[New-Poetry] Against National Poetry Month

[amy king]

Yeah!  Because anything written more than eight years ago has nothing to say to me ... or any of of us!

Actually, the essay is still quite relevant, and unfortunately, Bernstein's sentiment hasn't been widespread enough, in any sense of the word ... I don't know who this "you" is who has "read it all before" as David notes, save poets on listservs who find themselves 'beyond' such thinking, but from I've seen, the poets who do call attention to the capitalist thrust of poetry, that which touts the sappy song of simple sentiment, and criticize it are too few and far between.  

Where is the indignant response of poets that calls attention to the very  machinery that only allows for the "major" publication of the stuff noted above and or anything "edgy" that can be easily absorbed?  The underbelly of the beast is that the poetry that doesn't suit the masses is ignored, not distributed, and even suppressed in some cases.  But I suppose it's passe to be angry about such things?  No one wants an angry poet anymore, right?  How old hat!  A poet that notes some injustice, in its multiple manifestations, in any effective way or has a  not-traditionally-life-affirming take will be largely ignored and denied the big prizes down the line, no matter how good at craft and dedicated he or she is.  The public beyond the poets' realm will never know ... 

Not since Ginsberg has there been a public poet that created ripples and tears in the cultural fabric ... can anyone think of another?  Angelou with her inaugural poem?  I can't recall; did that poem incite response?  Call attention to anything untoward within the culture?  Are poets in other countries still looked to for vision?  Consulted in public matters?  Respected?  Or are they second-rate pop idols we pin notes about on bus and subway banners now and then?  "That's a cute poem about the kid who lost his tooth ... my Timmy lost his tooth the other day ... I should copy that down!"  

It seems that poets don't want to appear disagreeable in the face of that money-making machinery anymore because we might not get a grant or a job or whatever is required for our livelihood.  Or we might appear uncool somehow if we agree?  So it's easier to mock or dismiss the naysayer, the one who doesn't go along with the machinery that makes and breaks the public function of poetry, a very tenuous position anyway, so why not go with the National Poetry Month flow - and get safe with it, remain insular, etc.?

The cost is buying into the illusion of the promise of the capitalist machine -- you too could sell your poetry books in a BIG way once you write enough popular and pretty sentiment!  You'll earn your living making the reading rounds, raking in profit checks from book sales, etc. (good luck on that one) or you will tag a job at a nice university.  But, the model is similar to the pop music industry - and the poetry will be as watered down and much less popular/distributed than those songs and tours - and poetry will remain on its relegated fringe.  So what has your poetry ultimately done in the world when you're in that Billy Collins' position?  Yes, you've kept your mouth shut, affirmed popular sentiment, but what changes has your poetry made?  How has your poetry served the public-at-large?  


David Graham <grahamd at ripon.edu> wrote: Well, I'll venture one thought:  Bernstein's essay is very old news in several ways, starting with its copyright date:  1999.  But even if you missed it 8 years ago, you've read it all before.
 


========================================
David Graham
grahamd at ripon.edu
Home Page:
http://www.ripon.edu/academics/faculty/GrahamD/index.html
Poetry Library:
http://www.ripon.edu/academics/faculty/GrahamD/poetrylib.html
==========================================



 

On Apr 13, 2007, at 2:16 PM, Suzanne Burns wrote:

Well, this is meaty:

http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/044106.html

Money quote:

"National Poetry Month is about making poetry safe for readers by promoting examples of the art form at its most bland and its most morally "positive." The message is: Poetry is good for you. But, unfortunately, promoting poetry as if it were an "easy listening" station just reinforces the idea that poetry is culturally irrelevant and has done a disservice not only to poetry deemed too controversial or difficult to promote but also to the poetry it puts forward in this way. "Accessibility" has become a kind of Moral Imperative based on the condescending notion that readers are intellectually challenged, and mustn't be presented with anything but Safe Poetry. As if poetry will turn people off to poetry."


Thoughts?

Gleefully,

Suzanne Burns
_______________________________________________


_______________________________________________
New-Poetry mailing list
New-Poetry at wiz.cath.vt.edu
http://wiz.cath.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/new-poetry


       
---------------------------------
Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?
 Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://wiz.cath.vt.edu/pipermail/new-poetry/attachments/20070414/a11a7a68/attachment.html