This is the poem:
monday to friday at the plant
concrete yards are busy with
vehicles and movement although most of what
moves is machinery
now and then a human figure crosses the open
space looking small & helpless
in the sky above the plant not much is blue
behind the buildings in a grey channel something
oozes past seeming to have been a river
on friday night when the machines are silent
& and the watchman finished his rounds
walking away with gun and torch like some
mistaken supplicant then only the dark
finds its way through wire fences
and sometimes due to atmospheric conditions (for which
the management is not responsible) the wind will rise
or in the wasteland hours of industrial sunday
rain might start falling inadvertently as if
still thinking of a plant as some kind of
flower
This is my close reading
A poet in many ways ahead of his time, infamous for his drug use and early death, Michael Dransfield is prominently known for his involvement in the generation of ’68 that sought to use art as a means of social protest, with a number of his works outlining the relationship between man and nature. In ‘Prosperity’ (1970), by Michael Dransfield, it highlights how the landscape is a construct of the poet’s imagination, one which nature has been ravaged by humanity, hence allowing for an eco-critical reading. However, with the ubiquitous presence of industrialisation throughout the poem, an anti-capitalist lens can be applied, depicting a society that is “helpless” in the face of rampant capitalism. Devices such as symbolism, imagery and personification have been used to aid in these interpretations.
As the century progresses, the health of our ecosystems are regressing, with many aspects removed by human activities resulting in larger scale destruction. In ‘Prosperity’, Dransfield highlights how the natural landscape is now a “wasteland”, brought on by humanity’s ‘opposition to nature’ (Wright). In the poem, the visual imagery of the sky “where not much is blue” and “something ooz[ing] past seeming to have been a river” is unsettling to the reader, reinforcing the extent of the destruction incited by humanity. The wind that sometimes “will rise” and the rain that “might start falling inadvertently” for which “management is not responsible”, is ironical as it implies that these elements of nature are unwanted – sublime, uncontrollable forces as they are, outside the grip of the humans in their intent to ‘subdue, tame, control’ (Otto). In this sense, the poem becomes a macrocosm for the damage we have done as a species to the Earth. Reading from an eco-critical perspective, Dransfield’s poem emerges as a depiction of the rampant destruction caused by humanity, this supported through sensory imagery.
In the text, the connotations of “machinery/plant/industrial” perfectly encapsulate the capitalist nature of Dransfield’s poem. The concrete yards “busy with vehicles and movement” with “most of what moves [being] machinery”, reinforces the extent of the industrialised presence upon the landscape as it has largely replaced nature. The persona in the poem who works “monday to friday” implies he is just another worker in a blue-collar profession that leaves him exploited in the ‘booming’ economy. This is reinforced in the line “now and then a human figure crosses the open space looking small and helpless”, depicting the misery of the humans in a once sublime landscape, now tamed and replaced by the larger construct of an embodiment of capitalism, the personification of the rain in a reminiscence “thinking of [the] plant as some kind of flower”, aiding in this interpretation. Through an anti-capitalist lens, the poem can be read as depicting industrialisation that has left humans in want, this supported by personification and connotations.
In ‘Prosperity’, the discourse of control by mankind is ever-present, with the frequent motif of nature been tamed by capitalism in that “most of what moves is machinery”, the sky is no longer “blue” and rivers have been reduced to “oozing grey channel
”. The landscape can only reclaim some aspects of its sublime nature when “the machines are silent”. This is reinforced in the intriguing description of the “watchman” as “some…supplicant”. A “supplicant” has religious connotations, perhaps suggestive of some request for divine intervention through prayer. This is symbolic of nature requiring a cleansing of humanity’s industrial influence in order to truly reclaim a presence in the “wasteland”. The religious meaning can taken further when the “rain…start inadvertently falling” on “industrial Sunday”, where work has ceased in a ‘Sabbath’-like manner, and this perhaps symbolising a temporary reprieve from humanity’s continued destruction through industrialisation. This anti-capitalist reading of Dransfield’s poem has been constructed through symbolism and motif.
In ‘Prosperity’ by Michael Dransfield, humans have been revealed to be in ‘opposition to nature, first and foremost, in a physical battle for survival” (Wright). Through an eco-critical lens supported by sensory imagery, the poem can be read as a macrocosm of the continued damage inflicted by humans upon the Earth. With an anti-capitalist reading applied, the poem emerges as a critique of industrialisation that has largely replaced nature and left us “helpless” and in ‘want’.
Any feedback at all would be appreciated