Classic and Contemporary Poetry: Explained

In "Day Song, The Day After," Charles Olson contrasts the idealized vision of nature and love expressed in his earlier poem "Day Song" with a much more cynical, grounded perspective. Olson’s tone here is starkly different, marked by disillusionment and even sarcasm. This shift in tone reveals a rejection of poetic romanticism in favor of a rawer, more skeptical outlook on the relationship between nature, love, and perception.

Unlike the speaker in "Day Song," who is awash in the sensual delight of nature and the purity of his connection with a feminine presence, this speaker is "beside himself," both literally and figuratively. The line, "Beside herself (and me, too, so help me)," reveals a detachment, as though he’s no longer captivated by the “limpid brook” or by idealized notions of love and clarity. Instead, he refers to her as “another dame,” stripping away any illusion of mystique or elevation. The formalism and beauty of the “mixed table” from "Day Song" are replaced by a dismissive tone here, where he remarks, “Right-schmight, me,” showing impatience with the previously admired symbols of spring and connection. This response indicates a clear break from the romantic idealism of "Day Song," casting doubt on the sincerity or sustainability of that initial vision.

Olson’s diction, using phrases like “no delight at all” and “altogether too god damn poetic,” highlights his shift from reverence to disdain. He now views the earlier poetic language as a “necessary poetic delay”—something artificially imposed rather than truly felt. Where "Day Song" emphasized harmony and delicacy, this poem is heavy with skepticism and grounded in gritty reality. This grounding is further expressed through a sense of clumsiness and embarrassment as he recounts slipping on the grass, which punctures the elegance and composure of his prior imagery. The speaker’s fall from grace symbolizes a descent from the elevated ideal back to the earthy, physical reality, undermining the notion of divine or transcendent love.

The speaker’s voice is also marked by a mocking resistance to the concept of “claritas,” the clarity or purity that was previously praised. His response, “up yr—well, yr claritas,” directly opposes any lingering illusion of enlightenment. He embraces the “green” of naïveté, “green as they come,” suggesting a return to an unrefined, perhaps more genuine self that eschews the pretense of sophisticated or poetic expressions of love and nature. This line hints at a newfound self-awareness or, alternatively, a disillusionment with any attempt at profundity, emphasizing that he prefers rawness to romanticized depth.

The humor and playful cynicism continue as Olson uses a combination of slang, expletives, and mangled language to mock poetic ideals of “Tenderness-schmenderness” and “Self-res ting-festering.” The sharp, almost absurd sound of these phrases suggests the speaker’s impatience with overwrought ideas of self-reflection and grace, as if to say that he is done with the notion of love as a harmonious, redemptive force. By turning such concepts into nonsense, Olson’s speaker strips away the cultural weight of romantic ideals, reducing them to trivial, empty gestures that hold no real meaning for him anymore.

By referring to himself as an “injun boy,” Olson hints at an ironic sense of alienation from these idealistic perspectives, as though he views himself as culturally and emotionally out of sync with the refined, poetic notions he once entertained. This sense of isolation is underscored by his closing wish to “flee, flee” from this overly sentimental, romantic landscape. His final rhetorical question about “deep stuff” and “still waterz” further dismantles any expectation of emotional or philosophical revelation, ending on a note of defiance against the very notion of profundity.

Ultimately, "Day Song, The Day After" serves as a powerful counterpoint to "Day Song," exposing the tension between idealism and reality, and the allure of poetic language versus the bluntness of everyday life. In rejecting the earlier poem’s idealism, Olson’s speaker grapples with the limitations of language to convey true experience. By grounding himself in an ironic, detached perspective, Olson underscores the ephemeral nature of poetic beauty and connection, suggesting that the thrill of nature and love may only be a temporary illusion, unable to withstand the inevitable pull of reality.

Copyright (c) 2025 PoetryExplorer

Discover our Poem Explanations and Poet Analyses!

Other Poems of Interest...