Why don't you read poetry?

[Amok]

Like a lot of the posters here, I like a lot of older and classical poetry, but don’t pay much attention to modern poetry. I think the most recent poems I’ve read and enjoyed are some of Sylvia Plath’s from her collection Arial. Particulary “Daddy” and “Lady Lazarus”. And that was published, if I remember correctly, in the mid-60s, so that’s not really that recent.

I’ll echo that it seems like a lot of work to find the poems I’d enjoy in modern poetry among all the chaff. Of course, the same could be said of a lot of things. I like reading fantasy novels, but 99% of the published genre is deeply mediocre, and when I was really into it, I read through a lot of so-so works to find the ones I thought were really good. But, for whatever reason, I can enjoy mediocre fantasy novels on some level, while with poetry it seems like it’s the case that either a work appeals very strongly to me, or I have no interest in it. There’s not much inbetween.

[js_africanus]

@jsgoddess

Why?

Some people hate rap because they’ve never heard good rap. When they do, they only hate most rap. Maybe there’s good verse out there, but I really haven’t seen it. The vast majority of verse that I’ve seen or heard was trite, unimaginative fluff. Even in cases where there’s something interesting to be said, clarity, parsimony, and precision are abandoned and obfuscation embraced. In addition, it often seems like the verse I see is “art,” in the sense of someone’s adolescent angst dressed up in a gaudy pastiche of Poetry, rather than art, in the sense of exceptional execution and conception, a skill to be learned and practiced with nuance and expertise.

In some sense, verse seems to be a form that has been rendered obsolete by technology. In pre- or illiterate societies, or in societies lacking ample paper or printing, the rhyme & meter (sp?) of verse is a tool for enhancing memorization. Verse made the text easier to recall and repeat later on when the ententainer had left town.

For several years running, i.e. five or six years, I listened to “Writer’s Almanac” (sp?) on public radio. Every weekday I heard Garrison Keiler read a poem. I didn’t hear any music in the language. I didn’t hear any constructions that brought the beauty of language to the fore, or any rythmic elegance that danced through my brain. I got none of that. Not a sausage.

I confess, I find more poetry in prose than I do in verse. S.J. Perelman and Mark Leyner (sp?) have produced actual poetry through their prose. I really cannot recall much verse that can qualify as poetry. Verse is good for cutesy constructions that make me say, “How clever,” as I turn the page to something more interesting.

It may just be that I’ve only ever heard or read crap. I mean, if all you’ve ever heard was Eminem and his ilk, of course you’re going to think that all rap sucks.

[Maeglin]

I have an alternate view. First, I would dispense with the following.

Poets began writing only to elite audiences who would “get it.” The non-elites did not react to this snub by prostrating themselves to their superiors and promising to try real hard to be worthy.

Written poetry has almost always been a preserve of the elite. Even popular literacy has hardly ameliorated this. Through poetry, poets speak to each other and about each other to educated audiences. The dialogue between poets crosses milennia, and it is truly an astonishing thing to watch if you know what to look for.

It helps to learn how to understand the language. Traditionally, only elites or those who pretend to be elite have had the time or the inclination to do the above. Unfortunately, this hasn’t changed enough. A lot of people miss out on some great stuff because teachers, critics, and others don’t make it very accessible.

But as others mentioned, like prose, there are many poets who do violence to this poetic language and who simply lack skill. Understandably this puts a lot of people off. However, if you make an effort to hear the music of the verse or to interpret some of the language, even reading a mediocre or poor poem is a worthwhile experience.

I read poetry. I had a fairly literary education and I read on the train every day. I translate from Latin, Greek, Occitan, Old English, and a few other flavors of French and German thrown in there. I am learning Sanskrit now. My favorite poets in English are Pound and Keats, neither exactly obscure or recherche. I love them both for very different reasons.

I read poetry for a lot of reasons. I love the feeling of reading words aloud that I find beautiful. I love the refinement of expression and the perfection of Vergil’s form along with the chaos and malevolence of Ezra Pound. I love the way Pound creates incredible tapestries of meaning that tie together countless times, places, and languages in a few terse phrases. I cannot get enough of Keats’ dreamy imagination and relentless high-mindedness. Horace’s complex blend of suavity, urbanity, and simplicity are confounding and exquisite.

Poetry is not refuge in obfuscating language. The language is the meaning, it does not conceal the meaning. Poetry can be hermetic on purpose, because there is learning and discovery in the act of dissecting poetry. The goal is not arriving at a predetermined meaning but expanding one’s capability for thought by responding to something on the page.

Reading good, I mean, really good poetry is like dropping a little depth charge in your brain. You read it, and perhaps it makes a favorable impression. It sits there in the murk, waiting for the right time. Then something happens in your life that calls to mind a word, a phrase, even a couplet. The verse then takes on a meaning of its own, or perhaps you understand it in a new or unexpected way. In these moments of realization, life is truly enhanced by art.

I treasure these kinds of moments. I treasure the times when I am living my prosaic life and something reminds me of a few words Catullus wrote two thousand years ago. Perhaps I gain some new insight into my own life or regarding the way I view myself. Sometimes I just like to hear the words bounce around in my head.

I couldn’t get the phrase, “Cabestan’s heart in a dish! Tis, tis, ytis!” out of my head in the shower the other day. It is a moment of extreme pathos in Pound’s Cantos. Though the scene is not exactly uplifting, it made me smile while I was brushing my teeth. There aren’t a whole lot of other art forms that you can take around with you wherever you go.

[Cervaise]

I don’t read poetry because I’m too busy reading other stuff. Sort of glib, but it’s the truth. I’ve always got at least a dozen books stacked up on the to-read list behind the half-dozen I’m reading at any one time.

But what others have said about the deliberate abstruseness of modern poetry may also be part of it. When I look at recent stuff (which I do occasionally), it feels like it’s gone off into its own cul-de-sac, and I don’t know enough about what’s going on in the field to make the effort of puzzling through it worthwhile.

I do, however, make an exception for older work. I read Shakespeare regularly, and I just picked up some Dylan Thomas. Nothing newer than that is on my shelf.

@Ethilrist

Dartboard-style writing.

All    finding
     over          meaning
the    without
        page     whiplash
too         difficult
   on
      the        reader's
brain
that's          me, btw.

Genius!

[yBeayf]

For several years running, i.e. five or six years, I listened to “Writer’s Almanac” (sp?) on public radio. Every weekday I heard Garrison Keiler read a poem. I didn’t hear any music in the language. I didn’t hear any constructions that brought the beauty of language to the fore, or any rythmic elegance that danced through my brain.

What about this?

[amarinth]

I was taught poetry all through elementary school, middle school, and high school. I just didn’t like it that much. Ocasionally a poem would really hit me, but most of them (especially the teacher who was enamored by Emily Dickenson) just left me cold.
I was also taught that I (and all my classmates) were amazing and creative and that we could write poetry. That it was an expression of our feelings, and our poetic efforts had value. That was obviously, completely, and totally untrue. And having to suffer through a ton of crap poetry (while smiling at your classmates) makes it harder to put forth the effort to find good poetry.
I do occasionally go to slam poetry readings - and while there are a few great people out there, a lot of them seem to have been told the same things I was told as child. They just never figured out that their supporters, encouragers, enablers were were dead wrong

The elitism doesn’t bother me, but then, I am an intellectual elitist. I’m more likely to conclude that if I don’t get it, there’s nothing to get.

[stpauler]

jsgoddess, come to Duluth, MN. They just put up a wanted ad for a poet laureate.

Wanted/ Poet laureate for the city of Duluth. Salary: $2,000 a year (two-year term). Benefits: local prestige, some national exposure.
The poet laureate committee of Lake Superior Writers, a nonprofit organization, is accepting applications until March 1. The winner will be announced during a series of literary events April 19-22 that will include a visit by National Public Radio commentator Terry Gross.

Requisites:
The poet’s mission will be to raise awareness of poetry in Duluth. To qualify, poets must live in Duluth, be respected by their peers and have a volume of poetry published in the past 10 years.

I go to see poetry slams every once in a while. I enjoy 'em. I even like the Def Jam Poets show on HBO. But reading?

About a year ago I was at Half-Price Books and was pawing through the poetry collection. I grabbed about 5 random titles that were published in the last 5 or so years. Hoping to get a flavor of new ideas, I got vanilla. Over and over again. Maybe I had bad luck in the finds, but I haven’t tried it again.

I think it’s hard to find poets that are new, good, and accessible. For now, I just find them in music by artists that straddle the fence a bit like Greg Brown, Ani DiFranco, or Rufus Wainwright to name a few.

[Little_Nemo]

I have a tin ear for poetry. Every once in a while I’ll try an anthology in hopes that this time something will click and I’ll understand the appeal. But everytime I find myself at a loss.

[rowrrbazzle]

Perhaps the OP should first tell us what she means by poetry or at least give us some examples so that we can say, “This is poetry, that is not, this is in a gray area”. As pointed out, song lyrics are certainly poetry. Weren’t classic poems like the Iliad and the Aeneid sung? Wouldn’t the OP include them? If not, why not? What about limericks and other light verse? (I’m being a bit frivolous here, and the quality of these forms and individual pieces is a separate question, but I’m asking quite seriously.)

Secondly, she should give us the reasons he/she thinks we should be reading it. This is actually very important. Without that, a sufficient answer (and mine) is that there is no particular reason to.

@ultrafilter

This is why you’ll find many more fans of older poetry than newer. Tennyson was hardly one of a few poets of his day, but he’s one of the few who’s remembered. The chaff that anyone alive then must have had to sort through is gone and forgotten. That’s not the case with modern poetry yet, and I prefer to let literary critics do the sorting for me.

That is a big factor, and I feel the same way about a lot of the arts.

@jsgoddess

Poetry is marginalized. I don’t think anyone would argue with that.

Well, actually, I do. To use “marginalized” and the passive voice there seems to imply an unstated person or persons are doing this intentionally and actively. If that’s what you mean, you’ll have to convince us of that by presenting evidence. If you just mean it’s on the fringe or simply unpopular (like most of the serious arts, really), no argument.

[js_africanus]

@yBeayf

What about this?

Sorry, it’s just not doing it.

[yBeayf]

Sorry, it’s just not doing it.

What are some examples, you would say, of rhythmical elegance or linguistic beauty?

[saoirse]

@Thudlow Boink

Except that there’s one sort of poetry that these criticisms don’t apply to: song lyrics. Not all song lyrics qualify as great poetry, or even as poetry at all, but I think some of them do. I think song lyrics are filling much of the same role today (and for the past few decades) that poetry filled earlier, and that many of the best “poets” working today are songwriters (including rappers, probably, though I don’t pay enough attention to rap to be sure).

Now I don’t think song lyrics qualify as poetry. Not because they’re inferior; song lyrics have a different purpose, in the vast majority of cases. A song lyric is tied to its music, and I think if you’re reading a song lyric without listening to the song, you’re just not approaching the work properly.

@Maeglin

Written poetry has almost always been a preserve of the elite. Even popular literacy has hardly ameliorated this. Through poetry, poets speak to each other and about each other to educated audiences.

It is the preserve of a much smaller portion of the educated public than it was. It is possible to get a bachelor’s degree without reading a single poem. Even people with English degrees often don’t know much about poetry later than Pound and Eliot.

[tiltypig]

I love poetry, but I don’t read it on a daily or even weekly basis, for more or less the same reason I don’t watch a lot of depressing art movies. Good poems are moving, and I feel like I come out of the experience of reading them as a better person, but it’s often wrenching and difficult and leaves me feeling sad and emotionally vulnerable afterwards. So I read novels and nonfiction and watch action movies and comedies, and feel OK, and entertained, and every once in a while I break out something that will touch me on a deeper level.

I don’t feel that the purpose of poetry is to intentionally obsfucate or to create some kind of puzzle-box for the reader to decipher (although some poets certainly do approach it this way). It’s just the appropriate form to express some thoughts, ideas, or feelings. I mean, how could you rewrite a poem like one of Neruda’s love poems as prose, or as an essay?
http://www.pierdelune.com/neruda26.htm

"How you must have suffered getting accustomed to me,
my savage, solitary soul, my name that sends them all running.
So many times we have seen the morning star burn, kissing our eyes,
and over our heads the grey light unwind in turning fans.

My words rained over you, stroking you.
A long time I have loved the sunned mother-of-pearl of your body.
Until I even believe that you own the universe.
I will bring you happy flowers from the mountains, bluebells,
dark hazels, and rustic baskets of kisses.
I want
to do with you what spring does with the cherry trees."

[Interrobang]

@amarinth

I was also taught that I (and all my classmates) were amazing and creative and that we could write poetry. That it was an expression of our feelings, and our poetic efforts had value. That was obviously, completely, and totally untrue.

I kind of disagree. Your poetic efforts have value, but it’s the same kind of value a snapshot has. It captures something personal to you, and people who know and like you may want to see it. But if course that doesn’t mean you’re Diane Arbus.

I suspect that part of the reason poetry has become more and more “marginalized” is that there are more and more options for expression. The Odyssey and the Aenead had to incorporate and preserve defining myths for an entire culture; these days, we’ve got Wikipedia for that. And Hollywood. And Stephen King. And Grand Theft Auto. And blogs. And the White Album. And the New York Times. And a whole bunch of other things that each do some piece of what some kind of poetry used to do.

[The_Blonde_Bomber]

This is a great question.

A lot of my thoughts have already been addressed, but I’ll answer anyway. I was exposed to poetry in jr. & sr. high and undergraduate classes. I never enjoyed it much.

Why? I guess because of the “superiority” of the teacher when he/she would tell you what the poem “really” meant. I remember an argument I had with an english teacher in high school. I don’t remember the poem, but I remember saying something to the effect “how do you KNOW the butterfly in the poem is a metaphor for the poet’s mother? Did anyone ever ask the poet? Is there an answer key where the poet explains the poem?” Of course not. We “the ignorant class” were just too shallow to see the depth of this poem. I then asked “How do you know the poet actually didn’t just write a poem about butterflies?” The answer was along the lines that poets never write literally. Ah, I see. So I’m supposed to guess what it means, and if I interpret it wrong, I’m a moron? No thanks. Give me a calculus problem. At least I know when I’m right and wrong. I always thought that the poet was laughing his ass off somewhere, knowing he wrote a poem about butterflies and the literary minds were spending countless hours trying to figure out what he meant.

As to what poetry is, I don’t really know. Everyone thinks they can write poetry because anyone *can * write poetry. Who are you to say that I can’t? Maybe you are just not smart enough to understand what I’m writing. I can’t make a rhyme? Well, then I don’t need to. Free flowing prose is just as poetic to the really smart people. If you don’t like or get it, you then, by definition, are an idiot. How can you not see the brilliance of my work?

I think song lyrics are sometimes great to read. Sting can write some good stuff, and I’d wager that if it was in a book and not set to music, some of his stuff would hold up pretty well.

Although for my money, you can’t beat Dr. Suess.

I do not like green eggs and ham,
I do not like them, Sam I Am!
I do not like them in a house,
I do not like them with a mouse,
I do not like them here or there,
I do not like them anywhere!
I do not like green eggs and ham,
I do not like them, Sam I Am!
See? This guy doesn’t like green eggs and ham. Anywhere. That’s good enough for me. Now THAT’S poetry!

I’m sure my english teacher would be trying to convince the class that green eggs = mother and ham = father.

[wonky]

@rowrrbazzle

Secondly, she should give us the reasons he/she thinks we should be reading it.

I would tell you the reasons if I felt that you should. Since I don’t think anyone “should” read poetry unless they want to read poetry, it doesn’t apply to me.

[Gala_Matrix_Fire]

@jsgoddess

Yes, it does.

Well, that convinced me. Now I feel completely differently about poetry. And especially, poets.

[Miss_Purl_McKnittington]

@Trunk

Was there some time in the past when we were all poetry-reading-motherfuckers, and as a result we had a peaceful, gentle society?

Trunk, I nearly killed myself laughing at this. Can I put it in my signature please?

To answer the OP, I don’t read nearly as much poetry as I should. I took a creative writing course fall semester, and I was pretty blunt in telling my my instructor that I haven’t read any poetry written after about 1960 that I really liked. She lent me a few books of poetry that she thought I might like after I described the poetry I had/do read. I read that and I’m beginning to appreciate modern poetry more than I did before. The more you are exposed to, the easier it is to appreciate. If you go merely by what you are given in school, then you’re hobbling yourself. So much of what is presented in schools is provided as the definitive model of the period or type of poem or whatever. Being willing to branch out past this opens up a tremendous world that is not covered fleetingly by high school English teachers. There are more Victorian poets than Tennyson; Shelley was not the only Romantic. The current education system doesn’t really encourage adventurous reading.

@amarinth

I was also taught that I (and all my classmates) were amazing and creative and that we could write poetry. That it was an expression of our feelings, and our poetic efforts had value. That was obviously, completely, and totally untrue. And having to suffer through a ton of crap poetry (while smiling at your classmates) makes it harder to put forth the effort to find good poetry.

I think this attitude (that Every-one is a Unique Spirits and the Muse knows us All) also alienates a lot of people from poetry. It’s easy to see bad poetry; knowing good is harder. And, man, let’s face it: the first draft always sucks. I don’t think I ever wrote more than a single draft of anything before college. If English teachers in middle school and high school were more willing to tell their students when something needs more work and this is why, rather than just praising it, I think more students would begin to realize what makes poetry good, rather than just lumping everything that sounds vaguely poetic into the stupid category. I realize this problem won’t happen, since every student is some parent’s Delicate Flower. Most people just can’t respond to constructive criticism.

I am sort of curious about what people who don’t like poetry-written-for-the-poet think about poems like Do Not Go Gentle (Dylan Thomas) and [ (WH Auden). Both of these poems are about the death of the poets’ fathers, yet are appreciated by many more than just those directly affected by those deaths. Isn’t it possible for more than just those affected by the actual event to empathize? An appreciation for poetry written mid-century and later relies heavily on the ability/willingness to empathize with the poet, I think. A lot of people need the structure of plot, or the structure of, um, poetic structure, to latch on to so their brains can get busy deriving meaning. (Nothing wrong with that – I have a distinct preference for it myself.) Ramblings about emtion just don’t appeal to most people. And some people just never understand that poetry/literature can be enjoyed/interpreted on many levels – literal, metaphorical, etc. It’s not so much that there’s only one meaning, but that there are layers of meaning.

bluethree, jsgoddess may have been a little blunt, but [url=http://rpo.library.utoronto.ca/poem/1904.html]Ozymandias](]Funeral Blues[/url) does in fact rhyme. It’s a sonnet, so it must. It’s rhyme scheme is ababacdcedefef, making it a modified Petrarchan sonnet, but a sonnet nonetheless. Some of the rhymes are slant rhymes (appear/despair) and some aren’t really rhymes at all (stone/frown), but I’m actually quite surprised you didn’t pick up on land/sand, which is as rhyme-y as you can get.

[JThunder]

@Miss Purl McKnittington

I am sort of curious about what people who don’t like poetry-written-for-the-poet think about poems like Do Not Go Gentle (Dylan Thomas) and [url=]Funeral Blues (WH Auden). Both of these poems are about the death of the poets’ fathers, yet are appreciated by many more than just those directly affected by those deaths. Isn’t it possible for more than just those affected by the actual event to empathize?

I don’t think anyone’s saying that poets shouldn’t write about what’s important to them. After all, any good writer will tend to draw on things that he knows well.

Rather, many self-described poets seem to write as though they had no audience but themselves. While this can occasionally result in some beautiful works, I think it tends to produce crap. After all, if the poet already knows what he intends to say, then why pay any attention to clarity?

That’s not to say that poetry should be written at an elementary level so that everyone can understand it. After all, a well-written poem becomes more beautiful as you plumb its depths. However, when a poem seems like nothing but stream of consciousness ramblings or other disjointed thoughts, then it’s unlikely that digging through all that bedrock would uncover any gems.

[Maeglin]

@saoirse

Now I don’t think song lyrics qualify as poetry. Not because they’re inferior; song lyrics have a different purpose, in the vast majority of cases. A song lyric is tied to its music, and I think if you’re reading a song lyric without listening to the song, you’re just not approaching the work properly.

Incidentally, most classical poetry in the epic and lyric genres were sung and whose singing was accompanied by music.