You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Poetry Sunday: We All Sing America Now
Famously, or infamously, I would beg to differ that Walt Whitman was a Great Poet ... or that matter, whether being the Father of Free Verse ought to be considered a compliment.
Anyway, I thought your work was an interesting adaptation ... a balance of the good and bad we find in society and culture and I think Whitman, a Modernist, would probably have approved.
Whitman lionized Lincoln and "A More Perfect Union" captured the ineffable reality of nations: It is both an acknowledgement of present imperfection ... but also, an admission that absolute perfection can never be achieved.
Recall that "Utopia," the fantasy of Post-Modernists, comes from the Greek, "ou-topos" meaning,"Nowhere."
Of course, such things are a matter of taste. Each to each, every poet to his own.
If Whitman is great, it's simply for being such an inspiration to so many others who have come after. He did have some interesting turns of phrases and, for his time, an interesting perspective on poetics. Though, I wouldn't call him a Modernist. That would put him in the same category as Pound and Eliot. He isn't easily categorized as far as schools go, falling betwixt the Romantics and the Victorians. Some people call him a Transcendentalist (which I find elusive), and others say he's one of the Romantics (which is more easily defended but not quite right either). I have heard some refer to him as a Realist, but that depends on how you define Realist.
In truth, I think he is his own category, and that's where his "greatness" lies. A man that can create his own category and stay there without company deserves at least a nod of appreciation. While he doesn't fit easily in any other school of poetics, he has had a profound impact on just about all of them that have followed (Modernists, Beats, Confessionalists, Black Mountain, and Language Poets, to name a few).
Always love to spar, my friend. Thanks for reading.
@blockurator,
First off, you are an excellent writer. And thanks for making the effort to edit your comments before hitting the "Post" button. The quality of the craft is noted.
You're right, of course ... Whitman is in his own category which, I suppose, deserves a tip of the hat for originality. I don't really dislike Free Verse as much as I let on, it's just that so many poets go to it because it's easy and learn nothing about the science and art that underlie poetry composition. As nothing is right then nothing is wrong. In the anything goes ethos of post-modernism, Art gets to be anything that anyone says is Art ... no filters or quality-control. The result: Modern-day poetry.
Do you honestly think anyone will be quoting modern-day poets in 400 years like we presently quote Shakespeare? No one quotes them now.
In any event, I've taken it upon myself to fight an undoubtedly losing battle: The resurrection of "verse"... which now, rather ironically, is referred to as "New Formalism." Despite the long litany of literary giants that preceded them, all of whom wrote verse, the Free Verse folks are asserting "default status" ... verse has become some "exceptional."
I used to regularly volunteer at my daughter's Elementary School. In kindergarten and Grade 1, the kids loved poetry and I used to read them mine and others' works. In Grade 2, the teachers introduced them to Free Verse. And that was the precise moment that they started hating poetry.
I'm in advertising and I've done several studies on people's reaction to poetry. It's not that the general public think free verse is bad poetry per se ... it's that they don't consider it poetry at all. There's nothing mysterious about the reason why. I've explained the neuroscience behind the effect of verse in several of my posts if you're interested. Few poets are. Philosophically, most poets consider themselves "thought leaders" (we're an arrogant bunch) but as I've pointed out, if no one is following you ... you're not a leader of anyone or anything.
In reality, modern-day poetry has become post-structuralism on steroids and a venting mechanism for post-modern (Marxist) political and philosophical ideology. As a soldier, I spent 5 years in Africa at the end of the Cold War. If people only new what Marxism actually looks like in its implementation ... the difference between the theory and the reality. It's a
bloody nasty business.
Quill
I don't disagree with any of that. As a group, however, I don't think the New Formalists are any more humble than any other poet. They just know how to rhyme. ;-)
@blockurator,
I know I'm not. :-)
I will say this. While I write primarily in free verse (but certainly not always), when I do, I often incorporate formalist poetics into them. Most people probably don't notice, or don't recognize it. I'm a big proponent of learning the techniques that poets have always used.
@blockurator appreciated this comment via @poetsunit
DISCORD - @poetsunited - witness upvote