Identity

Identity

Identity, as conceived in this poem, is not something which is predetermined, fixed or objective. Each subject constructs his own identity and the identity of his fellow human beings in their interpersonal relationships.

Stanza 1

When I decide I shall assemble you

Or, more precisely, when I decide which thoughts

Of mine about you fit most easily together,

Then I can learn what I have loved, what lets

Light through the mind. (...)

In the first stanza, the word “assemble” suggests that building up identity consists in putting pieces together to make a whole. These pieces are “thoughts” that a person has about somebody else, which have to be selected to construct this person´s identity.
 The word “decide”, which is repeated twice,  is related to this process of rational selection. Not all the pieces are useful. Only the ones that “fit most easily together” help us get to the final picture of somebody´s identity. Besides, the fact that the object of the word “assemble” is a personal pronoun implies that people for us are our own personal interpretation of them, as they are constructed from the ideas we have about them. The poem, however, does not present these ideas in general terms as we are doing here to simplify the analysis. On the contrary, there is an I- voice describing  the way in which she constructs the addressee´s identity.

In lines 4-5, the speaker is referring to what she learns when she decides to undergo this process: she discovers what she has loved. The use of the pronoun “what” instead of “whom” focuses on the fact that what she has loved is an arbitrary combination of traits created by herself, and not a concrete person. Besides, in the same process, she discovers “what lets light through the mind”, i.e  the  qualities of a friend or lover that brighten her own outlook of life. Therefore, in constructing the identity of somebody else, she also discovers what she appreciates and what gives her hope to go on.

The second person pronoun of the first stanza may create ambiguity because in a different reading its referent may be the speaker´s own identity. In this interpretation, the persona would be trying to construct her own identity and not somebody else´s.

                      (...)              The residue

Of what you may be goes.

If building up identity is assembling a whole out of pieces, once the picture is complete, the discarded elements disappear, at least from the speaker´s mind. Those discarded elements are the “residue” of what the addressee may be. The word “may” suggests that identity is not something stable and definite but it is rather the unique construct of an onlooker. Most probably, a different speaker would build the addressee´s identity in a different way.

             

       

                          (...)                       I gather

The last word of the first stanza is extremely meaningful, and in spite of the enjambment, one cannot help considering it on its own because of the visual pause created by the end of the stanza.  On the one hand, “gather” may be a synonym of “assemble”, and therefore sends us back to the idea of putting parts together to make a whole, which is what we do to construct somebody´s identity.  On the other hand, “gather” can be understood as “ reach a conclusion from hints”, and is thus related to a rational mental process, which is another aspect of building up identity according to the poem. This second meaning seems to be related to words like “decide” and “mind”.

Stanza 2

Only as lovers or friends gather at all

For making friend means this-

Image and passion combined into a whole

Pattern within the loving mind,not her or his

Concurring there. (...)

If we focus now at the object of “gather”, we can notice that what the speaker assembles is “image and passion combined into a whole/pattern within the loving mind(...)” The speaker creates a pattern out of what she perceives (“image”) and what she feels (“passion”) in her “loving mind”. The word “whole” is again pointing to the fact that identity is the conjunction of different pieces into a coherent unit. As the pattern of somebody´s identity is a subjective construct, it may not coincide with the pattern which that person makes of himself or herself: “not her or his concurring there”

The second stanza seems to move from the speaker's experience of constructing the addressee's identity to more general ideas about this process. First, the second line includes the statement that making friends means constructing their image in our minds.  Secondly, the use of the feminine or masculine possessive pronoun (“her or his”) suggests a generalization is being made.  

The words “friends” and “lovers” may also be hinting at the relationship of the persona and the addressee. If the second person pronoun of the first stanza could be considered ambiguous in the first lines of the poem (i.e referring  to a person or to the persona´s own identity), the second stanza seems to clarify its referent as human.

             (...)              You can project the full

Picture of lover or friend that is not either.

This sentence repeats the idea that our picture of lover and friend  is neither of them. It is just a mental construct of them that can be projected. The word “full” is related to “whole”, and reminds us once more that this picture is an assemblage of pieces, which are made up of our thoughts. As this last sentence goes back to previously stated ideas, it acts as a good conclusion to the second stanza.

As regards the referent of the second person pronoun of these lines, we believe that it refers to people in general and not just the addressee, because the stanza presents a generalisation on the topic of identity. Therefore, anyone can project an image of friend or lover, which is different from the actual person.

Stanza 3

So then assemble me,

Your exact picture firm and credible,

Though as I think myself I may be free

And accurate enough.

The third stanza opens with an imperative through which the speaker asks the addressee to assemble her.  Therefore, the roles of speaker and addressee seemed to reverse from what they were in the first stanza. Now it is the turn of the addressee to construct the speaker. However, this doesn't imply that the speaker´s self-image will be constrained by the picture the addressee makes of her. The persona may be free to conceive herself in her own way.

The use of “enough” in the last stanza is striking, because it undermines the word “accurate”, which doesn't usually admit gradients. The fact that the speaker´s self image admits just a satisfactory degree of accuracy is consistent with the idea conveyed by the whole poem:  if identity is a construct that depends on point of view,  none of these constructs can be completely accurate. All of them entail a selection of some aspects over others.

That you love what is truthful to your will

Is all that ever can be answered for

The second person in these lines can include both the addressee and all human beings: as we construct people´s identity in the way we choose, we love what/whom we want to love, i.e. a unique and personal view of that person.  Therefore, we don't fall in love with what is truthful to fact, but with what is truthful to our will; so we can just respond for falling in love with the picture of our friend or lover that we ourselves have created.

And, what is more,

Is all we make each other when we love.

The poem closes with the use of the first person plural. Again, as in the previous lines, it can be interpreted as including either the speaker and the addressee or all of us. When we love, what we do to each other is precisely this: we construct each other. Therefore, we may conclude that loving somebody and building up this person´s identity are two sides of the same coin.