Seamus Heaney was a major Irish poet, born in 1939 in County Derry, Northern Ireland, and winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1995. He’s especially known for writing about rural life, memory, language, and Irish history. Death of a Naturalist is both the title of Heaney’s first poetry collection, published in 1966, and the collection’s title poem: one of his best-known early works, it turns a childhood encounter with nature into a coming-of-age tale about wonder giving way to unease.
Another poem in the collection, “Digging”, is another beloved one: the pen resting between finger and thumb like a gun, the decision to dig with it instead of following his father and grandfather onto the bog and the potato drills. It’s a splendid poem, and it’s also, I think, slightly too neat as a metaphor. The son doesn’t become a digger: he becomes a poet who digs with different tools, and the poem lets you leave with that substitution feeling settled. A few pages later in the same collection sits a quieter poem that doesn’t let you off so easily, and it’s the one I want to spend today with instead.
“Follower” describes the same father at the same kind of labour — not turf-cutting this time but ploughing, behind a horse — and Heaney gives the whole business the vocabulary of a genuine trade: the shafts, the wing, the bright steel-pointed sock, the headrig. His father is, in the poem’s own flat verdict, “an expert” at his trade.
“His eye
Narrowed and angled at the ground,
Mapping the furrow exactly.”
No instrument does this mapping. No plan, no string line, no surveyed grid. A furrow gets cut dead straight, row after row, entirely by a trained eye squinting at unmarked ground and a set of muscles that have done this exact motion enough thousand times that the hand and the horse and the blade produce precision without consulting anything except themselves. It’s a poem about admiration, identity, and role reversal. Heaney begins by celebrating the father’s mastery and ends by showing time’s reversal. The word in the title is doing more work than it looks like at first. Heaney is naming his own relationship to the craft as one of following rather than performing it, an apprentice’s-eye view rather than a practitioner’s, and the poem’s final turn shows the cost of that: years later, it’s his father who has become the follower, stumbling behind the son and refusing to go away, the roles reversed by time in a way neither of them chose. There’s a real question underneath this that any trade dependent on embodied, unwritten skill has to eventually answer: what happens to mapping-the-furrow-exactly once the person who could do it is gone, and the only inheritance left is someone who once watched closely enough to describe it, but never learned to do it himself.
If you’re following me, I don’t need to explain why this is important for what we do: knowledge matters, gatekeeping sucks, and so on.
No Comments