Patriots -- A National Obsession By Gosh By Jingo

 

next to of course god america i… (III)

“next to of course god america i
love you land of the pilgrims’ and so forth oh
say can you see by the dawn’s early my
country tis of centuries come and go
and are no more what of it we should worry
in every language even deafanddumb
thy sons acclaim your glorious name by gorry
by jingo by gee by gosh by gum
why talk of beauty what could be more beaut-
iful than these heroic happy dead
who rushed like lions to the roaring slaughter
they did not stop to think they died instead
then shall the voice of liberty be mute?”

He spoke. And drank rapidly a glass of water

By E. E. Cummings (1926)

I believe we are in a serious conflict involving patriotism. In the wake of Trump's “America First” policy and mindless flag waving, jingoism (extreme and aggressive nationalism) has been resurrected and brought to new, dangerous heights, The soul of America is complex and diverse. That spirit holds a very special place for national devotion. The heart of patriotism is love, yet some believe otherwise.

Those on the right may believe patriotism is an unwavering commitment to the objective superiority of one’s country, and leftists may hold contempt for any pride in nationalism whatsoever. However, history tells us that patriotism is a fragile loyalty in which a true patriot ardently loves America while also lamenting its shortcomings – both past and present. Patriotism calls for understanding, not just blind allegiance.

A person must practice piety to observe true patriotism born of love. Virtuous people honor and love the things that have brought them into being, and this includes one’s homeland. “Piety,” St. Thomas writes, “is a declaration of the love we bear towards our parents and our country.” The pious patriot shows a reverence for country in fidelity to natural obligations, never to forced political allegiance.

The true patriot must be thankful for the life and liberties we all share, yet at the same time, he must be mindful of those who confuse nationalism with patriotism and seek a country in which a particular ethnic group is dominant, seeks sovereignty, and attempts to set the terms for communal life.

“It is perfectly possible to love one’s own without becoming morally narrow, or unreasonable, let alone irrational. This is so because a certain degree of partiality is both permissible and justified.”

– William Galston at the Estoril Political Forum on June 25, 2018, from the forum’s Dahrendorf Memorial Lecture on the topic of “Patriotism, Cosmopolitanism, and Democracy”

William Galston, author and senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, believes in a “reasonable patriotism.” He contends …

“You cannot be simultaneously a citizen of the world and of a particular country, at least in the sense that we must often choose between giving pride of place to humanity as a whole as opposed to some subset of humanity.”

(William A. Galston. “In defense of a reasonable patriotism.” Brookings. July 23, 2018.)

That “reasonable” view is definitely brought forth in love, not in prideful desire for dominance and forced submission. I hope the discussion and the poem above help to clarify the contract Americans have to their allegiance to country and to all humanity. Let's look at the work of art closely to illuminate a poet's perspective.

E. E. Cummings

E.E. (Edward Estlin) Cummings (1894-1962) is often regarded as one of the most important American poets of the 20th century. As one of the most innovative poets of his time, Cummings experimented with poetic form and language to create a distinct personal style. A typical Cummings poem is spare and precise, employing a few key words eccentrically placed on the page. Some of these words were invented by Cummings, often by combining two common words into a new synthesis.

In 1917, Cummings went to France as a volunteer for the Norton-Harjes Ambulance Corps, a popular choice among Cummings’s coterie of Harvard-educated literary types, young men who wanted to experience the frisson of war without having to shoot anybody.

Five months after his assignment, however, he and a friend, William Slater Brown, were interned in a prison camp by the French authorities on suspicion of espionage for his outspoken anti-war convictions (an experience recounted in his novel, The Enormous Room – Cummings witty and absorbing report of the experience, and also the first of his literary attacks on authoritarianism.) Cummings spent about four months in jail and was freed only thanks to the entreaties of the U.S. State Department.

Cummings then returned to the United States on New Year's Day 1918. He was soon drafted into the army and served in the 73rd Infantry Division at Fort Devens, Massachusetts, until his discharge following Armistice in November 1918.

next to of course god america i

E. E. Cummings published "next to of course god america i" in 1926 as part of his poetry collection Is 5, which contained a number of anti-war poems. In keeping with this, the poem satirizes the intense patriotism that many people adopted during World War I.

Cummings was one of the most linguistically experimental mainstream modernist poets writing in the United States in the twentieth century, and his poem “next to of course god america i’ is a fine example of his innovative style.”

“next to of course god america i” touches on the dangers of empty patriotism. The poem begins with quotation marks, indicating that the speaker is actually speaking aloud in this moment – the first fifteen lines all fall within these quotations. The speaker seems to be addressing an audience of some sort employing the gung-ho, unflinching patriotism that was popular in the United States during and after World War I, but this speech is filled with shallow, rambling clichés and empty platitudes.

As a result, the poem becomes a parody of patriotism itself, framing certain forms of national pride as misguided and thoughtless. More specifically, the poem suggests that mindless patriotism often leads to violence, since it can fuel enthusiasm for war. However, it's hard to determine if the speaker says these things sarcastically or if the speaker actually thinks this way. What remains clear is that the poem invites readers to think critically about excessive, unquestioning patriotism.

Like many of E. E. cummings’ poems, ‘next to of course god america i’ is difficult to follow because he deliberately wrests language into new shapes, bending the rules of syntax, so that we begin (without a capital letter, as is his trademark style) with the declaration ‘next to of course god america i / love you,' which essentially means ‘next to God (of course, he comes first), I love America the most.'

For example, what about the first line that ends with an “i” – does the reader stop before going on to the second line which begins with “love”? Not really. The enjambment (when a line has no punctuation at the end and sense continues on) means the reader should not take a pause but flow on as best they can into the next line.

Language Considerations In the Poem

Certain colloquial phrases in the verse make lines sound insincere. Throughout the poem, Cummings makes light of many of the slogans and references associated with the United States of America, such as when he follows the phrase “land of the pilgrims” with the offhand words “and so forth.”

Further casual, colloquial phrases such as “what of it” are peppered throughout the poem. Some of these, such as “by jingo,” cleverly hint at the nationalism or jingoism which cummings’ poem is addressing – and, indeed, mocking.

The informal phrases, especially compared to the grand pronouncements the speaker makes about the United States, deflate the overall patriotic tone. In fact, it's possible that the speaker is using verbal irony to imply sarcastically that patriotic platitudes lack substance. It's as if the speaker is reading out a list of cliches, not really caring.

The lines, without punctuation, continue at a frantic pace; fragments of well known songs combine with cliche and personal opinion as the speaker gushes forth his platitudes. The sense is disjointed, which reflects the emotional confusion, or suggests that what this speaker is saying is nonsense.

Line 6 is ambiguous. The reader is left to work out whether or not in every language means the mother tongue of all citizens who should be worried (even those who use sign language) or could line 6 flow into line 7 to suggest that the citizens are the ones who glorify the country's name?

Note the complete spelling change of “by golly” to “by gorry” so that it part-rhymes with line 5 “worry.” “Gorry” sounds and looks like “gory,” which references America’s bloody past and “son’s” in the same line refers to not only American citizens, but also to soldiers at war, fighting for American “glory.”

In lines 9 and 10, the word “beautiful,” is split in half with a hyphen. The word connects the two lines but also tears the word in half, while bringing emphasis to the split. In patriotic songs or words, America is often referred to as beautiful, yet in the poem, beautiful is broken up, possibly symbolizing the ugliness, rather than beauty, of the country.

Cummings’ reference to the “heroic happy dead” who have “rushed like lions to the roaring slaughter” might be interpreted as a criticism of a certain brand of zealous patriotism, which glorifies fighting for one’s country and celebrates the dead as “happy” – assuming they were all “happy” to give their lives in service of their great nation.

Isn't it supposed to be “like lambs to the slaughter?” Either way, the use of the only simile in the poem is powerful enough. Also, Line 13 has five regular beats as the monosyllabic words move on, reflecting the thoughtless action of those who died.

The whole of the speech ends in a question – what of “the voice of liberty”? Is it better to speak one's mind or refrain? Perhaps liberty should be next in line to “god and america and i,” for who is to shout up for those “heroic happy dead”?

Meaning enough? Not quite.

Finally the perspective shifts from the words of the speaker to a simple post-action. There is a period after spoke, creating a pause. Then the speaker drinks water rapidly, as if to get off stage quickly. The reader’s attention is distracted from the rest of the poem, American glory and whatnot, and is focused on water. 

Could it imply that American patriotism is reduced to the incredibly ordinary action of drinking a glass of water? Who wouldn't need a gulp of water after espousing mouthful after mouthful of that meaningless bullshit? He may just have to get that awful taste out of his mouth.

At any rate, Cummings is very clever in distracting the reader and succeeds in mocking nationalism. He has cunningly shaped the speaker’s regurgitated fragments into a perfectly rhymed Petrarchan sonnet. The formal order clashes with the urgent but pointless rhetorical order of the speech. By treating words as if they were only sounds, cummings expresses his contempt for conventional patriotism, his belief that its formulas are now empty of meaning.

A simple poem with common words in extensive designs can open new understandings of liberty and personal freedom, and how these gifts are an intricate part of our American patriotic obligations.