Natural Objects

Sean Buckley

English 397

February 7, 2012

Natural Objects

It is common in humans to be self-conscious about our self-worth. In the poem “Conversation with a Stone”, Wislawa Szymborska writes a dialogue between a stone and an unknown speaker speaking from the 1^st person. The central conflict in the poem is the speakers versus the stones sense of how beautiful the stone is: the stone knows it is merely a stone whereas the speaker believes the stone is a “palace” with “great and empty halls inside you [the stone]” (Szymborska lines 16 & 26). Another poem by Szymborska entitled “The Onion” delineates the vegetable from the poet’s perspective. In her description, the onion is not merely just a vegetable but rather an object of what nature has provided us and what can be made from it, similar to how a stone can be used to make a beautiful monument. Although the poems by Szymborska have stylistic differences, the onion and the stone symbolize all physical objects in nature that can be utilized to form more beautiful objects when combined with other objects, as well as being beautiful within themselves; a quality, I believe, Szymborska subtly stresses that should be embraced within ourselves as humans when viewing our self-worth.

To start, “Conversation with a Stone” is a poem broken down into ten stanzas, a significant couplet which, when added together, causes for a dramatic concluding line. The ten stanzas consist of a constant struggle between a stone and an unidentified speaker. For example in the first stanza, the speaker knocks at the stones front door and requests “to enter your [the stones’] insides,/ to have a look round” (Szymborska lines 3 & 4). “Go away” replies the stone in the second stanza, “I’m shut tight” (Szymborska lines 6 & 7). Szymborska, here is further reiterating the confusion as to what the stone is and what the stone has the ability to do. This is further exemplified when the stone says, “Even if you break me to pieces,/ we’ll all still be closed” (Szymborska lines 8 & 9). It should be noted that stones can be utilized in constructing monuments with “front door(s)” and “empty halls inside” them. However, this is not the case, for the stone has not been utilized for constructing anything and remains a mere stone. Thus, the stone is enlightening the speaker that he cannot enter its insides because, stating the obvious, entering a stones’ insides is physically impossible and the speaker should leave because the stone cannot let any object inside it.

 This constant struggle between the speaker and the stone becomes humorous because Szymborska uses personification with both the stone and the speaker depicting an impossible situation. The stone recognizes this humor when stating, “I am bursting with laughter, yes, laughter, vast laughter,/ although I don’t know how to laugh” (Szymborska lines 65 & 66). This is significant because the speaker believes the stone is an object that possesses the ability to let him inside, but the stone, and all stones for that matter, cannot physically allow something inside as merely a stone. Further, the stone points out that this conflict is ridiculous and it would burst out in laughter if it could do so but it cannot. These lines coincide smoothly with the final words of the poem when the speaker asks one last time to let it inside the stones front door to which the stone replies, “I don’t have a door” (Szymborska line 69). The stone is telling the speaker that his requests are ridiculous and he has clearly been misinformed about the stones physical characteristics.

            On the other hand, in Szymborska’s other poem, “The Onion”, she uses a peculiar form to emulate the beauty of the onion in itself and what can be made from an onion. The poem entails four consistent stanzas each containing eight lines with complex diction, such as the line, “the anathema of anatomy” (Szymborska line 12). These lines are puzzling to the reader yet effective with their careful construction and uses of alliteration. Further, Szymborska coins words such as “oniony” and “onionesque” which gives the poem a sense of unique individuality (Szymborska lines 5 & 6). These words also describe the onion similar to the way students describe bad teachers as “Nazi-like”. It should be noted that “Conversation with a Stone” does not contain the same style of word choice because the poems content would not flow as smoothly as it does in “The Onion” when told from a descriptive perspective. However, this paints the onion as humanized, something Szymborska uses effectively in both poems.

Additionally, the poem has a superb foundation of symbolism for beauty while describing the onion magnificently. Szymborska, similar to the stones ability to converse with the speaker, personifies components of all onions, such as the anatomy of the onion when saying, “Our skin is just a cover up” and “In an onion there’s only an onion/ from its top to its toe” (Szymborska lines 5 & 13/14). Similar to the stones being nearly useless on its own but can be utilized to create majestic monuments, the onion is constant throughout its being. However, when added with other ingredients, such as cheese and broth, onions can be utilized into creating a savory French onion soup. Szymborska describes the onion as natures “greatest success story” and “drapes itself in its/ own aureoles of glory” (Szymborska). It should be assumed that onions are popular elements throughout many cultural cuisines and, as such a simple but tasteful vegetable, can be considered as the “greatest success story” amongst all foods. This further emphasizes the onion as an ingredient which, on its own, is not worth as much as when it is added with other ingredients to make a gourmet meal.

Thus, both the stone and the onion are symbols for all physical objects in nature and how they can be combined to form greater objects with the assistance of humans. Both the stone and the onion are commonly viewed as simple and insufficient objects on their own. A stone can be thrown and an onion can be plainly eaten but this is not what humans tend to use these for. Rather, we tend to use stones to create a majestic monument and eat onions when combined with palatable meats. Hence, these objects are nearly inadequate on their own but, when combined with other objects, have the ability to be used adequately.

However, it is my belief that Szymborska is using these objects to emphasize how important self-worth is within humans. Just as the onion and the stone are insufficient on their own, humans rely on each other to function in everyday life. Granted, there may be some extreme situations which prove that statement false but for the most part humans rely on each other to get through the day. However, what I believe Szymborska is stressing is that every human is imperative to all other humans’ existence. To be clear, just as the monument cannot be built without stones and just as the French onion soup cannot be made without onions, most humans depend on the qualities of other humans to function every day. Hence, Szymborska is stressing that humans generally have more self-worth than they give themselves credit for and should start embracing our own qualities and cease from worrying about our flaws.

To sum, Szymborska uses a stone and an onion to symbolize all physical objects in nature that can be combined to form more beautiful objects, as well as being beautiful within themselves. However, the style of the poems differ: “Conversation with a Stone” is read as a dialogue containing ten altering stanzas whereas “The Onion” is told from the poets’ point of view containing four consistent stanzas. Both the stone and onion are objects in nature and Szymborska uses poetry to analyze if they possess beauty within their personified selves. With the stone, the speaker desires to gain entrance inside the stone because it believes the stone is an object that it is not, such as a monument. Conversely, the onion is described by Szymborska as a vegetable constant from its insides and its outsides. However, I believe Szymborska uses this symbolism of the stone and onion as a subtle reference of how she believes humans should view their self-worth.