By Mitaya La Pierre
When I think of a rose, I like to generally think of romance; I like to consider the red hue of the flower and the love it can symbolize. But when I think about what could be seen as ‘challenging’ that symbolism; two poems come up to par. One, “The Rose and The Poppy” by UC Merced student Adrianna Puente, and two, “Sea Rose” by H. D. Now, both poems are very explicit in re introducing the symbolism of the rose; however I find myself more drawn to the UC student’s poem rather than H.D’s poem, but let me explain!
In “Sea Rose”, the speaker is apparently sighting a pathetic rose, drifting in the sea, not having having anything particularly special about it. I felt initially drawn to this because the poem then compares spice to the ‘sea rose’; which I thought was a strange comparison. But when re reading Puente’s poem, I could see a true de characterization of the rose symbol, and a re flourish of the definitions ‘unique’, and ‘lovely’. Which in this case is the presumed “Poppy”.
In lines 1-3, the speaker of the poem disallows any notion of it being a rose.
“I am
not a ravishing ruby red,
or a semblance of purity white.”
And through lines 4-10, the speaker then goes on to describe the abilities of a rose; the flower you give out of love, condolences; a flower you represent with a beautiful red, a passionate event’s must have.
“Not the flower you give to a lover,
or a token of comfort you give to a friend in the hospital.
Nor am I a symbol of romance
–
of new moments to
be made,
of old memories to be cherished.
Though I am not a beautiful rouge,
Buds picked to be set onto a bed of down and wine”
So here we are re iterating it’s human perceived ‘uniqueness’, it purpose, and everything else the rose is meant for. Yet we are also reminded that the speaker is NONE of these adjectives. So still we read to find out what they could be. We go down further, to lines 11-14
“I am
wild in fields of green and blues.
Electric orange
–
like tangerines in an orchard of trees”
Now this speaker is describing what they are, instead of what they are not. Here, it is not just any orange but ‘Electric’ orange color, and born of green and blues. This is very much not a rose; not just because the speaker said so, but the introduction is so different from any other rose.
“my skin’s perfume meshed
in the summer breeze.
Most times I am forgotten.
Rarely chosen for
eager hands on Valentine’s day
–
but I am my own.”
The not-rose describes that it may not be picked for Valentine’s, but that it has other desirable qualities like, a beautiful scent and extraordinary coloring. That it is ‘unique’.
“In a potpourri of our colors
we each wilt
between dried petals
–
Scenting rooms
with our fragrance.
Rotting
into umber”
In the last few lines of the poem, the flower then describes a scene, a scene of her and other flowers like her all rotting for scent in a potpourri bowl. This part struck me most peculiarly because flowers are traditionally known for scent. And by standards of what the speaker is saying, if we put the perfume of this flower in our homes, all of time, then why is it not revered more perfectly? Why doesn’t “The Rose” get less credit than the “The Poppy”? And the answer is clear, that those things that are talked about the most; as in the rose that is seen as such a symbol of beauty and romance–tends to lack a uniqueness. Simply because everyone sees it as ‘special’, rather than a collective small group who can notice the actually ‘unique’ beauty of the wild poppy flower. While the rose has its assumptive traditional roles, ones played all of the time, this poem takes the role of ‘special’ out of it, and puts the new notion of ‘romance’ into the poppy. Majorly because its spoken of in such an defined yet divine way, its hard to try and not wonder if the Poppy is more special and more of a symbol of ‘passion’ and ‘love’ then the rose. After all, isn’t love more special, when only a select few see it’s worth in something completely different?
Introduction to Poetry 