Author Spotlight
Natalie Lyalin Week (2): Water Experiment in Two Parts
Below is perhaps my favorite poem, though there are likely many favorites, in Natalie Lyalin’s Pink & Hot Pink Habitat. It speaks for itself. After it though, following the break, I’ll say a little more about what it does on me, as a human.
I.
A scientific study reveals: water is alive.
Equal amounts of water is poured into three identical containers.
Zelig Berken died fighting in world war II.
Equal amounts of rice is poured into each container.
Zelig Berken was twenty years old.
The first container is told “I hate you.” The second container
is told “I don’t care about you.” and the third container is told
“I love you very much.”
While Zelig Berken was away at war his entire town was evacuated.
The rice in the first container turned black. The rice in the second container
bloomed. And the rice in the third container rotted.
II.
Water is poured into two identical containers.
The first container goes home with Scientist A.
The second goes to church with Scientist B.
The next day, a droplet is extracted from each container.
The droplet from the first container shows nothing of significance.
The droplet from the second container shows formations of stars
and giant flowers.
Faith is difficult to write. Science is difficult to write. Both are equally on the line of being either fascinating or boring. You have to have each inside you to speak of each in a way, which is easily mistaken.
Characters with unique names are inventions: some would say like faith and science. Much of certain schools of writing asks that characters be defined as parts: look, motive, idea, size. These creations of character invariably fail. Creating a character, then, with a unique name, who operates in a text on terms left uncertain, allow that character to become larger than a body or a human, and left to the untraceable, what we are given. This, again, is like faith, and like science, and perhaps less difficult to write, but more prone to being poked at.
When you google the name ‘Zelig Berken’ in quotes, the only thing that comes up is Natalie Lyalin’s graduate thesis. This is known as a googlewhack. This is also known as creating, but more so, the making of an instance. A singularity. Though he may likely exist for the author in another state, in the building of our texts, Natalie Lyalin creates from void.
And yet it is not clear even after reading the sole instance in which Zelig Berken exists, what or who he is. We know he was 20 years old, and died. We know he left his town and the town was evacuated in his absence. His position in the text is almost happenstance, a causal alignment in the midst of something put forth as a “Water Experiment.”
In the environment of the poem, we learn that environment around water, which is named alive, affects the nature of the water. The nature of the water, then, in turn, affects its environment, a dual feedback system wherein the inanimate, previously benign object, in its conditioned state, creates “formations of stars / and giant flowers.” The affected system affects the system that gave it its affect.
Natalie Lyalin, in the process of pressing buttons on a machines, or perhaps using her arm to drag a stick over paper, has developed, in an economy of words that describe, and therein define, a human body of a void, and a magical (though I prefer: true) property to one of the most abundant presences in our midst.
Zelig Berkin exists. The small stirrups in our language affect our air, our earth, and beyond our air and earth, systems.
This poem is an object that wakes beyond the object of itself. It, in having been written, and printed from the mind, propagated, is an act of not only great faith, but of knowing. The paradox of both.
For me, this faith is not about religion, despite the instance of the church. There are many churches. There are people whose presence or nonpresence creates voids of homes.
What, if anything, are texts for but to make paradox. To create instances of air that did not previously exist. Even outside the realm of the entertainment, in camps where fabrication is intended to comment on its system, there is often a hard lack of the instance, of the glyph, of texts that are not text so much as they are space, and in that space, creation, and in that creation, not an inherent God, but the not necessarily plain-faced mode of exhibiting understanding, concentration, and, the oft-smited and overworked faculty of love.
Love in literature is often cheapened. When we can touch something that shows the interaction of the human with the human, we call it heart, we call it what we write for.
Here, though, in a calm and unassuming column of short undemanding sentences, Lyalin invokes the heart as both spectator and parent, foreigner and neighbor, hoped and clinical, endless and brief. She has the faith, the heart, to give the reader the rope, to invoke in sentences a space that does not demand a pulling, a want, an oh, but somewhere else. The unassuming, the notion of touching rather than prescribing, or deciding, is to me a greater science, a gift that does not demand that it be opened, and goes on regardless, beyond its box. However its presence hits you, whatever of your own faith you might apply, that is up to you: you at or against its face.
I thank her, it.
Tags: natalie lyalin, pink and hot pink habitat
Wow. Great poem, Natalie, and great analysis, Blake.
Wow. Great poem, Natalie, and great analysis, Blake.
esp. intrigued by the ‘googlism’ concept; hadn’t heard of that before
esp. intrigued by the ‘googlism’ concept; hadn’t heard of that before
thanks stephen. just realized its not actually called a googlism. that is something else.
it’s a googlewhack.
thanks stephen. just realized its not actually called a googlism. that is something else.
it’s a googlewhack.
No disrespect to any of the other poems (or poets) that’ve appeared in these Giant pages, but this piece resonates the loudest, the roundest to my ears. And I don’t think it has anything to do with my preteen tenure as an altarboy.
I like your creative extrapolation as well, Blake, but I’m curious why you didn’t address the significance of the most (arguably) challenging image: the water told “I love you very much” rots. In that same part, the water treated w/ apathy blooms, not unlike the water that went to church. Is there not a connection there worth exploring?
No disrespect to any of the other poems (or poets) that’ve appeared in these Giant pages, but this piece resonates the loudest, the roundest to my ears. And I don’t think it has anything to do with my preteen tenure as an altarboy.
I like your creative extrapolation as well, Blake, but I’m curious why you didn’t address the significance of the most (arguably) challenging image: the water told “I love you very much” rots. In that same part, the water treated w/ apathy blooms, not unlike the water that went to church. Is there not a connection there worth exploring?
definitely. i could have written a lot more. my focus was a little different than a straight reading/interpretation. feel free to take the stage right here…
definitely. i could have written a lot more. my focus was a little different than a straight reading/interpretation. feel free to take the stage right here…
This “Zelig Berkin” stuff is just nonsense. Maybe it spells out something witty if we change the letters around? (the author could have chosen to make a parallel which fit in with the rice/feelings triad, but didn’t, as far as i can tell)
In the end, this poem proposes two main theses. First, neglect increases the desire to be noticed and that is a good thing. Second, Scientist A’s home is lame and Scientist B’s church is cool. Regarding the former, OK, I can go along with that, but the way this thesis is performed is far (in my mind) from pleasing. The later is a cop out–just a room temperature piss on reason.
Environments affect organic objects. Wow?
Why does this poem remind me of Gremlins?
Butler’s “analysis” actually (re)writes the poem. Which is cool. His version is better than the poem as a standalone object.
This “Zelig Berkin” stuff is just nonsense. Maybe it spells out something witty if we change the letters around? (the author could have chosen to make a parallel which fit in with the rice/feelings triad, but didn’t, as far as i can tell)
In the end, this poem proposes two main theses. First, neglect increases the desire to be noticed and that is a good thing. Second, Scientist A’s home is lame and Scientist B’s church is cool. Regarding the former, OK, I can go along with that, but the way this thesis is performed is far (in my mind) from pleasing. The later is a cop out–just a room temperature piss on reason.
Environments affect organic objects. Wow?
Why does this poem remind me of Gremlins?
Butler’s “analysis” actually (re)writes the poem. Which is cool. His version is better than the poem as a standalone object.
why must an entity be witty
why must an entity be witty
the entity in question would be the author…i suppose she doesn’t have to be.
but back to ZB…
you say it yourself “His position in the text is almost happenstance.” My position is that there is no reason to indicate his position in the text as anything other than happenstance. It’s as if three lines from some other text stumbled into this poem. As far as i can tell, they don’t relate to the rest of the poem i.e. it would be a better poem without them. maybe nonsense was too strong. how about “excess”?
the entity in question would be the author…i suppose she doesn’t have to be.
but back to ZB…
you say it yourself “His position in the text is almost happenstance.” My position is that there is no reason to indicate his position in the text as anything other than happenstance. It’s as if three lines from some other text stumbled into this poem. As far as i can tell, they don’t relate to the rest of the poem i.e. it would be a better poem without them. maybe nonsense was too strong. how about “excess”?
why can’t an entity be excessive
why can’t an entity be excessive
Thingamagjig,
You write some of the most absurd dreck….what absurd university are you holed up in?
Thingamagjig,
You write some of the most absurd dreck….what absurd university are you holed up in?
what do you mean by “relate to the rest of the poem”? how does one line “relate” to another line in a poem? is conventional meaning the only way? i would hope there are others.
and luckily there are!
what do you mean by “relate to the rest of the poem”? how does one line “relate” to another line in a poem? is conventional meaning the only way? i would hope there are others.
and luckily there are!
I would be interested in how you understand these ZB lines Cozart. Perhaps my critique hinges on the fact that I don’t get anything from these lines.
Butler, I’m knew here. Do you usually troll your own posts?
Mugg, am i being too clear or not clear enough for you? Maybe you have some thoughts on the poem?
I would be interested in how you understand these ZB lines Cozart. Perhaps my critique hinges on the fact that I don’t get anything from these lines.
Butler, I’m knew here. Do you usually troll your own posts?
Mugg, am i being too clear or not clear enough for you? Maybe you have some thoughts on the poem?
ah, i can see we’re on a last name basis. like tough sports guys! grrr!
it’s perfectly fine not to get anything from those lines. i was just questioning the thought process that led to your conclusion.
ah, i can see we’re on a last name basis. like tough sports guys! grrr!
it’s perfectly fine not to get anything from those lines. i was just questioning the thought process that led to your conclusion.
I’d like to dig into this, but I’m at work (work-work kinda work) so I’ll just offer this: there’s definitely a connect here, as I see it, between apathy and church, as if the church doesn’t care about you, doesn’t have to. Redemption comes from within, as does faith or awareness of our bloodline to the bloom of stars and giant flowers. Also, obviously, the Zelig character’s three lines are tied sequentially to the water hate, apathy and love — and how that matters and doesn’t. Yay, nay?
I’d like to dig into this, but I’m at work (work-work kinda work) so I’ll just offer this: there’s definitely a connect here, as I see it, between apathy and church, as if the church doesn’t care about you, doesn’t have to. Redemption comes from within, as does faith or awareness of our bloodline to the bloom of stars and giant flowers. Also, obviously, the Zelig character’s three lines are tied sequentially to the water hate, apathy and love — and how that matters and doesn’t. Yay, nay?
yes, i like the within tie. and zelig looming there seems to bounce off that, in a nice way. it’s not random, as others have suggested. thanks jesus, like this.
yes, i like the within tie. and zelig looming there seems to bounce off that, in a nice way. it’s not random, as others have suggested. thanks jesus, like this.
I don’t know you on a first name basis so I used the last one. Both Matt Cozart and Mr. Cozart seemed a bit too much.
I posted an opinion and instead of writing something for or against that opinion I get some “you’re not as cool as I am” ad hominem shit.
Done.
I don’t know you on a first name basis so I used the last one. Both Matt Cozart and Mr. Cozart seemed a bit too much.
I posted an opinion and instead of writing something for or against that opinion I get some “you’re not as cool as I am” ad hominem shit.
Done.
When I first read this poem, I saw paradox, because the first time the rice is mentioned, the rice that is given apathy is the one that turns out right, while the second time it is mentioned, the one that goes to church (rather than home with Scientist A) is the one that is better. I don’t associate church with an uncaring thing. I associate it with community. But church can be both, I suppose.
When I first read this poem, I saw paradox, because the first time the rice is mentioned, the rice that is given apathy is the one that turns out right, while the second time it is mentioned, the one that goes to church (rather than home with Scientist A) is the one that is better. I don’t associate church with an uncaring thing. I associate it with community. But church can be both, I suppose.
I’m not sure if “goo…wha..” is some kind of standardized verb-in-of-itself {I decided not to GOOG.. the phrase for the sake of irony or laziness..? will decide later…} though if the verbed noun isn’t standard, I’d like to put forward a term {that I believe} better describes said “making-the-reader-seek-out-obscure-info-via-‘net-search-tech,” ’cause, honestly, do we really need more products invading language?
Tunneling.
I’m not sure if “goo…wha..” is some kind of standardized verb-in-of-itself {I decided not to GOOG.. the phrase for the sake of irony or laziness..? will decide later…} though if the verbed noun isn’t standard, I’d like to put forward a term {that I believe} better describes said “making-the-reader-seek-out-obscure-info-via-‘net-search-tech,” ’cause, honestly, do we really need more products invading language?
Tunneling.
rotting is kind of like blooming, it’s just that the bacteria is usually gross and smells bad
rotting is kind of like blooming, it’s just that the bacteria is usually gross and smells bad
genuinely puzzled as to where i engaged in “’you’re not as cool as I am’ ad hominem shit”. you seem to have invented this accusation out of thin air.
genuinely puzzled as to where i engaged in “’you’re not as cool as I am’ ad hominem shit”. you seem to have invented this accusation out of thin air.
this exchange would have worked better as a freestyle rap off
this exchange would have worked better as a freestyle rap off
This one has stuck with me.
This one has stuck with me.
[…] in Space” by Molly Young for a discussion of the fusion of poetry and science. Also, Natalie’s poem “Water Experiment” and the discussion that follows gives you some poetry and science. Tags: Molly Young, natalie […]
Thanks for that gloss, Blake, it’s as if the poem sprouted a rare and beautiful wall-climbing plant.
Thanks for that gloss, Blake, it’s as if the poem sprouted a rare and beautiful wall-climbing plant.
[…] section of last week’s NLW: SUPERMACHINE post. A dwarf in a week shouldered by GIANTS (Amy, Blake), super Seths (Landman, Parker) and other guests (Erin McNellis’ Noö review), my post shrank […]