Rant about poets

[bogusbrig]

I was chatting to friends yesterday in the pub and asked them along to a poetry reading I was going to. Their response was ‘Oooh nooo! Does our friendship rely on us putting ourselves through this?’ Well, yes!

Eventually accepting their reluctance I asked them why they have such a response to poetry. Their answer was that poetry doesn’t says nothing to them, it’s some elitist art that doesn’t address any of the issues that have anything to do with their lives, whether psychological, metaphysical or social or in any other way, it is just an irrelevance. Why is this? At the beginning of the 20th century, poets were writing best sellers and people queued up to buy the books of the top poets. One friend suggested this lack of interest was because poetry was the art of the ‘me’ and he really wasn’t interested in some egoist’s introspection.

Now a top poet has to rely on government subsidies or an academic chair. Every nation has to have a national poet like it has to have a national airline that no one uses because it’s too expensive. No one reads the national poet but no self respecting nation can do without one. Yet all my friends can recite some poetry by heart but none since before the second world war. The one thing I noticed about all the poetry they recited they felt some affinity with, involved subject matter that was greater than poet him/herself. It was about an objective reality or a communal consciousness that everyone could share and take part in.

This got me to thinking, are poets nowadays just a bunch of irrelevant naval gazers that aren’t read because they aren’t willing to accept a communal existence that is greater than themselves?

 

[Recidiva]

I think it's up to an individual to breathe life and meaning into art, but it can be true that a group's attitudes toward something can choke the life out of something.

I had aspirations to be an actor and a writer when I was young, but the company of many writers and actors convinced me differently, they were endlessly egotistical. I wanted to make my art about life and they always wanted to know how their life was about art. I wanted to explore life, and many of the people in my company wanted to preach about what it was all about, and that was just alienating.

So I went about the business of living and I bring my art into my life and not the other way around. Poetry and art can at times look like an escape from life or complaint about it instead of an enrichment of it. There are different types of artists and poets, just as there are different types of actors. Those who include, and those who exclude. Those who go into something, and those who escape from something. So what you see as immersive might just look like escapism to someone else.

I think it's that difference in attitude that can be a challenge to overcome. Seen that way, all that has to be done is to find out how to speak to each individual, and hear how each individual speaks. Not everybody is a word person. Some people really don't like words at all. Discussion always sounds like whining or complaining. You might think of it as free expression.

I get football intellectually, but I don't enjoy it as a pastime. It's not fair to make me sit down and watch it every weekend. I had to do it as a kid when I was in the marching band. I don't like it. It may be poetry in motion, but I don't get it, never will.

So not everyone likes everything and that's okay. There are really good reasons, and poetry isn't for everyone, just like football. I get that other people might really get into the idea of there being a team and all that, and the physical whatever...okay. I get that. But to me it's a bunch of people on drugs beating each other up. Yes. That's oversimplified and that's okay with me.

 

[Debbie]

I was chatting to friends yesterday in the pub and asked them along to a poetry reading I was going to. Their response was ‘Oooh nooo! Does our friendship rely on us putting ourselves through this?’ Well, yes!

QUOTE]

Friendships are invaluable. I would never ask my friends along to a poetry reading and if they refused cut them off as true friends.


Poetry is a personal thing. It isn't to everyone's liking or understanding.
Some people get it and some don't.


My husband loves me to bits but he doesn't get my poetry.
And I can understand that.

 

[WickedEve]

I was chatting to friends yesterday in the pub and asked them along to a poetry reading I was going to. Their response was ‘Oooh nooo! Does our friendship rely on us putting ourselves through this?’ Well, yes!

QUOTE]

Friendships are invaluable. I would never ask my friends along to a poetry reading and if they refused cut them off as true friends.


Poetry is a personal thing. It isn't to everyone's liking or understanding.
Some people get it and some don't.


My husband loves me to bits but he doesn't get my poetry.
And I can understand that.

Hi Debbie

My lover and I have been together almost 6 years. Poetry is not a priority for him. He'll read the occasional poem that I send him. He'll even write me a poem--about twice a year or less! Over the years, I've learned to talk a lot less about poetry. I miss my poet friend. Yes, I think all poets need poet friends. I've been reading and writing poetry since childhood, and I believe poets may be the only true fans of it anymore.

 

[bogusbrig]

But why are poets the only true fans of poetry in western culture?

Poetry used to be a mass art form but it no longer touches the collective consciousness. Yet nowadays in bite sized culture where people's attention span appears to get less and less, poetry should be an ideal art form.

In Russia and many eastern European countries, poetry is still a mass art form. Is this because western poets write primarily for themselves and not for an audience?

 

[Recidiva]

But why are poets the only true fans of poetry in western culture?

Poetry used to be a mass art form but it no longer touches the collective consciousness. Yet nowadays in bite sized culture where people's attention span appears to get less and less, poetry should be an ideal art form.

In Russia and many eastern European countries, poetry is still a mass art form. Is this because western poets write primarily for themselves and not for an audience?

America has freedom of speech. We can rant at will. Poetry used to have to be an expression of stylized symbolism where you could print something up where "everyone knew" what you were talking about but you were talking about the government. It was a "Hydra" though. The beast that you cut it's heads off and more appeared.

Now you can bitch without symbolism. It's actually progress.

 

[bogusbrig]

America has freedom of speech. We can rant at will. Poetry used to have to be an expression of stylized symbolism where you could print something up where "everyone knew" what you were talking about but you were talking about the government. It was a "Hydra" though. The beast that you cut it's heads off and more appeared.

Now you can bitch without symbolism. It's actually progress.

Why doesn't this argument fit with other art forms?

I grew up when there was a lot of condescension in the west towards Russian state sponsored culture and this was the reason put forward why such arts as poetry were popular there and not in the west. Once I grew up I realised western countries sponsor their culture and the arts much more than Russian and eastern European countries ever did. Though I agree, eastern countries see more importance in the collective consciousness than in western countries and lack of freedom was one of those facts.

I have no doubt that in the west, the raising of the 'individual' to one of cult and mythical status has had an affect and many collaborative artforms such as film have to descend to the lowest common denominator to attract a mass audience. However it doesn't entirely explain why poetry is in a ghetto that contains hardly anyone else but practitioners. There has to be something about the poetry poets write that has helped this process along.

One assumes one writes to be read. If there is no one to read what one has written, is it worth writing? Just a thought.

 

[Angeline]

Hi Debbie

My lover and I have been together almost 6 years. Poetry is not a priority for him. He'll read the occasional poem that I send him. He'll even write me a poem--about twice a year or less! Over the years, I've learned to talk a lot less about poetry. I miss my poet friend. Yes, I think all poets need poet friends. I've been reading and writing poetry since childhood, and I believe poets may be the only true fans of it anymore.

I'm your other poet friend, even though we don't get to talk as often as we like.

I think one of the great blessings of my life is that my so--eagleyez--loves poetry as much as I do. We talk about it and write it and read it to each other all the time. In fact we met here on this forum two years ago yesterday--and the poetry is still flowing.

I don't expect anyone else I know outside here to particularly care about poetry. It's a matter of taste: some people are attuned to the arts as a means of expression and some aren't. When I find someone in my non-Lit world that loves poetry (very rare), I consider us both lucky to have the opportunity to share our interest. And sometimes when I teach poetry, I find a student who responds to the notions of imagery and metaphor in writing. Most could care less though.

 

[Recidiva]

Why doesn't this argument fit with other art forms?

I grew up when there was a lot of condescension in the west towards Russian state sponsored culture and this was the reason put forward why such arts as poetry were popular there and not in the west. Once I grew up I realised western countries sponsor their culture and the arts much more than Russian and eastern European countries ever did. Though I agree, eastern countries see more importance in the collective consciousness than in western countries and lack of freedom was one of those facts.

I have no doubt that in the west, the raising of the 'individual' to one of cult and mythical status has had an affect and many collaborative artforms such as film have to descend to the lowest common denominator to attract a mass audience. However it doesn't entirely explain why poetry is in a ghetto that contains hardly anyone else but practitioners. There has to be something about the poetry poets write that has helped this process along.

One assumes one writes to be read. If there is no one to read what one has written, is it worth writing? Just a thought.

It comes back to people wanting art to be an escape and artists wanting art to be an illustration of life.

Some people go to movies to see things blow up because they LIVE life. They know it's ugly, it's horrible, they see it every day. They know. They're the ones doing the hard work.

But artists have the gall to think they're the ones that have to show the ugly, the horrible, the miserable. They're often the ones that need to see more things blow up and get a sense of humor about it. They're the ones that are the ones behind the camera and have a budget to market that crap. Change some diapers, live in a war zone, then talk about it.

The audience has the money for a ticket. The artist has the budget for a marketing strategy. Different aspirations altogether.

 

[WickedEve]

I'm your other poet friend, even though we don't get to talk as often as we like.

I think one of the great blessings of my life is that my so--eagleyez--loves poetry as much as I do. We talk about it and write it and read it to each other all the time. In fact we met here on this forum two years ago yesterday--and the poetry is still flowing.

I don't expect anyone else I know outside here to particularly care about poetry. It's a matter of taste: some people are attuned to the arts as a means of expression and some aren't. When I find someone in my non-Lit world that loves poetry (very rare), I consider us both lucky to have the opportunity to share our interest. And sometimes when I teach poetry, I find a student who responds to the notions of imagery and metaphor in writing. Most could care less though.

Yes, you are. I miss Doug and you. But I know we're both busy with life. Life is time consuming. lol I just talked with J and told him about my post. He said he appreciates poetry the same way he appreciates any art. So, I'm okay with that.

 

[bogusbrig]

I guess poets are irrelevent, for everything but masturbating that is.

 

[WickedEve]

I guess poets are irrelevent, for everything but masturbating that is.

Are we discussing poetry or masturbation? I'm fine with either one.

 

[Liar]

One friend suggested this lack of interest was because poetry was the art of the ‘me’ and he really wasn’t interested in some egoist’s introspection.

Does your friend listen to popular music?

 

[bogusbrig]

Are we discussing poetry or masturbation? I'm fine with either one.

Hmm Why do I have this suspicion you have a preference for the latter.

Could you be getting yourself a reputation?

 

[WickedEve]

Could you be getting yourself a reputation?

Reputation? Me? Shucks no. I just realized that we don't know each other very well. I've never threatened to leave you drained and whimpering in a corner, have I? Gosh, I've been too nice lately, and I'm losing the rep that I did have! It's me! Wickedeve. Dildo queen!
It may be time to put my ass avs back up... I need to dust them off, though.

 

[mojo_cat]

Does your friend listen to popular music?

ahahahaha

sorry but that was a coffee-spit moment for me

 

[bogusbrig]

Does your friend listen to popular music?

Now that depends what popular music you are talking about.

One does like BOOM BOOM music where you thankfully can't hear the lyrics but the price of that is you can only hear the BOOM BOOM!

I can't say though that despite my liking of some popular music that I have ever heard a popular song that works without music.

Lyrics aren't poetry, they are lyrics and are conceived with music in mind.

 

[mojo_cat]

Lyrics aren't poetry, they are lyrics and are conceived with music in mind.

We could have a very interesting debate about this, and I think it has been tried before on this board.

It depends on your definition of poetry, though.

My lyrics were always written as poems first. If I had to adapt cadence to fit a song, i would, but most often it didn't happen. I have heard great songs that functioned beautifully without music - I can give a ton of examples of this.

But - I don't want to derail this particular thread.

I personally will not go to see poetry readings live because the poems and poets themselves may be fantastic, but the crowds that attend, in my experience, tend to be unbearably pretentious and obnoxious. I have never been to a poetry reading attended by people who liked and respected the poet. I have been to numerous readings attended by people who thought of themselves as poets and spent the evening discussing their own work in relation to the featured artist, or getting drunk because they were jealous not to have been giving the reading themselves.

I'm *not* applying that to you or your friend, don't get me wrong, but poetry readings tend to give people who have not attended one the impression of a group of people masturbating each other furiously, and that's not necessarily everyone's cup of tea.

Just my opinion. Maybe Toronto just has terrible poetry nights?

 

[bogusbrig]

I personally will not go to see poetry readings live because the poems and poets themselves may be fantastic, but the crowds that attend, in my experience, tend to be unbearably pretentious and obnoxious. I have never been to a poetry reading attended by people who liked and respected the poet. I have been to numerous readings attended by people who thought of themselves as poets and spent the evening discussing their own work in relation to the featured artist, or getting drunk because they were jealous not to have been giving the reading themselves.

I know where you are coming from and I've been to a couple of those nights.

Where I would differ though, is that I see the poets as the main problem on the whole. They are the ones performing (yep, performing) and too many see performing as beneath them and deliver their poetry in sombre earnest tones and send their audience scurrying to the bar.

However, I've been to poetry readings where poets have put the audience's entertainment first before bulling up their own pseudo-intellectual ego and I've been thoroughly entertained.

I used to go to a regular reading in London's West End and you had to get there early to get in. There was a mixture of poets with a mixture of poetry and styles. The obvious aim was to give the public a good evening and it worked.

My whole train of thought has been that poets have forgotten about their audience and that is why they have created a ghetto for themselves.

 

[flyguy69]

Darkmaas made a pertinent observation on this topic some months back. He said "poetry does itself a disservice when it forgets its audience" (or words to that effect-- sorry, DM!).

I have thought of that comment many times since as I read poetry that becomes so self-absorbed and opaque that it just isn't fun to read. Why would readers voluntarily subject themselves to belittlement and confusion? Of all the activities in which I can spend my time, why would I spend it on one that offers no reward? I won't be so naive as to suggest every poem should touch every reader, but good poetry should touch most people.

And that raises an interesting dilemma: it requires that only a few folks be able to do it. If everyone can write good poetry, the impact of such poetry is negligible. Professional Bowling will never catch on because everyone can produce perfection: anyone can roll a strike. Good poetry has to present images and stories in a manner in which I couldn't have thought of myself.

 

[Liar]

Lyrics aren't poetry, they are lyrics and are conceived with music in mind.

As the dear cat just said, that's debateable. If you can write a poem on paper, or read a poem out loud, they are still poems despite being in different medias. Music is just yet a different media.

Either way that's a debate for another thread I think. I hope you got my point, that any pop or rock song is as ego-centrered as the poetry your friend shuns because it's ego-centrered.

 

[wildsweetone]

BogusBrig - This got me to thinking, are poets nowadays just a bunch of irrelevant naval gazers that aren’t read because they aren’t willing to accept a communal existence that is greater than themselves?

modern media is pumped into us every time we turn our heads. where is poetry? we have to physically hunt the stuff out in our day to day lives. who has the time to do that? i respectfully suggest only other poets have (or make) the time.

back in the 'dark ages' there was no television, no radio... it even took a while before the 'daily newspaper' became daily. any reading or listening would have been in pubs or where groups of people gathered for entertainment. i think that poetry was a fairly forefront interest of the times.

however nowadays, poetry has not stepped up and moved with the modern media. how many of us can open our local (or even national) newspaper and read a poem, be it witty or otherwise?

go to the library and see how many poetry books you can count (if you can find them).

and thinking further... i don't know how many other people do this, but i far prefer taking my own sweet time to read poetry. i've been to a couple of poetry readings and it's very difficult to get past the personality of the poet in order to hear their words. because it seems, to become noticed as a poet here (i.e. to be published), you have to be in-everyone's-faces, flamboyant, over-the-top, different, etc.

people need to make time to smell the roses and to hunt out the poetry.

 

[bogusbrig]

I hope you got my point, that any pop or rock song is as ego-centrered as the poetry your friend shuns because it's ego-centrered.

Pop and rock is ego and I think it is accepted as egotistical, theatrical, rebelious and transient. There is nothing worse than a pop/rock singer pretending to produce high art, it misses the point of the whole nature of pop/rock music. By its very nature pop/rock is a here today gone tomorrow medium.

and thinking further... i don't know how many other people do this, but i far prefer taking my own sweet time to read poetry. i've been to a couple of poetry readings and it's very difficult to get past the personality of the poet in order to hear their words. because it seems, to become noticed as a poet here (i.e. to be published), you have to be in-everyone's-faces, flamboyant, over-the-top, different, etc.

people need to make time to smell the roses and to hunt out the poetry.

I think it is horses for courses. Some poetry is written with the intention of it being performed and some with the intention of it being read. I've mentioned this before on Lit somewhere but there is a film of a poetry reading in The Royal Albert Hall in the late sixties with Alan Ginsberg top billing. Adrian Mitchell stole the show with a powerful performance. He gained a large following through that reading, though some poets that were respected at the time disappeared because they just didn't perform. Mitchell said himself, that reading killed off better poets than him but he wrote his poetry to be performed and didn't value it beyond the performance so he wasn't inhibited or over precious about his poetry which helped him communicate it.

 

[Liar]

Pop and rock is ego and I think it is accepted as egotistical, theatrical, rebelious and transient. There is nothing worse than a pop/rock singer pretending to produce high art, it misses the point of the whole nature of pop/rock music. By its very nature pop/rock is a here today gone tomorrow medium.

What isn't? In any medium, it's the rare exceptions that are here tomorrow too. For ever poem you regard as "high art" there's a thousand pieces of fluff that you'll never hear of.

I think anyone pretending to produce "high", "true" or "important" culture, be it a painter, a playwritwer, a poet or a punk rock band, are just plain silly. It happens, in all cultural varieties (you may disagree, but in pop and rock music too), that high art is made. But rarely because someone sat down and said "I'm gonna write the Great American Novel now." They might have said, and done, but that's correlation, not cause and effect.

Those who forgets that art is in the eye of the beholder needs a good hard slap in the face with the Salmon of Reality.

 

[Recidiva]

What isn't? In any medium, it's the rare exceptions that are here tomorrow too. For ever poem you regard as "high art" there's a thousand pieces of fluff that you'll never hear of.

I think anyone pretending to produce "high", "true" or "important" culture, be it a painter, a playwritwer, a poet or a punk rock band, are just plain silly. It happens, in all cultural varieties (you may disagree, but in pop and rock music too), that high art is made. But rarely because someone sat down and said "I'm gonna write the Great American Novel now."

Those who forgets that art is in the eye of the beholder needs a good hard slap in the face with the Salmon of Reality.

That Salmon smells funny! Just who the hell does that Salmon think He is!?