In the poem Cartographies of Silence, the author uses this constant repetition of the word and ideas relating to the topics of language and silence. I felt that silence represented those oppressed and suffering that society doesn’t hear or chooses to ignore. However, “silence is not absence” (140). Even though society may choose to not hear them and there cries, does not mean that they do not exist. The 6th stanza stuck out to me because it was bold. The ideas that Rich develops seem to be used as a way of building up to this stanza throughout the poem. There seems to be this voice that is screaming to come out. This voice or the inner voice is speaking to those suffering and it can no longer be silenced anymore. “It has ceased to hear itself” (141). I noticed that the author didn’t use he, she, or them but instead ”it.” I believe that the author uses this “it” to really strengthen the idea that she is not talking about a person or physical object. Those suffering must break the silence for the continuation of silence leads to no social change. This strong and meaningful passage and message connects to previous readings that have discussed language: why do we write poetry? The author believes poetry is old and ancient. Taking a shot in the dark, my mind began to form this cascade of connections between writing, language, and silence. I believe that the writer is trying to say that writing another form of language in which voices can be heard. Poetry and writing were ways that ideas could be spoken but not heard by society, silence. Thinking about the text as a whole, perhaps language is the medium through which social ideas can be changed and in order for that change to occur silence must be broken. The suffering cannot continue using the “ancient” way of poetry to say what they need to say, but by speaking what’s inside.
4 thoughts on “Language and Silence”
Comments are closed.
I have also noticed Rich often repeats different forms of communications in her poems. In stanza 7 of “Cartographies of Silence” she writes “language cannot do everything” (141). This leads me to believe language is not the medium for social change. Rich mentions different forms to communicate in her poems which include language, silence and poetry. Therefore, I believe language is one of the many mediums needed for social ideas and that each form can expose the truth.
You’ve shown a very interesting perspective on how you feel Rich uses her poem to analyze the power, or lack thereof, of silence. I had just finished reading another post analyzing a similar phenomenon, but with slightly different meaning. A classmate feel that Rich writes this as a means to glorify silence, not to be confused with being silenced. This classmate used the analogy of silent protests, claiming that silent protests are more effective than others. I feel as if your ideas nearly contrast, seeing as you see language more as a way to spread ideas, rather than using silence to convey a message. I feel there is validity to both messages, but I feel this is much more spot on to what Rich was trying to convey- there is a purpose for language, and being silent is not always enough. Very nicely done, and excellent clarity! 🙂
When I first read this poem, the utilization of the word “it” also stood out to me. When I read through it the first time, I read it as you did, with the word referring to the inhumanity of not being heard. However, I disagree that the word “it” could not be used as a way to describe a person or physical object because when I read the poem a second time, I thought of the word “it” being used as a personification for the actual voice. The voice was an actual thing, that without recognition as its own entity could not be heard. I thought this was a very interesting tool for Lorde’s writing, where the usage of one word could change depending on the time of reading it. I believe that both of these ideas tie into the need to be heard in order to feel human. I don’t believe that this comparison to the differentiation between writing, language and silence is a shot in the dark because I agree with your idea. Another place I see Lorde explaining this idea is in the sentence later in poem 6, “How do I exist?”. When I read this sentence it reminded me of the centuries of “illegitimate” people who had not existed fully because not only were their voices not being heard, they were not given the ability to write or speak. The need to express themselves and represent themselves was taken away and, these people were forced to be silent.
You have done a very good job on pointing out what silence and communication mean in the context of this poem rather than the literal meaning of those two words. As you wrote, silence is not invisible – individuals that exist in silence because the society chooses not to recognize them. Also, the interpretation of the usage of the pronoun “it” instead of “he”, “she”, or “them” are interesting. The individual, calling itself “it”, has found another form of voicing its words to be heard by the community, through means poems.