ABC One Two Three

Possibly the most universal hymn in the world, the ABC's, by literally whatever children's T.V show or child is singing it that day, discuss a central aspect to all of our lives. The core of all of our statements. The only universality in all poems. The very building blocks themselves. The letters.

Many might argue that this song isn't poetry. It's too simple the haters say. It's only for children! But there are many arguments to refute these petulant and close-minded claims. This poem discusses the theme of acquiring something beautiful, in this case knowledge. One proof of its status as poetry is it's concision. Perrine argues that poetry is the most concise form of literature and I can guarantee that among the swath of songs that will permeate this blog over the next few days, the ABC's will be the shortest. Second, is the multi-dimensional nature of the words at the very end, "Now I know my ABC's. Next time won't you sing with me." Let's start with an explication of this line.

First the word "now". It not only signifies the simple act of learning an entire language, but it symbolizes what the singer can "now" do. They can now, in the simplest sense, create, from hate speech to love poetry to essays on the existence of life all are founded in letters like the one the singer "now" knows.

Next "now I". While the "I" doesn't itself give meaning, the "now I" is a multidimensional treasure trove. It gives agency in a miraculous way, perhaps the most empowering statement that can be uttered, even more emphatic by the realization that the singer probably first uttered a declaration of agency through the same phrase. Second, the phrase NOW I talks to the fact that the poem is currently finished  "now I" need something new to do, a commentary on the current social progression to one of a lack of patience.

Next "now I know". This text discusses something deeper than anything before. "now" the singer "knows" the singer knows everything in the world in a figurative sense, there is literally nothing that the singer can't know now that he understands the foundation of everything, the letters. In addition, it is a spiritual reference. Throughout, the Torah the phrase "now I know" is used as an expression of repentance in specific reference to the failure to perform tikkun olam and the relationship with Yom Kippur there implied. Because we have our children sing this song we have imparted onto them the figurative sins of the father

"The ABC's" is the next section of the ending phrase of the song and is perhaps the most disturbing yet. And yet, that doesn't take away it's classification as poetry as Perrine writes that poetry can be ugly. "The ABC's" is westernization in the very letters they hold. There is no room for the language of other cultures, no we as a supreme culture have completely covered our childhood singsong rhyme in our the very fiber of our being excluding when we should be accepting.

The next phrase is "next time". It implies something that cuts me at least to the bone. It implies that there always will be a next time, so obviously I wonder as an invested reader how many time the ABC's have been sung without the next time being fulfilled. How often has a child been left there with no one to sing with. I see my niece as I analyze "next time", in a state of sadness I would be happy to never see her again. But at the same time it is the ultimate sense of future. The "next time" along with the tools the song itself has given the singer implies a power to do anything and to be constantly expanding one's knowledge whenever one returns to the song.

The next phrase is "won't". This is interesting because of the inherent contradiction it possesses. Won't is a negative phrase plain simple, but at the same time it encourages a practice in the specific context allowing for a rumination period in the mind of the singer. However, the true poetry in this phrase is found in the basic etymology of the word. Won't means in the colloquial form will not, but that contraction would have been willn't no? In fact, the actual word is a contraction of the words woll and not an archaic English version of will not. What does this have to do with poetry you might ask? Well, the archaic nature of the word  belies its actual intent the future action of singing creating another interesting contradicting parallel.

We follow with "you". The ultimate accusatory phrase. What does this word mean? Well it attacks in the way only one singular word can. It defines anger, but can accompany itself instead with honey and comfort. Its vagueness is its poetry. Whatever you want from it "you" can provide it.

We follow with the word "sing". "Sing" provides an existential threat to this argument in its very definition. How can a song that in its very lyrics commands the reader to sing be poetry? Well, "sing" does not mean exclusively the action of speaking in a method where notes are bound to the words. No "sing" can also be phrased in the context of sing for joy and that is what this word truly commands the reader to do. Knowledge, or letters, is commonly synonymous with sweetness or joy in many cultures, physically symbolized with honey or candy, and in this case that joy of knowledge is what the author is commanding us to sing out for.

We have now come to the final phrase, "with me". This phrase is benign in almost every sense until we consider what I first mentioned at the start of this post. We don't know who the author of the ABC's is. Therefor to write the word "me" in their work is the ultimate act of the mysterious genre of poetry. They leave us thirsting for what cannot come.