a love long gone. The poem has a tone of affection, but it is an affection that can no longer be completely embraced. The first three lines of the sentence dictate a sense of longing that casts a shadow over the entire poem- “We want to think/ we know each other scientifically;/ we want to believe (1-3).” Why know your love scientifically? The poem even goes so far as to use the terms surgeon, bone bend, and shoulder blade-not exactly the language of Aphrodite. Pointing to the fact that affection did at one time exist, the speaker tells of “objective knowledge that gives us the conviction of intimacy” (4-5). The use of the word “conviction” in the connotation of a reinforced idea juxtaposed against a personal term like intimacy summarizes the dichotomy presented throughout the poem. Were the speaker actually still in love with her lover, she would not be trying force herself to believe this conviction.The second stanza ends the mention of body parts and medical references and enters a more emotional, metaphorical dimension. Instead of “each hollow, each hair, each failure of form,” (15), the speaker tells of “these currents of feeling rushing past like ripples over a pool of water,” (24-25). In what seems like an attempt to grasp the last bit of love the two shared, the poet expounds upon an idea that questions the existence of permanent love. Instead of a tangible emotion, love is a phantom that casts a spell just long enough to make us trust another individual with our minds, bodies and emotions. Why else would the author refer to love as “this ignorance, this uncertainty, this lack of clear view” (line 35-36) which brings a true feeling that “emerges briefly” (42)? These are not the words of a woman in love, and this makes the tone of this poem much more tragic than the foiled one-night stand of Mr. Wayman. “Wayman in Love” a...
