A second
question those of us participating in the retreat have been asked to consider
is the following:
What underlying ethical, social,
and political values inform our practices as poets and poetry teachers? How can
we pursue our knowledge of such values?
How to make
sense of an art form that encompasses not only the politics of Pablo Neruda
& Ho Chi Minh, but Ezra Pound? That was in many respects the first medium,
the first profession, to embrace the lives of gays & lesbians, from Sappho
to Whitman to Stein & yet also included a professional homophobe like Eli
Siegel? The current head of the NEA is a poet, a registered Republican, who
just in the past week talked to Terry Gross on Fresh
Air of the importance of bringing art to the masses in a way that does not
condescend to them while at the same time promoting a massive tour of plays by
a British writer of 400 years ago in what must be the most condescending spoon
feeding of Kulchur in the 37-year history of that agency, funded by no less
than the Defense Department. William Logan, the closest thing there is to a
house poet & poet-critic at The New
Criterion, the most programmatically reactionary cultural magazine in the
language, has work in the September 22nd issue of The Nation.
The form of
a retreat itself, an internal discussion of peers behind closed doors, a mode
most closely associated in 2003 with the World Trade Organization &
parallel international organizations, is itself an interesting albeit
problematic form through which to contemplate such things. Poets have been
known to appreciate irony & I hope we appreciate that one.
But what
really strikes me about these questions is the degree to which the one above
could have been asked in exactly this format in 1970. It is perhaps the most
depressing aspect – or should I say prospect – of this retreat. There is not
one thing in this list of questions that could not have been asked as easily –
indeed far more easily – 30+ years ago. More than anything this tells me (1)
that either there are no good answers
or, worse, (2) that whatever answers poets have given to date have been shown
to be inadequate. Why else keep beating your forehead against the same brick
wall?
I think it
is clear that poetic form is morally neutral – it is as available to the
communist George Oppen as it is to the British spy in
In that
sense, it is impossible to imagine the trope of Logan’s mother “a brunette,
hurried in her cloth coat / through postwar Sundays, which fell / as they were
meant to fall, too slowly” as intending anything other than the guffaw it
provokes, a Bulwer-Lyttonism
of the spirit, as though film director Ed Wood had reincarnated as a poet. It’s
funny precisely because it doesn’t mean to be.
There is an
entire worldview tucked into a phrase like as
they were meant to fall. Meaning is positioned, but agency is invisible.
Right order is something that existed in the past. The narrative, by
definition, must be one of decline.
What are
the values in a specific act of writing? Is
My point is
that any attempt to correlate poetry & value, especially political value,
ethics, appears headed for a complete garble. We do the polis in diff’rent voices.