by
kendrive
@ 2007-07-21 - 08:53:42

Click to enlarge
IN SANTA MARIA DEL POPOLO
Waiting for when the sun an hour or less
Conveniently oblique makes visible
The painting on one wall of this recess
By Caravaggio, of the Roman School,
I see how shadow in the painting brims
With a real shadow, drowning all shapes out
But a dim horse’s haunch and various limbs,
Until the very subject is in doubt.
But evening gives the act, beneath the horse
And one indifferent groom, I see him sprawl,
Foreshortened from the head, with hidden face,
Where he has fallen, Saul becoming Paul.
O wily painter, limiting the scene
From a cacophony of dusty forms
To the one convulsion, what is it you mean
In that wide gesture of the lifting arms?
No Ananias croons a mystery yet,
Casting the pain out under name of sin.
The painter saw what was, an alternate
Candour and secrecy inside the skin.
He painted, elsewhere, that firm insolent
Young whore in Venus’ clothes, those pudgy cheats,
Those sharpers; and was strangled, as things went,
For money, by one such picked off the streets.
I turn, hardly enlightened, from the chapel
To the dim interior of the church instead,
In which there kneel already several people,
Mostly old women: each head closeted
In tiny fists holds comfort as it can.
Their poor arms are too tired for more than this
-- For the large gesture of solitary man,
Resisting, by embracing, nothingness.
Thom Gunn
Santa Maria del Popolo (i.e. Saint Mary of the People) is a church in Rome and the painting above which is housed there, shows the conversion of St. Paul on the road to Damascus.
In this poem Gunn tries to show how Caravaggio deliberately made his work ambiguous: there is a simple surface meaning, beneath which the artist has concealed his own vision.
Gunn suggests that the famous painting seems to show St. Paul, fallen from his horse and struck blind by his encounter with Christ.
In reality, Gunn argues, the painting shows the saint having a rather different experience. While simple people, who come to the church to pray, will be comforted by the conventional religious meaning, those who are more perceptive will see what the painter really intended.
In the first stanza, Gunn describes his waiting for the time of day when the sunlight falls on the painting, so he can view it. He notes how real shadow falls on the painted shadow. (The artist is celebrated for his use of light and shade). This means “the very subject is in doubt”. One can barely see (literally) what is in the painting. But what Gunn perhaps means (or suggests) by this phrase is that there is doubt as to the interpretation (or “meaning”) of the painting.
The second stanza describes the painting's content. The artist has tried to show Saul (the Pharisee) becoming St. Paul (the Christian). But Gunn notes how Caravaggio's technique draws the viewer's eye to Paul's convulsive gesture, lifting his open arms. In asking “what is it you mean?”, Gunn implies that the orthodox (conventional) interpretation (Paul's accepting Christ) may not be what is intended. The painter, Gunn argues (third stanza) “saw what was”, both the open and the hidden. Caravaggio's eye for the truth of human frailty is shown in his other works, to which Gunn here refers.
But the point of the poem only appears in the final stanza. Having seen the picture, Gunn is “hardly enlightened”. He has found understanding neither of the religious experience Caravaggio was commissioned to paint, nor, with certainty, of what the artist really meant to show. This he contrasts with the others who have come to the church (“mostly old women”). They take comfort from the painting, which they interpret conventionally, as showing a religious conversion. They are “too tired” - too exhausted by the harshness of their lives - to manage the “large gesture”. This is, to resist “nothingness”, “by embracing” it.
Gunn suggests in this concluding line, that there is no real meaning in life, that beyond it there is oblivion - “nothingness”. The only way truly to resist this, to face up to it, is by “embracing” it, that is accepting it with no fear. This, of course, is a difficult thing to do. It is for this reason, that few will have the courage for this. This explains why it is “solitary man” who does so. Gunn does not begrudge the simple masses the conventional succour of religious belief. Though he does not state it, he suggests that Caravaggio showed how this “embracing” of “nothingness” was St. Paul's real experience; Gunn may also imply that, finding no enlightenment in religion, he, too, may be ready for this “large gesture”.
The poem clearly articulates how modern man, discovering no meaning in religious belief, is forced to confront his own mortality. There is a certain arrogance in Gunn's idea that religious faith (shown to be the religion of simple and aged Italian peasant women) is for the weak, as there is in the implied commendation of the heroic “large gesture” of Paul/the artist/Gunn himself. However, you may compare the poem favourably with On the Move. There, Gunn examines others' search for purpose while remaining aloof from the human dilemma, as if it has nothing to do with him. In this poem, he has the courage (even if he makes a show of it) to face the bleakness of his own view of human life. The poem is characterized by a lofty stoicism.
Technically, the poem is very pleasing: the argument moves from apparently innocent comments about seeing a painting, to profound observations on human existence. By his use of the metaphor of light (“enlightenment”) and by exploring the nature of art, in his own work of art, Gunn makes his argument coherent and intellectually stimulating, while the final line concludes the debate with an apparently unanswerable flourish. The language of the poem is more varied, less formal, than that of On the Move, and the iambic line is used more fluently and with greater vigour.
From: www.universalteacher.org.uk/poetry/gunn.htm