Does
Poetry Matter?: Page -2-
My neighbors are all above average; of this I’m almost certain.
They go to work on time and pay more than their fair share of
taxes. On the other hand, I highly suspect that none is heir to
a fortune of any kind. I also feel in my bones that the vast majority
of them ponder poetry less often than Arbor Day, which makes them
like average Americans. Residents of Main Street U.S.A. don’t
consider poetry mainstream. In fact, if they consider poetry at
all, they consider it exotic, radical, and even bizarre.
It wasn’t always this way. The stoic bard of Carmel, Robinson
Jeffers, was just one among several poets to appear on the cover
of Time back in mid-century America. Apparently 1950 represents
poetry’s high-water mark, for Robert Frost and T.S. Eliot
each commanded a cover that year—as did Winston Churchill,
Mao Tse-tung, and Joseph Stalin. Ah, the 50s. No American poet
has made the cover since. Today, it’s hard to imagine John
Ashbery, Jorie Graham, or even Billy Collins, our current national
poet laureate, on the cover of anything but their own books. (Why
is there a poet laureate but not a painter laureate or musician
laureate?) Vigorous art forms and genres have a mainstream that
frequently overlaps the mainstream. Music, film, fiction, painting,
sculpture, and even dance have a public face. Finicky aficionados
may shun the populists for being too accessible, for what they
consider to be pandering to the masses, but their presence guarantees
a place in the national consciousness and is a sign of a dialogue
between the art and the people.
And the people are writing fiendishly. Our collective hangover
of grief and guilt has driven many people to writing poesy like
never before, and they have generated innumerable elegiac murmurings
since the towers collapsed. That isn’t necessarily surprising,
especially considering the prominent role that grief and guilt
play in American Poetry. American Poetry is sad. Melancholy and
mourning rule the day, but neither poetry nor poet can afford
to exclude ways of thinking or ways of feeling or economics or
science or computers or comedy or pigs’ feet or prairies,
irreverence, hip-hop, tube tops, vibrators, escalators, the profane,
the mundane, insults, invective, detective, middle classes, or
even our asses from their vocabularies.
Gabriel Gudding, poet, critic, and onetime Minneapolitan, has
pointed out that many of today’s poetry anthologies demonstrate
what he calls a “narrow bandwidth of emotion, topic, and
tone” and feature an “unremitting High Seriousness”
that usually takes the form of a poem mimicking suffering. Confessional
poetry, self-help psychology, journaling, and an endemic victimology
are all partly to blame for this knucklehead obsession with a
single emotion—and grief, of all the ones to pick! But beyond
the spike in grief poems, the fact remains that more Americans
write poetry than read poetry. No other art form can make such
a claim, and none would want to. It seems everyone in America
is a poet. Why is that? Not everyone considers himself a sculptor
or a painter or a musician or even a conceptual artist, which
all of us could call ourselves if we don’t already. The
low barrier into the field of poetry—the meagerest facility
with language—gives license to most anyone to think she
can write a poem. And she can. It just might stink. Denis Johnson,
author of Jesus’ Son, may have exaggerated when he wrote,
“At any one time only a handful of genuine poets reside
on the planet,” but the underlining point rings true: Not
everyone is a poet.
The preference to write rather than to read poetry might also
indicate a rejection of what is regarded as excellence in professional
circles. Poetry considered “good” inside those circles
is often considered difficult and impenetrable outside those same
circles. Of course, many poems are difficult, and some are excellent,
and some even manage to be both difficult and excellent. But many
read like the periodic chart of a navel-gazing doofus, which occasionally
passes for genius. In some ways, a successful poem is no different
than a great pop song. It stands up to repeated listenings, shifting
a little to reveal a bit more upon each subsequent reading—it’s
not about making sense but capturing essence. A college freshman
once asked where he might find the book that gives the literal
translation of poems. As absurd as that is, many people spin their
wheels trying to decipher poems as if they were riddles. When
their efforts fail, they give up. Sometimes they give up poetry
altogether. Even the most accessible poem, one that uses simple
language and conventional syntax, must pass the play-it-again
test. A good poem refuses to cower in the box of reason; it chooses
to roam the gray area between this world and the next.
>>Page Three
|