, would correlate greatly with a fossil
fuel. Writing, therefore, requires a great sense of imagination and creativity to lead readers on a
journey. In “Literature and Ecology: An Experiment in Ecocriticism,” Rueckert expands on the
overuse of a particular theory. “If you do not get in on the very beginning of a new theory, it is
all over with…” (Rueckert 72). Rethinking the ways of old theories, that is, old language is
necessary to continue the power of writing. To avoid the overuse of language, writers must
reconsider the old to create the new.
Emily Dickinson was one poet who brought about and instituted the great power housed
within a single poem. “I dwell in Possibility” (466, ln 1). The structure of her poems and the use
of language is much different than other writers of her time. She expanded on the possible,
unexplored territory of her day. Dickinson can be seen as a milestone in the writing of poetry.
She did not follow the status quo. She invented her own use of language and brought about a
profound amount of energy. This can be seen in her poem “He fumbles at your Soul.” “Then
nearer - Then so - slow-” (ln 8). Dickinson interrupts the ways of iambic pentameter with the use
of dashes. This creates an expansive space for the acquiring of stored energy. The reader can feel
the power of the dashes. The poem seems to come to a stop, or at least slow down. “All energy
comes from the creative imagination” (Ruekert, 75”. Dickinson’s creativity instituted an energy
that still exists today. The power continues today, much like a renewable resource.
One of the descendants of Dickinson, Hillman, immensely drew on the ideas Dickinson
pursued in poetry. “The possible is boundless” (Water, 33). Following the example of
Dickinson, Hillman expanded on possibility. She dwelt on the reinvention of language, to
explore the opportunities found within the realms of writings. The structure and use of language
found within Hillman’s poems are seen much as a new invention.
Works Cited
Dickinson, Emily. The Poems of Emily Dickinson. Reading Edition. Massachusetts: Harvard
UP, 2005. Print.
Hillman, Brenda. Practical Water. Middletown: Wesleyan UP, 2009. Print.
Rueckert, William. “Literature and Ecology: An Experiment in Ecocriticism.” Iowa Review 9.1
(1978): 71-86. Print.