Summer words of a sistuh addict - Essay Example

? Poetry is by its very nature an artifice. One of the most important components of poetry is the fact that each word is chosen, each sound chosen, so specifically by the poet that it can convey an incredible amount of meaning with a small amount of text. This often leads to poetry seeming artificial – words packed full of subtext, words not used in every-day life, are put on the page, representing a modern day aureate tongue, a golden language for the discussion of high ideas. In “Summer words of a sistuh addict,” Sonia Sanchez intentionally plays with this aspect of poetry, making the lowest of slang the language for communicating important ideas. “Summer words of a sistuh addict” uses slang to demonstrate the fundamental importance of choosing language to fit subject matter, as well as to demonstrate the true lack of mutual intelligibility between the words and ideas of two distinct groups of people. The language of poetry is usually very complex – poetry is seen as something that should not be for the masses, but rather is something to only be appreciated by the select few who have the keys to unlock the literate language they are written in (Early, 24). This makes poetry a “literate tradition that ... [are] culturally constituted tools” which create and exaserbate striations in society (Early, 20). It is, in this understanding, important for a poet’s works to be inaccessible because accessibility implies lack of though and complex ideas – essentially if a piece of art is of value it should have to required a certain level of education in the tradition of that art to comprehend. “Summer words of a sistuh addict” reverses this understanding entirely. By using slang language of the people who often face struggles with addiction, Sanchez reverses the usual dichotomy of the literate being able to understand poetry while the less literate cannot. Suddenly, the literate find their training and education in literate language a hidnerance to their understanding of poetry – they do not understand what is meant by “shot up / behind a feelen gainst her” (Sanchez, 8-9). They must ask questions like: how can something be behind a feeling? and does “gainst her” refer to against the mother? This demonstrates to the literate reader the hierarchy that the literary language of poetry often establishes against people not privy to that secret language, by making the literate reader try to work in someone else’s preferred language – it reverses the usual hierarchy and turns the oppressor into the oppressed, at least for the length of a poem. Sanchez’s use of slang also demonstrates the importance of connecting appropriate language with a certain type of subject matter. Technical languages are incredibly important to clear communication (Bamforth). A doctor trying to communicate important issues regarding a patient’s health without recourse to a specialized language would find it nearly impossible, and people would suffer (Bramforth, 18). So it is important in many fields to use the appropriate language when discussing a specific issue, failing to do so will inhibit understanding and hamper communication. When looked at through the lens of technical language, “Summer words of a sistuh addict” creates some interesting discussions about the use of literate language in poetry. By eschewing the usual poetic language, Sanchez breaks away from the technical language of poetry, which draws attention to the fact that it does indeed operate a specialized form of language. But using slang to talk about the issues surrounding drug addiction in the “sistuh’s” society makes the reader question whether it would be appropriate to rely on the literate language to talk about this issue. If slang, like literate language, operates as a form of specialized language, a technical language of some kind, then should it not probably be the best language to talk about the problems of poverty and addiction? Is it not ridiculous to try to discuss these specialized concerns in the overly wrought literate language that poetry is usually constructed in? Through using slang, the kind of language the speaker would actually use, to talk about the kinds of issues the speaker would actually go through, Sanchez demonstrates the importance of using particular kinds of languages to talk about particular issues, and demonstrates how using literate language to talk about the issues who do not have access to that language would be oppressive and counter-productive, creating a lens of observation giving those with literate language undue power. This, however, creates a problem of intelligibility. If the only way to communicate appropriate ideas is through appropriate language, does this mean that the literate will never have access to the issues of those not inducted to literate language? Does it mean that those without literate language will never have access to the ideas and art of the literate? Sanchez’s poem actually provides an answer to these questions. At first blush it appears that this language is composed almost entirely of slang, but this is not the case. It in fact switches between slang with the speaker of the poem is speaking, to a more neutral language that is the voice of some unseen narrator. After the speaker, the sistuh telling the audience how “it felt so gooooooood” (Sanchez, 14), a narrator picks up, saying “and as the sistuh sits in her silent/remember high someone leans forward gently asks her,” after which follows a another passage in slang by a new speaker, which is followed by the narrator continuing “and the music of the day/ drifts in the room to mingle with the sistuh’s /young tears/ and we all sing.” (Sanchez 14-26), The language of this narration serves as a middle ground, that can be understood both by the sistuh and by the literate audience, demonstrating that there is a way to communicate art without relying exclusively on any particular form of language, and create art that can be understood by all. Sanchez cleverly plays with slang and literate language to demonstrate the unfair hierarchy that the language of poetry often creates. It does this by demonstrating to the reader how hard it can be to understand language which one is not comfortable with, by connecting the importance of using a form of language with appropriate subject matter, and finally by demonstrating that there can be common grounds for all forms of a particular language, and room for everyone to understand each other. Bamforth, Iain. “Is there life on earth? Some observations on techincial language” Parnassus. Poetry in review 23 (1998). 10-28. Early, Margaret. “Literate traditions are ‘culturally constituted tools.’” English Quarterly 35.1 (2003). 20-31. Sanchez, Sonia. “Summer words of a sistuh addict” WE a BaddDDD People. New York: Broadside press.(2008). Read More