Does the politics of a poet affect how you read/look at them?

[vampiredust]

I learnt that Philip Larkin (who was a favourite poet of mine) supported the far right during a creative writing class last semester

It made me look at him differently, but not his poetry so much

Do you think the politics of a poet can affect how you read their poetry?

 

[TheRainMan]

Do you think the politics of a poet can affect how you read their poetry?

they shouldn't, i don't think.

what do they have to do with one another, unless the opinions are expressed inside the poetry itself?

and acceptance of oppossing thought is essential, in art and everywhere. it is what freedom is built upon.

this is a day and age of intolerance. both extremes tend to demonize the opposition. that needs to change, i think. a person is not evil because they believe differently than you.

 

[Remec]

I learnt that Philip Larkin (who was a favourite poet of mine) supported the far right during a creative writing class last semester

It made me look at him differently, but not his poetry so much

Do you think the politics of a poet can affect how you read their poetry?

It can, in the same way that knowing certain details about any other artist can influence how you react/respond to their work. When it comes to poets, however, I rarely ever know anything about them other than that they wrote whatever I'm reading, and it'd have to be something I'd learned relatively recently to really stick in my mind at a later date.

 

[Remec]

this is a day and age of intolerance. both extremes tend to demonize the opposition. that needs to change, i think. a person is not evil because they believe differently than you.

They're not?

*shaking head*
Man, I'm going to have to rethink my perceptions of a lot of people.

 

[Tzara]

they shouldn't, i don't think.

what do they have to do with one another, unless the opinions are expressed inside the poetry itself?

and acceptance of oppossing thought is essential, in art and everywhere. it is what freedom is built upon.

this is a day and age of intolerance. both extremes tend to demonize the opposition. that needs to change, i think. a person is not evil because they believe differently than you.

I would agree they shouldn't, but I would argue that they do, from personal experience.

Now I am talking here about extreme political positions—specifically Nazism or fascism. Whether I want it to or not, Ezra Pound's fascist activities color how I read his work. A better example, though known primarily as a novelist, is Knut Hamsun, who was put on trial after World War II for his open admiration of Hitler and his collaborationist activities with the Nazis. Hamsun, in my opinion, wrote some of the most brilliant novels of the late nineteenth century (in particular, Pan, Mysteries, and Hunger), works that were very influential in the establishment of modernism. (Ernest Hemingway said he wanted to write like Hamsun.)

I first discovered his books when I was in my early twenties. It wasn't until a number of years later, when reading Robert Ferguson's biography of him, that I fully understood the extent of his involvement with the Nazis. It fundamentally changed how I read his books. I still read him, in fact still adore him, but it is with an adoration that is now marked with a kind of anguish.

The American novelist Edmund White wrote a wonderful essay about Hamsun expressing exactly the same feelings. It begins "Knut Hamsun is one of my favorite novelists although my affection for him troubles me."

So I'd say yes—politics at least can affect how I experience a writer's (or artist's or composer's) work. That I differ with TRM probably reflects the difference between his major (English) and mine (psychology).

 

[wildsweetone]

I learnt that Philip Larkin (who was a favourite poet of mine) supported the far right during a creative writing class last semester

It made me look at him differently, but not his poetry so much

Do you think the politics of a poet can affect how you read their poetry?

Politic as a noun - no (but then, I don't know any poets who are forthcoming about their political stance).

Politic as a verb - yes.

 

[Maria2394]

I would just reiterate what Rainman said. Unless it is obvious in thier poetry, i tend to not even think about politics as I read thier work...

 

[TheRainMan]

I would agree they shouldn't, but I would argue that they do, from personal experience . . .

i agree that they do, for many.

but they shouldn't . . . i guess i said that already.

we agree on both points.

 

[ishtat]

If you think of Larkin for what he was rather than his politics it might be more helpful.I believe that he was contented to be a librarian in Hull ( Yorkshire for) most of his life.

 

[RhymeFairy]

Pick up a coverless book.
Read.

Does not knowing the author of said book,
make it any less or any more enjoyable?

No ... I read for the words. Only the words.



Please do not get me wrong. If I do know the author then I can possibly see where they're coming from if I stumble or if I have read their writing before. I really just love figuring out the puzzle myself ... that's all I'm saying.



Just me ~

 

[FifthFlower]

I learnt that Philip Larkin (who was a favourite poet of mine) supported the far right during a creative writing class last semester

What did Philip Larkin say that bothered you?

I recall how some people in the US who support the Iraq war tried to boycott the Dixie Chicks who were opposed to George Bush and his war. Now that Bush is so unpopular, this boycott may backfire.

For Pound, I could never understand what he was saying. I pick up the Cantos in the bookstore and have to put it down since it makes no sense. Knowing that he was a fascist doesn't encourage me to try harder to understand.

So I guess taking a political position is not the best marketing technique unless you happen to be on the winning side.

 

[bogusbrig]

I learnt that Philip Larkin (who was a favourite poet of mine) supported the far right during a creative writing class last semester

It made me look at him differently, but not his poetry so much

Do you think the politics of a poet can affect how you read their poetry?

I always get the feeling Larkin was a disgruntled and dissatisfied old sod and would have an affection for extreme politics just to be bloody awkward. I lived quite a long time in that part of Yorkshire and I can imagine anyone being resonable would get on his nerves, I don't know what it is, just something in the air and constant gray skies.

As to your point about whether someone's politics should affect the way you view their art, no it shouldn't but it probably will if it is extreme enough. I think sometimes the best thing to do is not look at someone's lifeWhen I was young I was a big Kerouac fan and I can remember being disappointed to find he was pretty conservative and something of a mothers boy. Bang went my dream of driving across the USA.

I suppose we put writers/artists on pedestals and think they are somehow wiser than the rest of us but they aren't, they are just better at communicating through an art form than the majority of us and like the rest of us they too have feet of clay.

 

[beautyandwine]

Ideally, no, it wouldn't. However, I think that once I learn tidbits about an author, I tend to look for those bits and pieces in the author's work, and I find myself reasoning and making conjectures about the work and how it might possibly tie into the author's philosophy/life experiences/voice. I think the voice of a poet or an author is what attracts me (and why there are many wonderful books I may put down after a chapter or two), and I think the politics of any individual person may well influence their work and hence my feelings towards it.

However, I would say that I'm the penultimate fencesitter and staunch independent, and I get rubbed the wrong way when any person launches into a diatribe towards either extreme. A closed mind is a wonderful thing to lose, either way you look at it.

 

[Angeline]

I love the poetry of Pablo Neruda, and I have a hard time reconciling the fact that he was a Stalinist with the beautiful, sensual poems he wrote. I have this same problem with Ezra Pound (and Eliot for that matter) though I appreciate his writings more from an intellectual standpoint than an emotional reaction (like Neruda).

I hear people make this same argument about Leni Riefenstahl, that she was a brilliant filmmaker who captured moments in history and not a Nazi propagandist. I don't really know her work, but I can't even bring myself to know it because of my own family's victimization in the war years.

I think, therefore, I agree with Tzara. My liking the art of someone whose politics revolt me is troubling. It's hard to separate art and politics. And I WAS an English major.

 

[eagleyez]

The Formalist's taught that one had to seperate the lives and leanings of poets "completely" from the works of the Poet. This trend arrose after the hullabullo created post WW!, when, with aid of Pound, Ellioit delivered the Wasteland. Both were known to be right leaning, and in Pound's case, he was a card carrying facsist.(although many believe his rantings were a ruse of insanity to shield him from prosecution)

This seemed neat and tidy until Poets such as Celine, Ginsburg, Snyder, et al produced Poesy that revolved around personal experience, thus requiring the reader, if he truly intended to wrap his arms aound the work, to read the works with biographic eye. Gindburgs HOWL cannot be read completely without its historical nexus as prerequisite. Snyder's Cold Mountain and Turtle Island are only half read if the sense of place and history is not perceived actively among their reading. I do not claim that this is the ONLY way to read these post modern texts, but for me doing one without the other leaves me woefully half-fulfilled.

AS a closet historian, I find the timing and place essential within the reading of a poem. That said, I dont place extra weight where none may be found, nor do I "judge" a poet, writer, musician or artist merely by the wordly milieau from which they emenate. I DO however find it a need of my own to know the Poet, to perceive his/her ax to grind.

Langston Hughes wrote about Harlem. He wrote wonderfully lucid and textured pieces full of jazz and beauty and lust. But, he wrote of and about his Harlem.
To not know this while reading his work is to not fully digest the work. That said, I care nothing for his politics, which by themselves are mostly anthema to the work.