Sunday, July 02, 2017
There are many people who have no value
for poetry, even some who see it as pathological. Someone wrote on
the Internet that poetry is not a cure-all for low self-esteem. In my
case it has nothing to do with my self-esteem at all. I started
writing poetry when I was 10 and was recognized for it. And I did
this in Russia, where poetry was a big thing.
There are many who claim that poetry is
useless or impractical. I see three very useful and highly practical
applications for poetry.
One is that it can allow people to
express what they feel or think about someone they care about, and as
such can help to improve families, relationships and friendships.
Another is that it can allow people to
articulate and work through their feelings and their thoughts.
And probably the most important one is
that it can communicate one's understanding and realizations to other
people and thus help all sorts of people in all sorts of ways.
Finally, in case of a good poem, you
have produced something beautiful – something as such that adds to
the civilization and the world.
Another common slander against poetry
is that it is reflection of mental illness. Of this there are two
claims: Either that it comes from personality disorders (such as
“sociopathic” or “narcissistic”) and that it comes from
chemical disorders such as bipolar or schizophrenia.
The first is not hard at all to refute.
In many places such as France, Russia and Italy, poetry is widely
read and highly regarded by normal people, which would not be the
case if it was limited to people with personality disorders. Poetry
was highly respected in World War II generation, which unlike baby
boomers has never been accused of any disorders at all. If someone is
a sociopath and does not have emotions, he would not be attracted to
a pursuit that extols feelings; he would be much more likely to
become a businessman or a lawyer. As for narcissistic disorder, it
would pathologize everyone from Gates and Rockefeller in business to
Trump and Clinton in politics. There may be narcissists in poetry;
but I do not see why there would be more narcissists in poetry than
in business, politics, media, academia or law.
In case of disorders such as epilepsy,
bipolar and schizophrenia, poetry may actually be a way to make
something good out of a bad situation. In epilepsy there is
heightened contact between right brain and left brain, which makes
available for verbal expression intuitive understanding. That can be
very useful for creative pursuits, and Dostoyevsky, who was an
epileptic, produced some of the greatest literature in history,
writing his greatest work during his epileptic fits. In bipolar and
schizophrenia, there are available for conscious use the parts of the
brain that are not normally accessed. This can likewise be very
useful for creativity; and people with these disorders can achieve
naturally the kinds of states that people in 1960s attempted to
achieve with LSD.
Another claim that I've heard – this
time from an editor in DC – is that the reason that poetry has
become big in Russia is long winters. I have news for this person.
Poetry is big in place like Lebanon and Greece that do not have long
winters. There have been excellent poets coming from warm zones such
as Iran, Mexico and Chile. Many of the better poets in America are
black.
Then there is the claim that poetry is
unrealistic. The response to that is that human world is what people
make it, and something becomes realistic when people make it so. If
there is greater demand for poetry and for arts in general, then more
people who are willing to supply such things will be able to make
ends meet. The solution is to stimulate the demand by getting more
people to value these things. There is nothing unrealistic about
this; it has taken place in the past even in the American history,
and there is no reason why it cannot happen now.
I want poetry to become as big a thing
in the English-speaking world as it is in Russia. There have been any
number of excellent English-speaking poets in the past. Probably the
biggest problem has been that poetry self-destructed. It was turned
into cold cynical abominations called post-modernism and avant-garde.
When I took a magnificent visual artist named Julia to attend an
avant-garde poetry reading in DC, she said, “This is not poetry.”
On the Internet group rec.arts.poems, I found the least poetic
mentality of anywhere I have been. These people not only produced
absolute rubbish, but they were absolutely vicious toward people
whose poetry actually was poetry.
The best way to make poetry a big thing
in the English-speaking world is to produce real poetry. Poetry that
aims for – and achieves – things such as beauty and passion. It
is to leave in the dust the post-modern and avant-garde gibberish and
to produce something beautiful. People in Russia read poetry that is
being produced in Russia. Using similar styles to produce poetry in
English should create poetry in English that people actually want to
read.
I can do the contemporary styles as
well. For the most part, I choose not to. Julia told me also after
the reading, “I hope you never write this way.” She was able to
do excellent abstract art, but she preferred for her work to reflect
classical sensibilities. I took the themes in her art and turned it
into poetry. The result was a book
(https://www.amazon.com/Poems-Julia-Mr-Ilya-Shambat/dp/150234369X)
that made me – and her – the talk of DC poetry scene.
I want to resurrect poetry. And that
means clearing away both the misconceptions about poetry and the
post-modern and avant-garde nonsense and producing poetry that aims
for – and achieves – beauty and passion.
Things that poetry is meant to be
about, and things that have been present in poetry that people
actually want to read.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home