Poetry and the Masses

[Leanne]

I'm not sure whom I love more right now, milo or Leanne.

Pick me, nobody talks to me anymore.

Beauty is the intense expression of the heart; and poetry is beautiful; and the less we think "grammar", structure, the less life blood going into the work. I composed a poem the other day, and if the two words I chose for the title did not take a step down to the last line of the poem, and if the last line of the poem did not take a step up to the title: my poem was ruined, it would not have been an intense expression of my heart: beautiful! Going down, or going up, we must still dot our eyes and cross our teas. (spelling errors intended).

Oh, I think we're going to like you

[rayheinrich]

Beauty is the intense expression of the heart; and poetry is beautiful; and the less we think "grammar", structure, the less life blood going into the work. I composed a poem the other day, and if the two words I chose for the title did not take a step down to the last line of the poem, and if the last line of the poem did not take a step up to the title: my poem was ruined, it would not have been an intense expression of my heart: beautiful! Going down, or going up, we must still dot our eyes and cross our teas. (spelling errors intended).

applause

[BedsideFungus]

I've often thought about this - not just about poetry but about literature in general. It seems like with each successive generation, writing becomes less about skill and more about mass appeal - the way it makes people feel. Otherwise how could we explain the success of the Twilight series (which I've read and felt were pretty poorly written - although in all fairness to Meyers she did improve over the course of the trilogy)? Yet, Meyers has made a fortune from her mediocre writing and the novels of true worth sit on shelves collecting dust. It's frustrating - to say the least.

Some of this is due in part to technology: texting, hashtags, tweeting. Every book of note will eventually find its way to a film screen cast with marginally talented but good looking kids from some random CW show that I've never watched. I also think each generation gets progressively lazier and more stupid. Although I can't cite any resources, I'm sure that I've read that the average IQ is getting lower.

Poetry has always been one of those elite art forms that have been difficult for someone of average intellect to really understand. How can poetry evoke an emotional response if the reader can't obtain some meaning from it? But I don't necessarily feel like it's the poet's responsibility to reduce their art for the sake of being "popular". And honestly what self-respecting writer would want to do that?

I once read a letter from Billie Joe Armstrong, of Green Day fame, in response to a lady who wrote specifically to tell him that his music was offensive and not "art" and he said something to the effect that he doesn't write songs for her, he writes them for himself. Though art is often shared, I feel like the creation of art is mostly selfish. Artists generally create for their own personal expression (an outlet) and those who don't should maybe consider reclassifying themselves as capitalists. When art is created, it's out of some personal compulsion. If it sells after the fact, then kudos, but sales or popularity shouldn't be a motivating factor in its creation. If it is, it's not art, it's work. It just sucks that the writers who have managed to be the most financially successful using their talent aren't necessarily the best at their craft.

Don't get me wrong, although I believe the creation of art is selfish, I believe being exposed to other's creations can be satisfying beyond belief. I can't even begin to imagine a life without the books I've read, the poems I've studied, the films I've watched, the music I've danced to, the paintings I've ogled (one of the greatest moments of my life was standing for 20 minutes in front of the Mona Lisa - not necessarily because it's my favorite painting but because it was the f'n MONA LISA for Chrissakes!). Although it's not by any means the best painting ever something about "Christina's World" has always stuck with me. I could stare at that painting for hours and still not truly understand why it provokes such emotion for me, but it does and I love it for that.

Art enriches life and I'm so glad that it exists. And I further agree that the art that sticks with you, really touches your soul does so not necessarily because it was perfect, but because something in it touched something in you, BUT to know and understand how much investment was made to create that moment for you takes appreciation of art to another level. It's no longer just about "liking" it, but "respecting" it. I like a lot of songs, a lot of books, but do I respect the creator? (Not always.) For that respect to exist, I have to fundamentally understand that while the talent was there to create, it was boosted by hard work and investment.

That appreciation for hard work and investment doesn't exist in today's society. It's all about immediate gratification. Everything is starting to feel temporary and transitory. People are quick to dismiss things that they don't understand as not having relevance because they don't feel like it's worth the time and investment to attempt to understand. And that is a travesty.

It's easy for people to have contempt towards something (anything) that is beyond them. It's why bullying is so prevalent these days. In most instances this contempt exists simply because the individual holding the contempt is bitter because they subconciously understand that the object of their contempt is better or smarter than they are. So of course to make themselves feel more adequate, they have to try and bring it/him/her down to their level.

And I'll wrap up this soapbox sermon with a poem that makes me want to cry every time I read it:

Courage

Anne Sexton

It is in the small things we see it.
The child’s first step,
as awesome as an earthquake.
The first time you rode a bike,
wallowing up the sidewalk.
The first spanking when your heart
went on a journey all alone.
When they called you crybaby
or poor or fatty or crazy
and made you into an alien,
you drank their acid
and concealed it.

Later,
if you faced the death of bombs and bullets
you did not do it with a banner,
you did it with only a hat to
cover your heart.
You did not fondle the weakness inside you
though it was there.
Your courage was a small coal
that you kept swallowing.
If your buddy saved you
and died himself in so doing,
then his courage was not courage,
it was love; love as simple as shaving soap.

Later,
if you have endured a great despair,
then you did it alone,
getting a transfusion from the fire,
picking the scabs off our heart,
then wringing it out like a sock.
Next, my kinsman, you powdered your sorrow,
you gave it a back rub
and then you covered it with a blanket
and after it had slept a while
it woke to the wings of the roses
and was transformed.

Later,
when you face old age and its natural conclusion
your courage will still be shown in the little ways,
each spring will be a sword you’ll sharpen,
those you love will live in a fever of love,
and you’ll bargain with the calendar
and at the last moment
when death opens the back door
you’ll put on your carpet slippers
and stride out.

[rowens]

I think that appreciation for hard work and investment is very important in today's society, in regards to profit and status.

[Leanne]

Just before Christmas I had an interesting conversation with a couple of friends we rarely see. He's some kind of high ranking sales executive (I don't know what he sells, exactly, but he's awesome at bullshitting) and she's a PR rep for a whisky company -- so they're both quite good at making money. They were asking me about my writing -- why do I not market it more, why do I not produce more, why am I not more aggressively selling myself? She posed this question: If you were offered an advance of $100,000, would you write a book of 100 poems?

She was quite serious, and quite prepared to take on marketing. So, what did I answer, and why?

[rowens]

I wish whores were as eager to aggressively sell themselves as everybody else seems to be these days.
It's a positive thing to "sell out". It's not really a concept other than a juvenile rebellious ideal: to "sell out". Everybody sells out, and the majority benefits. And everybody's happy.

I myself am happy. I'm rich and famous. I have so many beautiful wives that some of them are still virgins because I simply haven't got around to them yet. I don't see what you all are complaining about.

Everyone loves art. If Vincent Gogh had just changed his clothes once in a while and got a real job, just think what he could have accomplished.

[tomoffing]

It's in all our nature's to crave simple answers. Confronting what we don't and can never hope to understand is a daunting, sometimes terrifying experience. Layers of social and psychological structures have been created to insulate us from those very thoughts.
The arts (and sciences to a degree nowadays) are often direct conflict with those structures and suffer as a result. Poetry in particular is a victim of that conflict because while I have no choice but to visually experience a painting presented to me, poetry demands a higher level of my engagement.

For me, bringing poetry to wider audiences is not a question of adapting the craft. The idea of "dumbing down" an art form that has been with us since shortly after we spoke is abhorrent and down right devolutionary. We should instead seek to affect people's expectations, to impart the idea that the longer and more arduous the search for meaning the greater the reward, that succinct, digestible answers are not the panacea.
Turn off the telly,
Get off the couch.

[shemthepenman]

@leanne I should hope you would have answered "yes" and double "yes!" I heard an interview with the black keys where they were accused of selling out. And they told this story where they were in England and some advert offered them an obsessed amount of money to use there song or something, and they turned it down. And they were broke... Oh fuck it, here is the link
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QHnXyNNpd1s

[cheyrn]

Anyone who thinks poetry isn't wildly successful has a kink in their definition.

I think the topic of the original post is interesting in terms of what is useful for a poetry group to consider for criticism and how it should be categorized.

A definition of poetry is, first, going to be wrong, because of people's individual biases. And, it is intentional ignorance.

But, expressing oneself through a tradition has meaning. If you make music that says something about a jazz tradition, it makes sense to judge the degree to which it is coherent with that tradition.

In a group where people are teaching each other poetry, having categories is required. The categorization only has use as guidelines regarding what is to be analyzed, or if it is supposed to be seen from the perspective of a tradition, then it's useful for considering it's coherence.

There should not be an agenda to force poetry on people, unless it is an effort to increase literacy. Teaching something so broad requires allowing the people being taught to have their own learning experience that is outside of and beyond the teachers.

I wish whores were as eager to aggressively sell themselves as everybody else seems to be these days.

I understand, or think I do, your points. But, as an aside and out of context, the only whores are not involved in the sex trade. I don't think you are using the word in a degrading sense though.

If you were offered an advance of $100,000, would you write a book of 100 poems?

The only problem I have with supposedly selling out, is if you are modifying poetry to serve as propaganda for an organization that I don't like. Or, if I cherished a poem, and you sold it to a company to be used in some product advertisment, I would feel let down, but I wouldn't blame the artist.

I think this has already happened via pop music...

If you don't accept "I like big butts" as poetry, it is incest (supposed experts mingling with supposed experts). Art doesn't need to present a facade to tell people it is worthy of respect.

[rowens]

All my comments on this poetry forum are brought to you by MyBB.

MyBB, fifteen minutes could save you ... well ... you know.

[Truerenigma]

More Ovaltine please!

[DonMar]

Perhaps it's because I've mainly been writing lyrics over a number of genres for the past several years, but I don't feel that making a poem intelligible to a reader/listener is by definition 'dumbing down'. (With the exception of most pop music, of course. )

Donna

[rowens]

Well, you can make a poem intelligible to a reader, but you can't make a reader intelligible to a poem. Unless you befriend him. But what if he doesn't want to be friends with you? You got to think about these things.

[DonMar]

Indeed. Something else to consider is that perhaps if the average person can feel comfortable with a well-written, intelligible poem - or any piece of text - that speaks immediately to him/her, that person may eventually feel enough at ease to move on to more complex or abstract thoughts expressed in a piece of writing.

I feel too that a lot of poets (and writers of lyrics) don't fully understand what they're even trying to communicate. This contributes to the unintelligibility. I believe it was Einstein who said that if something can't be explained simply, it means the person isn't clear about what he or she is trying to express.

Just a thought.

Donna

You got to think about these things.

[rowens]

Who wants to make an average person feel comfortable? That seems counterproductive to me.

[DonMar]

I didn't use the word 'make'. My meaning was/is that if the average person happens to encounter a piece of text that immediately resonates with him/her, the writer has communicated, whether in a poem or a song. Hence, mission accomplished - to touch another human being, perhaps to expand their knowledge and emotional capacity.

Donna

[rowens]

That's right, it happens all the time. So where is there a problem?

[DonMar]

The problem - your word, not mine - is that communication doesn't occur if the message is not - at least at a basic level - comprehensible.

And this can depend a lot on how well the writer is able to articulate the message.

Donna

[rowens]

Most people aren't interested. An easily understood poem is just as boring as a difficult poem. TV, movies, video games, text messages and Internet chatting take a lot of time leaving no time for serious consideration of poetry for most people, and those things are more stimulating, entertaining and relevant for them.

[Truerenigma]

Most people aren't interested. An easily understood poem is just as boring as a difficult poem. TV, movies, video games, text messages and Internet chatting take a lot of time leaving no time for serious consideration of poetry for most people, and those things are more stimulating, entertaining and relevant for them.

Surprisingly, that is a very good point. You must have sobered up for that one. Or took one or two drinks extra, whichever works best for you.