555-On Grief and Reason-Joseph Brodsky-Essay-1997
Barack
2025/02/01
On Grief and Reason, first published in 1997, is the second volume of Joseph Brodsky's essays and the first to be published since he was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1987. In addition to his Nobel lecture, the volume includes essays on the condition of exile, the nature of history, the art of reading, and the idea of the poet as an inveterate Don Juan, as well as a tribute to Marcus Aurelius and an assessment of the case of double agent Kim Philby (the latter two were selected for the annual Best American Essays). The title essay is a meditation on the poetry of Robert Frost, and the book also includes an appreciation of Thomas Hardy, "Letters to Horace," a close reading of Rilke's poem "Orpheus. Eurydice. Hermes," and a memoir of Stephen Spender. Other essays include Brodsky's open letter to Czech President Vaclav Havel and his "immodest proposals" for the future of poetry, which he published during his tenure as U.S. Poet Laureate.
Joseph Brodsky (born 1940 in Leningrad, Russian SFSR, Soviet Union) died 1996. He was a Russian and American poet and essayist. Born in Leningrad (now Saint Petersburg), Soviet Union, Brodsky fell out with Soviet authorities and was expelled from the Soviet Union in 1972 ("strongly advised" to emigrate), settling in the United States with the help of W. H. Auden and other supporters. He has since taught at Mount Holyoke College and at universities including Yale, Columbia, Cambridge, and Michigan. Brodsky was awarded the 1987 Nobel Prize in Literature "for the sweeping scope of his work, the clarity of his thought, and the poetic intensity of his work". In 1991, he was named Poet Laureate of the United States.
Table of Contents
Spoils of War
The Condition We Call E xile
A Place as Good as Any
Uncommon Visage
Acceptance Speech
After a journey
Altra Ego
How to Read a Book
In Praise of Boredom
When Robsky was a child, he ate canned corn beef that was airdropped into the Soviet Union by the United States. For the Soviet Union, which was short of food at the time, this was undoubtedly a rare delicacy. What's more interesting is that this canned food not only tastes good, but also has a sturdy and beautiful packaging. After eating, it can be used in many ways in daily life, which can be said to be a multi-purpose item. I don't know whether these canned food were dropped out of friendship when the United States and the Soviet Union were still allies during World War II, or whether they were a means to shake the confidence of the other side's citizens during the confrontation between the two sides during the Cold War. But what is certain is that the impact of this behavior is very obvious: people actually benefited, and they would inevitably have a certain yearning for the country where the canned food came from, or at least have a positive emotion. This reminds me that no matter what political or economic system is implemented, the most fundamental principle is to ensure that everyone is "well fed." Similarly, when running a business, no matter how grand the vision you advocate is, you must ensure that your employees have relatively generous material rewards. Even on a smaller scale, such as when you are with friends, when you are a boyfriend or husband, or when you are a father, you should strive to make the people around you feel happy and satisfied when they are with you - this is the most important thing, and everything else must be built on this foundation.
Robowski was exiled from his homeland. This experience is almost unimaginable to most people, and no one wants to experience it personally. Before I went to the United States alone to study and live there for a long time, I didn't have much concept of "psychological loneliness" and "separation". Because when I lived in China, even if I was not in the city where my hometown was, I didn't feel obvious loneliness. So at that time, I simply thought that there was no essential difference between going to a strange city abroad and going to a strange city in China. But the facts have proved that the two are still far apart. "Being alone in a foreign land is a stranger", especially during festivals, that kind of loneliness is often magnified several times. From this, I also began to understand why "foreign love" always makes people feel difficult to persist. It's not just the obstacles of distance and time difference, but also the confusion and loss when being overseas and lonely, and even the doubt about oneself. These emotions will surge in my heart from time to time. Look at those exiled people again. At least studying abroad is your own choice, and no matter how hard it is, you can say "I accept the outcome". But those who are exiled are forced to leave their homeland. How helpless and painful would that situation be?
Perhaps, the more a person travels, the more he or she will experience some subtle changes. Looking back on the days when I just finished high school and entered college, traveling attracted me more than any interpersonal relationship. I hardly cared who my companions were or who I set out with. I only cared about the destination: plateaus, dense forests, deserts, mountains and rivers... The motherland is so vast, and the world is even more boundless. In the following ten years, I never realized that my understanding of travel always remained at the level of "what I saw" - everything fell on "things" and ignored "people". However, just as people experience unique psychological changes at the age of 10, 20, and 30 , in the tenth year after graduating from high school, my thoughts suddenly changed dramatically: I no longer had the strong curiosity I had in the past about distant places, and the magnificent scenery that once amazed me became increasingly vague in my memory. On the contrary, the travel companions and interpersonal interactions that I used to care little about became more and more vivid in my retrospect, and even became the most touching part of my heart today.
The most notable feature of art is its "uniqueness". If we compare various things in the physical world - such as cars, houses, computers or mobile phones - the feelings they give people are usually not very different; however, a work of art may bring completely different experiences: some people appreciate it, while others are confused. This is because art is closely related to people's subjective attributes. In recent years, artificial intelligence has been extremely popular. We can already use it to write poems, generate images, and make videos. Perhaps it will soon be able to "independently" construct a truly meaningful story. The same thing may cause very different resonances in the hearts of different people. Sometimes I think that although there are countless individuals in the world, we may be like batches of samples generated by AI's "unsupervised learning", each taking on a different exploration path. Perhaps we all belong to a larger "intelligent body" or "spiritual community", and each of our lives is a unique trajectory from birth to end. Looking at the past and present, the existence of countless people is like the constantly accumulated parameters that help that larger intelligent body to exhaust all possibilities. In this long process of exploration, "uniqueness" is the most precious value of each person to the "great holy spirit"?
Everyone's existence is accidental and destined to be short-lived. Perhaps a group of people are gathering in a room to give a speech at this moment, but a few hours ago, there might be no one there; a few hours later, there will be no one there either. I gradually realized that every gathering is hard-won. We pass by countless people every day, but only a few can really intersect with each other's lives. Faced with this fleeting and uncontrollable gathering and emotion, we often go to two extremes: either desperately trying to grasp it, or simply stay away from it. For a long time, I chose the latter, because I felt that it was better to give up than not being able to grasp it , because emotion is an illusion. But gradually I realized that this attitude may not be desirable. So, I began to seek a balance between these two extremes: since I understand that all relationships will experience changes and even dissipate, I should cherish everything I have now. At the same time, I also know that no relationship can last forever, and at most it can only accompany me throughout my life. Maybe I shouldn't escape for "short-term", and I will no longer worry about gains and losses because of the fear of loss, and I wish I could hold it tightly all the time. Perhaps, this is just like the way we treat life: no matter what, we are getting older day by day and will eventually face death. The key is whether we can enjoy life without distraction and not be bound by worries about gains and losses while knowing this end.