The "Kathleen"

In "Danse Russe" by William Carlos Williams, the speaker of the poem adresses almost everything in a personal sense: "my wife," "my north room," "my mirror, "my shirt," "my arms" etc. There is a lot of "I" as well: seven in all. In the second line, however, there is "the baby and Kathleen." He does not refer to the baby as his own. The baby may not be his. If it was his baby, however, why would he refer to him/her as "the baby"? This poem is quite like the speaker escaping, at least in a mental way, his own life--being "lonely" without the others intruding in his life. It may be that the baby was impersonal for that reason. Same could be said for "Kathleen" too. The one thing that makes peculiar about "Kathleen" is that, that is the only proper noun written in this poem. The speaker, his wife, nor the baby had been identified with names. If she was his daughter, he could have written "my daughter." If it was a servant, he could have written "the servant." If it was his dog, he could have written "my dog." What was the meaning of this queer creativity? Although the speaker does say that he is "best so" at being "lonely," he could possibly be reaching out for someone to grasp his hand and tell him "no." He may be pointing out that something that one may think is the "best" may not be, and the person may be longing something else--something else that he/she may not have noticed--reaching out for it unconsciously.

The "Lala"s and "Lulu"s of Our Mind

Gertrude Stein plays with the readers' mind in a queer way and, because of that, some may find her poems quite confusing and indecisive. She very well portrays people's mind activities and the ambiguities in our everyday life--the reality some may find to not want to touch and/or accept. Ambiguity and the incomprehensive part of our world is frightening and a lot tend to not want too much of those. For an example, some, including myself, are afraid of ghosts. Ghosts are invisible and not scientifically decipherable, and because of that, it contains power. The ambiguous power makes people feel insecure and unstable. Another example is the fear of earthquakes and other natural disasters. Although technology have advanced quite a lot and a lot of machines can catch the sign before the occurance, the strength of the disasters can still not be absolutely predictable. Also, even if some may feel they have the control over nature, that is impossible because the power of nature is ambiguous and gives it power.

Stein's poems possibly give readers some kind of uncomfortableness or unstableness. She repeats a lot of words, exhausting them as she uses them in various ways. In "Sacred Emily," she repeats a lot as well, giving some readers a headache and insecureness because the poem seems unable to be controlled. The readers cannot wrap their hands around the poem and cuddle it in their arms. Instead, the poem slips, drips, flies, and teleports out, dancing, running, skipping, cartwheeling and doing everything imaginable making the readers baffled and uncomfortable. But if one stops and thinks--thinks about it for a moment--one may be able to realize how the poem is just like our state of mind when we space out during class, when we are trying to get to sleep, when we are walking, when we are not thinking about thinking. I could be thinking about pigeons while someone is talking about calendars. Our mind is incontrollable. We start thinking about one thing, ending up with something completely different. An easier example: we start talking about one thing, ending with something absolutely different. Our mind exercises--either on its own or not. Our mind is incontrollable, indecisive, a trickster, a necessity, dancing and jumping and cartwheeling a lot of the time, unnoticed. We may be quite uneasy and alarmed by it, but our mind is a necissity. It is nice to remember that a lot of things are not in our hands but slips out and twists around continuously.

Our minds do work that way oftenly--start thinking about one thing and the mind works out like crazy! In the poem, for an example, Stein writes:
Ethel.
Ethel.
Ethel.
Next to barber.
Next to barber bury.
Next to barber bury china.
Next to barber bury china glass.
Next to barber china and glass.
Next to barber and china.
Next to barber and hurry.
Next to hurry.
Next to hurry and glass and china.
Next to hurry and glass and hurry.
Next to hurry and hurry.
Next to hurry and hurry.
Plain cases for see. (96-111)
How often do people do this in their brain? Do we even know? Our minds are fantastic: too wonderful that it can think on and on about peculiar "stuff." The ability of our minds are unknown and people are therefore awed and tickled by it, making them quite uncomfortable at times. It is nice, however, to acknowledge it and feel the tink, which Stein helps to sparkle on us.