Scarred Narratives and Speaking Wounds: War Poetry and the Body Author(s): Jeffrey Sychterz Source: Pacific

Coast Philology, Vol. 44, No. 2, Violence and Representation (2009), pp. 137-147 Published by: Penn State University Press on behalf of the Pacific Ancient and Modern Language
Association

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25699562 . Accessed: 27/02/2014 04:42

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Penn State University Press and Pacific Ancient and Modern Language Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Pacific Coast Philology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.135.100.107 on Thu, 27 Feb 2014 04:42:13 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

War Poetry and the Body Jeffrey Sychterz

Fayetteville State University

Scarred

Narratives

and

Speaking

Wounds:

Violence played a particularly formative role in twentieth century poetics. That century's globalized wars and ever more potent weapons of mass de

civil wars and the indirect hostilities of theCold War, individuals in the twen tieth century were mobilized intellectually and imaginatively inways that have leftan enduring fetishization ofwar in Western, ifnot world, conscious ness. This fetishization, in both its heroic and anti-heroic forms, led to the development of a distinct genre of poetry about war. But war poetry notwith standing, violence assumed a more diffuse and powerful emblematic role in

struction brought nations and whole populations within war's sphere, whether directly through slaughter or indirectly through industrial mobilization. Not only in theworld wars, but in conflicts such as the Spanish and Vietnamese

poetry throughout the century, rivaling even poetry's ancient marriage with beauty. Poetry has increasingly become a privileged site for confronting vio lence in itsmyriad forms,whether directly, as in Carolyn Forche's Poetry of Witness, or more obliquely as inModernism's fragmentation, Confessional
poetry's wounded self-consciousnesses or even L=A=N=G=U=A=G=E

epistemological ruptures. Throughout veloped as a kind ofwounded speech.

the twentieth century, poetry has de

poetry's

But this development is not without precedent. In the history ofWestern literature,we see numerous examples inwhich bodies inscribed by violence carry significant epistemological power: scars tell stories and wounds speak. are the same. If we look closely at some well-known But not all woundings pre-twentieth century literary injuries, particularly in Homer's epics and we will notice fundamental differences between the Shakespeare's plays, ways thatwounds and scars "speak." These differences carry not only clear impli

cations for corporeal meaning and authority, they also point to generic dis tinctions between poetry and prose ? distinctions that poets have not just on but turned to their heads exploited develop poetry as a means to directly confront and protest violence in all its forms. The wound

tells a story.Homer knew this, for wounds and scars play cen tral narrative roles in both of his epics. In The Odyssey, a scar gives away Odysseus's identity and interrupts themain arc of the narrative with its own

story. InBook 19,Odysseus enters his house disguised as a beggar, but Euryclea, his nursemaid, discovers his identitywhen she sees a scar on his thigh thathe

137

This content downloaded from 128.135.100.107 on Thu, 27 Feb 2014 04:42:13 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

138

JeffreySychterz

mentions the scar, the storymust be told in full at themoment of its mention ing, even though it interrupts themoment of Euryclea's sighting the scar and her dropping the foot. foot but her shock at connecting But, what is her dropping of Odysseus's the scar toher master, whose foot she holds. Homer, therefore, inserts the story precisely between Euryclea's identifying the scar and her identifying thebearer moment she discovers its of the scar; in that meaning. It is as though the narra

scar, Erich Auerbach finds the childhood story significant because Odysseus's it interrupts "a moment of crisis": Euryclea's identifying the scar and her drop foot in the basin (2). Auerbach reads in thismoment an im ping Odysseus's Homeric portant epic technique: "fully externalized description" with no back events ground?all happen equally in the foreground (4). Thus, when Homer

received in childhood. Because the scar serves as a unique identifier and key to his identity, even more so than his face or his voice, Odysseus takes great cover to a moment his thigh. That of recognition opens pains seventy-line narration of theboar hunt inwhich Odysseus received the scar. In his essay on

reads its story to the audience. Therefore, Odysseus covers the scar not only to hide his identity,but also to control his own story until the proper time for its telling. In The Iliad, because it is awar epic, woundings occur much more frequently and play a central role in the plot. As in The Odyssey, thesewoundings invoke narratives of personal history as well, but here thewounds undo those narra tives rather than preserve them.Homer narrates his battlefield scenes mostly as a series of clashes between individuals; and he assembles these encounters in a rather consistent pattern: first,the poet tells a short story that humanizes the individual killed and tells us who he was before the war; then, he de scribes the fatal injury, often in graphic detail, including the exact organ or

tive of the boar hunt were inscribed upon the hero's thigh, and she read its story. In a very literal way, the boar has indeed inscribed Odysseus's body, and Euryclea is one of the readers who has the knowledge to interpret the scar properly. Upon seeing it, she not only instantly discovers itsmessage, she

organs destroyed; finally,he affirms the death and fate of the individual. We see this pattern in Book Five when we learn the fate of poor Pedaeus:
killed Pedaeus, Anterior's son, a bastard boy Meges but lovely Theano nursed him with close, loving care just to please her husband. some close attention too? him gave Closing, Meges struck behind his skull, the famous spearman children, the razor spear slicing ? the up jaws, cutting away the tongue straight through he sank in the dust, teeth clenching the cold bronze. (166) just at the neck-cord, like her own

This content downloaded from 128.135.100.107 on Thu, 27 Feb 2014 04:42:13 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Scarred Narratives and Speaking Wounds 139 A story tells us who Pedaeus was, and thewounding affirms that he is no more. The wound, therefore,unthreads Pedaeus's personal narrative. In The Body inPain, Elaine Scarry identifies this pattern of unmaking in The Iliad, but she argues that the wound threatens more than the individual, for in that unthreaded narrative she finds "one attribute of civilization as it is embodied in thatperson, or in thatperson's parent or comrade" (123). The mortal wound, therefore, empties civilization from the soldier's body by unraveling the com munal narratives that make the body a citizen of Ithaca, Lycia, Phthia or Troy. But, while The Iliad's unmaking of narrative may seem to operate in pre cisely the opposite way from the inscription of narrative in The Odyssey, each account of death destroys the peacetime narrative precisely by overwriting the body with its own narrative of violence and war. The war has remade the son of Theano

peacetime

unfolds inprecisely the same way as dozens of other deaths, The Iliad suggests that these shattered bodies form the story of theTrojanWar, on which Achilles's own personal story ismapped. The dead are disassociated from their previ

into an object ofMeges's war record by writing itself Pedaeus's his pierced mouth can no longer tell the tale of body. indelibly upon a father's love and a because thewar has replaced his devotion, stepmother's a of "cold bronze." Whereas he once testi human with tongue tongue fleshy fied to familial bonding, Pedaeus now testifies to the epic-making glory of the battlefield: he has been made into an object ofwar. And, as Pedaeus's death

ous lives, especially from the roles theyplayed in their families and city-states, and folded into a community of thebattlefield, whose bodies are thenarrative of the Trojan War. Many critics have identified a similar link between the war wound and communal identity in Shakespeare's Henry V. But in this play, written almost two and a half millennia afterHomer's epics, the nation has taken the place of the city-state, and thewar wound helps to strengthen national identity rather than threaten it.To rouse his troops before thebattle ofAgincourt, King Henry cites the narrative potential of thewound and the powerful authority itwill grant the bearer:
This day is call'd the feast of Crispian. that outlives this day, and comes safe home, Will stand a-tiptoe when this day is nam'd, He And He

rouse him at the name of Crispian. that shall see this day, and live old age, Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbors, And say, "Tomorrow is Saint Crispian." And

Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars, I had on Crispin's say, "These wounds day." Old men forget; yet all shall be forgot, But he'll remember with What feats he did advantages that day. (4.3.40-51)

This content downloaded from 128.135.100.107 on Thu, 27 Feb 2014 04:42:13 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

140 JeffreySychterz King Henry asks his soldiers to imagine the day when theywill show their scars and recount heroic tales of battle. Those triumphant taleswill be so pow erful that theywill reinscribe the feast day of Saint Crispian as a commemora tion of the battle; and, as the physical bearers ofmemory, the soldier's own bodies will serve as the day's livingmonuments. Those bodies will have been inscribed by wounds and remade as objects ofwar, much like those wounded and slain in The Iliad; but the ones who survive their wounds can masquerade,

likeOdysseus, as peacetime citizens by keeping their scars hidden. Yet, unlike the narratives inscribed in the soldiers' scars are national narra Odysseus, tives. As Henry makes clear later in his speech, the soldiers will not only re late tales of personal heroism, they will also remember, "Harry the King, Bedford and Exeter, / Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester" (11.53 scars mark the soldiers as part of the greater battlefield narra 4). Because the tive, each soldier's marked body will consecrate Saint Crispian's Day as a day

of national remembrance. Annually on the day, each soldier will roll back his sleeve and release the powerful national narratives encoded therein. some of Interestingly enough, although Henry does obliquely suggest that never indicates that others will certainly them will not survive the day, he emerge from the battle victorious but unscarred. In the logic of his soliloquy the scar is necessary, for in the future it is the only thing thatwill distinguish the bold soldier from the coward "at home abed." In an era without uniforms, ? albeit an ribbons, medals and discharge papers, the scar is the one proof ? as a And one soldier. and battle of one's of identity experience ambiguous that scar grants the survivor the authority to speak as the voice of experience.

masculine

Although soldiers are the ones who will tell heroic stories of Agincourt and national pride, the stories emerge from, are grounded in, and gain their au men will in effectdraw theirvoices thority from the soldiers' wounds. The old from those wounds that have now healed to scars. The scar grants the bearer

power and authority, including the authority to speak. At that fu ture feast day, he will command his audience by brandishing his scars, before filling the room with embellished tales of heroism and glory.

scar somewhat indiscrimi Although, thus far, I have used both wound and and to indicate the signifying power narrativizing potential of the nately an wound, important theoretical distinction between the two has already made itself apparent: while thewound evacuates the body of authority and opens it

to semantic appropriation, the scar closes the body's narrative and reinvests it with authority.Odysseus and Henry's soldiers are identified by and gain mas culine authority from their scars. The narratives inscribed on their bodies are firstand foremost their stories, and they have the power to speak them. I do not mean to suggest that the scarred individuals are in full command of those stories; to a great extent the narratives exist beyond their control: Odysseus

This content downloaded from 128.135.100.107 on Thu, 27 Feb 2014 04:42:13 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Scarred Narratives and Speaking Wounds 141 must hide his scar because he cannot control itsmessage, and theAgincourt survivors remember only what the scars tell them; besides, the stories scars tell are not necessarily a true account of history (1.50). Nevertheless, the scar marks the survivor as someone who is allowed to speak his own story and be

heard. Henry's soliloquy demonstrates the referential control that the scar grants the bearer. His body may be remade by war, and the story of thatwar may be inscribed in his scars, but his voice speaks the tale of those scars. The scar grants him the mantle and authority of the storyteller. When one ofHenry's soldiers strips his sleeve, we can imagine the feast goers falling silent, allow ing him to fill the room with his voice. He has the power to speak; others must listen.His voice determines themeaning The wound, of Saint Crispian's vigil.

has written over that history a new tale of war. The wound opens the body and undoes a previously closed narrative. If, as in the case of Pedaeus, the wound ismortal, it remakes the entire body into a wound we call the corpse and utterly silences the subject (Scarry 119). Even ifnot lethal, a wound that does not heal (such as a missing limb or the wounded psyche of someone suffering from posttraumatic stress disorder) objectifies him, robbing him of power and authority. As we

on the other hand, empties the body ofwill and intention, and the narrative of personal identity. historical spear not only disrupts Meges's silences Pedaeus, it robs him of subjecthood and makes him into an object of war. His body no longer substantiates his own history because Meges's spear

can see, the wound/scar dichotomy is clearly structured along lines. feminism, gendered Psychoanalytic particularly as conceived by Jane a semantic connection in patriarchal cultures be has theorized Gallop, long tween the wound and womb. Physically, thewound is a bleeding orificemarked by penetration. Semantically, it symbolizes the bearer's lack of authority be cause thewounded / wombed body lacks a closed corporeal integrity. The scar, a hard, carries because it closes wound the with alternatively, phallic potential, a of skin. It because unified, closed, jagged strip symbolizes subjectivity and thus grants masculine authority. Ironically, to gain the phallic authority in vested by the scar, one must first suffer a castrating wound. Such a paradox

describes, to a certain degree, thehistorical appeal ofwar. Patriarchal cultures have long formulated a strong connection between warfare and masculine authority. If one must undergo the trauma of thewound to gain phallic au thority, then the old adage, "war makes men," would be literally true. InNo Man's Land: Combat and Identity in World War I, Eric Leed describes this mascu line transformative process as a kind of special knowledge written on or in the body, which makes the soldier into a bearer ofwisdom:
The knowledge inwar was rarely regarded as gained something alienable, a tool or a method. Rather, it was most often something that could be taught,

This content downloaded from 128.135.100.107 on Thu, 27 Feb 2014 04:42:13 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

142 Jeffrey Sychterz

described individual's war as was a part of the combatant's body, like a chemi something that in the veins, a mark, a scar, a set of reflexes, a part of the to the knowledge in very potency. The best analogy acquired

cal substance

a is perhaps to sexual knowledge, that transforms the char knowledge acter and condition of the knower from that of an innocent to that of a bearer and administrator of a potent wisdom. (74, my italics)

The scarred, and therefore masculine, individual has supposedly gained some higher understanding through the ordeals he has survived, and the scar serves a sign that theman deserves to speak not just as the sigil of that knowledge ? and be heard ? but also as the very site of thatwisdom. But before the scar can close the now remade subject, thewound must first open him; and in the interim the soldier runs the risk of not healing, whether through death, loss of limb or posttraumatic stress disorder. He could thus find himself on the feminized end of the gendered scar /wound binary, never

having achieved masculine authority. Throughout the 1970s, American soci ety largely associated theVietnam veteran with images of castration and femi nization. The powerless veteran, in a wheelchair, with long hair, and mentally as a symbol ofAmerica's own wounded unhinged by his experiences, served masculinity and loss of authority. But, according to Susan Jeffords,theReagan era succeeded Rambo. While

lar process earlier inKing Henry's speech before Agincourt; the English sol diers can strip their sleeves with pride only if theywin the battle. The mean ing of the soldiers' scars is ultimately decided by national loss or victory. The or not symbolic wounding or scarring of the body politic controls whether our soldier's bodies are wounded termines whether healing ultimately de the individual soldiers have stories worth listening to. or scarred. National

in replacing that image with the hyper-masculine body of the 70s castrated veteran signified loss, both of personal au a thority and national victory, the 80s warrior body signified symbolic victory inVietnam, one that granted the veteran themasculine authority previously denied him. This cultural transformation demonstrates that the soldier's per sonal narrative is ultimately linked to national war narratives. We saw a simi

mimics an organ of speech. Pedaeus's body does much more thanmark him; it one can read Meges's war record. a not where is corpse simply mangled story The ruined mouth now speaks the violence and death of the battlefield with a re tongue of "cold bronze." That spear doesn't just cut away the tongue, it places whole broken body, as opposed subjectivity, speaks through it.Although Pedaeus's the tongue, and Pedaeus's to his living and injury is singular

Yet, as we hypothesize a link between scars and narrative and stress the link between scars and telling stories,we must be careful not simply to equate thewound with silence. While the boar hunt that scarred Odysseus appears inscribed upon his leg where it can be read, the spear thatmarks Pedaeus's

This content downloaded from 128.135.100.107 on Thu, 27 Feb 2014 04:42:13 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Scarred Narratives and Speaking Wounds 143 ? ? no other hero fallen on the plain of Scamander speaks with a similar tongue itdoes point to an important truth: while patriarchal cultures may associ ate the wound with the womb, thewound also resembles amouth, and mouths
speak.

Three hundred years after Shakespeare and twenty-seven hundred years afterHomer, the soldier poets ofWorld War I insist that thewounded body does indeed speak, and it speaks with surprising frequency throughout their poetry. In particular, the body that is entirely a wound, the corpse, plays a central role in theirwork. And, while many of the best-known war poets use the corpse imagistically as a form of visual realism, theway inwhich they present it strongly suggests that the corpse does speak, even ifnot in a lan guage we recognize. In poems such as Siegfied Sassoon's "The Rear-Guard" and Edgell Rickword's "Trench Poets," speakers converse with corpses, and the corpses answer with grotesque but meaningful leers. In "Dead Man's

Isaac Rosenberg focuses our attention on the aural imagery of death, including dying moans and crunching bones. And, Wilfred Owen's "Dulce et Decorum Est," not only features a speaking wound, but one that echoes Dump," Pedeaus's death in The Iliad:
hear, at every jolt, the blood gargling from thefroth-corrupted lungs, as cancer, bitter as the cud Obscene Ifyou could Come Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues, (my italics)

The poem invokes the faculties of speech as directly as does Pedeaus's injury; however, the Bronze Age wound has been updated for a modern industrial ized age: a tongue burned by poison gas has replaced the tongue of bronze. The FirstWorld War poem thatmost explicitly evokes the speaking wound long dialogic poem, "The End of aWar." The second section, entitled "Dialogue between the Body and the Soul of a Murdered Girl," be isHerbert Read's gins: BODY
I speak not from my pallid but from these wounds. lips

SOUL
Red lips that cannot a credible tale. tell

BODY
of martyr'd men these lips renounce their ravage: of France The wounds roused their fresh and fluid voices. (11.45-52) In a world

This content downloaded from 128.135.100.107 on Thu, 27 Feb 2014 04:42:13 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

144

JeffreySychterz

The body of a murdered girl speaks here precisely through her wounds, and the poem clearly disassociates this voice from the voice of the soul. Death has dismembered the girl's subjectivity into the untouched and transcendent soul and thematerial body "covered with bayonet wounds": one speaks from be

that they lack verifiable authority. Like the Trojan prophet her Cassandra, body is doomed to speak a truth towhich no one will hearken. imbued with connotations, the full meaning of her wounds subsists Although as Elaine Scarry reminds us, their message is arresting beyond language, and, but referentially unstable. Only when the poet translates those wounds do ? later in the poem we learn that she died they speak of heroic martyrdom attempting to sabotage occupying German troops. Unassisted, speak an unverifiable, semantically undirected message. But Iwant the wounds

yond the grave, while the other accesses speech through a livid red wound that resembles amouth. Moreover, the "red lips" of thewound gain the power of speech just as the "pallid" lips of the girl's mouth are silenced. But, al though thewound speaks, the soul warns that those strange lips "cannot tell / a credible tale." The problem here is not thather wounds do not tell the truth, but instead

ity bestowed by the scar's narrative authority. Therefore, the difference be tween thewound and the scar is not between silence and speaking. A wound carries the same semantic potential as the scar, but it emerges in a different way, through the strange language of the body: the screams and moans of pain, the crunch of bones, the sound of tissue tearing, the sight of blood and the charnel smell of rotting flesh. The wound differs from the scar in that the a injured individual cannot yet harness those lesions into coherent narrative, forher voice cannot yet close itsmeaning. The wound disables an authorita tive narrative identity, while the scar reassembles that narrative. One might say that the open wound is not yet ready fornarrative. The concept of thewound as pre-narrative communication suggests that if can associate the scar with narrative, then we can associate thewound After all,while the scar carries a story inscribed on the body, the with the lyric. we wound speaks with a voice. That poetic voice is better suited for speaking the or syntax. Poetic de strange truth ofwounds because it is not bound by plot in the epiphanic and imagery locate meaning vices such as onomatopoeia

to focus for a moment on the other half of line forty-seven. It is not just thatwhat thewound speaks is not "credible," it is also not a "tale." In truth fact, thewound's may not be credible precisely because it is not a narra tive.As an unhealed, and unhealable, wound, it lacks themasculine subjectiv

moment

of the poem's speaking, rather than deferring it through the causal chain of plot. Poetry builds meaning not through the relationship of events, mouth and the but through theheft ofwords: the sound and feel of them in the a on the page. Poetry, therefore, speaks space they occupy language closer to

This content downloaded from 128.135.100.107 on Thu, 27 Feb 2014 04:42:13 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Scarred Narratives and Speaking Wounds 145 that of trauma. In fact, posttraumatic stress counselor and author Judith Herman describes traumaticmemory in mode ways thatnotably invoke a lyric ofmeaning:
Traumatic coded studied memories lack verbal narrative and and context; images. civilian disasters, and combat, describes the as an "indelible traumatic memory image" or "death imprint." Often one inwhat Lifton calls the the experience, particular set of images crystallizes "ultimate." The intense focus on fragmentary sensation, or image without survivors ofHiroshima, context, gives the traumatic memory a heightened reality. (38) in the form of vivid sensations Robert rather, they are en Jay Lifton, who

Traumatic memories

grasped in the first place" (Caruth 62). Thus, like a poem, the traumaticmemory ismore than a "trace of an event," but an event in itself; an attempt to trans form the unknowable event intomeaning (Forche 33).

from history and strongly traumatic its the destructive forcenot from Moreover, memory gains imagistic. a link to the past, but precisely in the event's repetition in the present. The master what was never fully traumatic return represents the minds "attempt to

are therefore disconnected

wartime trauma,while might explain why poetry emerges as a firstresponse to novels typically do not appear until ten to twenty years after the survivor's experiences. Take thebest known war novels of the twentieth century:All Quiet on the Western Front appeared in 1928, ten years after World War I ended; the firstchapter of Catch-22 was published in 1955, ten years after World War II; he left Vietnam

not construct that narrative right away. She must undergo a significant por tion of the healing process before she can feel safe enough to tell her story. In other words, she has to gain some distance from the event. This distancing

Yet, one of the steps of recovery from trauma involves placing those im ages within context. The survivor does thisby telling "the story of the trauma" (Herman 175). It is important to recognize that the traumatized survivor can

and Tim O'Brien published The Things They Carried in 1990, twenty years after (to be fair,his firstnovel, Going afterCacciato, came out rela in 1978). Perhaps the intervening decades are necessary to heal the tively early so he can turn them into narrative. author's psychic wounds Perhaps time closes thewounds into scars. This association between for theWorld War

traumatic memory and poetry would have been I poets and their twentieth-century inheritors to enough a of model wounded adopt symbolic speech; however, the concept of the is In wounded poet much older. fact,poets have long considered Orpheus and Philomela as the founding archetypes of the Western poetic tradition. These iconic figures gained poetic power after receiving wounds that should have silenced them: Orpheus's head sang enchanted music after his dismember ment, and Philomela was transformed into a nightingale after having her

This content downloaded from 128.135.100.107 on Thu, 27 Feb 2014 04:42:13 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

146 JeffreySychterz tongue cut out. Explaining the lesson of these myths, poet Allan Grossman states, "poetry, gendered female, is driven into existence by the body's pain (134). Grossman argues, there (pain being the indescribability of thebody..." a a that to offers fore, poetry "counterstory" history, history not only as patri a as archal mode of meaning but also way of constructing meaning that si lences the body's raw, but disturbing, voice. So, while it may be beneficial to the traumatized

individual to silence the body's wounded voice by reassem traumatic the memory into a narrative, that voice "is one of our few bling allies the force thatwould reduce us to the ash of its indifference great against ? 'so rudely forced'" (134). The traumatized voice protests the very force of history, which silences the speaking body with conventional meaning. to posit an essential relationship between wounds and po scars and and narrative; but, instead, to argue that in the twentieth cen etry, tury,poets exploited certain resemblances to construct poetry as a wounded genre, one that paradoxically draws strength and authority from the strange I do not mean

paradoxically authoritative, witness to the violence of the twentieth century, whether the physical violence ofwar and oppression, or the representational violence of patriarchal history. After all, asWilfred Owen argues in "Dulce et we could hear the voice of "corrupted lungs" and "blistered Decorum Est," if we no longer believe the "old lie" told to make us march blithely could tongue," off towar. The war poets ask us to listen to the traumatized body as is, unfil tered and unsilenced by narrative.

a poetic voice as a counterweight to history speech of wounds. It is precisely that appeals to many twentieth century poets. They find in thewounded voice a not loss ofmeaning and authority, but instead an authentic, and therefore

Works

Cited

Western Literature.Trans. Auerbach, Erich.Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Willard R. Trask. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 1968. Print. Caruth, Cathy. Unclaimed Experience: Trauma, Narrative, and History. Baltimore: JohnsHopkins UP, 1996. Print. Witness. New Forche, Carolyn, ed. Against Forgetting:Twentieth-Century Poetry of York: Norton, 1993. Print. NY: Gallop, Jane. The Daughter's Seduction: Feminism and Psychoanalysis. Ithaca, Cornell UP, 1982. Print. Grossman, Allan. ing Stories of Teaching Poets: Ann Arbor: U Subjection and Mastery in the Found "Orpheus/Philomela: Poetic Production and in the Logic of Our Practice." Poets World. Eds. Gregory Orr and Ellen Bryant Voigt. Self and the ofMichigan P, 1996.121-39. Print.

This content downloaded from 128.135.100.107 on Thu, 27 Feb 2014 04:42:13 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Scarred Narratives and Speaking Wounds 147 Herman, Judith Lewis. Trauma and Recovery. New York: Basic, 1992. Print.

Homer. The Iliad. Trans. Robert Fagles. New York: Penguin, 1998. Print. ?. The Odyssey. Trans. Robert Fagles. New York: Penguin, 1999. Print.

Jeffords,Susan. The Remasculinization ofAmerica: Gender and theVietnam War. Vol. 10. In Theories of Contemporary Culture. Ed. Kathleen Woodward. Print. 1989. Indiana UP, dianapolis: No Man's Land: Combat and Identity inWorld War Leed, Eric J. Cambridge UP, 1979. Print. I. New York:

Owen, Wilfred. The Complete Poems and Fragments. 2 vols. Ed. Jon Stallworthy. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1983. Print. Read, Herbert. The End of aWar. London: Faber and Faber, 1933. Print. Scarry, Elaine. The Body in Pain: TheMaking York: Oxford UP, 1985. Print. World. New and Unmaking of the

Shakespeare, William. Henry V. The CompleteWorks of Shakespeare. 3rd ed. Ed. David Bevington. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman, 1980. Print.

This content downloaded from 128.135.100.107 on Thu, 27 Feb 2014 04:42:13 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions