For many decades American poetry has been a private activity, written by few people and read by few people, lacking the language, rhythm, emotion, and thought that could move large numbers of people in large public settings. In response to the news about Obama's inaugural, Derek Walcott, who is about the only poet I can think of who might have pulled it off, but wasn't selected, said, "There have been great occasional poets--poets who write on occasion. Tennyson was one. I think Pope was another. Frost also." It's not an accident that Walcott couldn't name a poet born after 1874. And even Frost, who was chosen by J.F.K. to read the first inaugural poem in American history, botched the job, composing a piece of triumphalist doggerel that compared Kennedy to the Roman emperor Augustus. The eighty-six-year-old Frost kept losing his place in the winter sun's glare, the wind whipped his pages around on the podium, and finally he abandoned the effort, as if he'd never really had much conviction in it, and instead read from memory an earlier and better poem, "The Gift Outright."
There are many good reasons not to have poetry at the Inauguration. Maybe the president doesn't enjoy it. Not many people read it. And the lion-share of poetry is awful. Of course this also true of boxers, blogs, novels and magazines.But because poems are supposed to be the arena of the high-minded, bad poetry manages to come off not just as another category of bad art (like bad TV, or a bad movie) but as haughty, snobbish and elitist. It comes off as the sort of thing endorsed by people who say things like "hip-hop isn't music," or writers who condemn every practitioner of genre post-1874 as "lacking the language, rhythm, emotion and thought that could move large numbers of people in large public settings."
Look, there are many counters here. The most obvious being that someone needs to hit George off with Nas, Jay or Doom. Somehow I think George would still beef with me over whether it was poetry or not. Fair enough. But if this...
I drink Moet with Medusa, give her shotguns in hell
From the spliff that I lift and inhale..
Or this...
So now your rolling with us, like co-defendants
No phony business, should know the difference
From suprems solo, it's the style ancient as Moses scripture
It's latin kings, black kufis and white justice
Amongst us, crime invades the mind of youngsters...
Isn't poetry, but Beowulf (which I love also) is. If this...
You heard holler, broad or dude, we need food
Eat your team for sure, the streets sure seem rude.
For fam like the Partridges, pardon me for the mix-up,
Battle for Atari cartridges, put your kicks up.
...isn't poetry but Shakespeare's Sonnet 130 is, than I need to start driving a cab. Maybe I do need to start driving a cab, but for other reasons. Anyway, by George's own definition--having "language, rhythm, emotion and thought that could move large number of people in large public setting"--hip-hop is the most vibrant form of poetry out there today. Even if it doesn't, as I suspect, move George.
[MORE]
But around these parts, we don't define poetry by its popularity. There are all sorts of reasons why people don't read poetry today, some of it having to do with the art, but a lot more having to do with the broader society. It's not like people are reading books, period, these days. Which is why I thought Packer's dig at Alexander--who we will discuss in a minute--was unfair.
I don't know how long Alexander worked on that Venus Hottentot poem, but having taken a shot at poetry myself, I've got some idea. It's not the job of a critic to make an author feel good, but he could at least give the work some time and respect. Instead you get a guy scrolling through your site and comparing you to a titular heir who's about to big-footed into a Senate seat, and complaining that your work has "a specificity that's personal and unsuggestive." .A forty-six-year-old professor of African-American studies at Yale named Elizabeth Alexander has been chosen to write a poem for Obama's swearing-in. She is a friend and former neighbor of Obama's in Chicago, and her brother worked on the campaign and the transition. These alone seem like the kind of qualifications that entitle Caroline Kennedy to a Senate seat. Judging from the work posted on her Web site, Alexander writes with a fine, angry irony, in vividly concrete images, but her poems have the qualities of most contemporary American poetry--a specificity that's personal and unsuggestive, with moves toward the general that are self-consciously academic.
Look, I'm not sure having Alexander read in front of an audience of millions is the greatest idea. I frankly hate ceremonies. They're too long and people talk too much. But I'm sur that of the many awful and mind-numbling boring things that will happen on that day, Alexander's piece--whatever it is--will be a highlight. I'm going out on faith. To paraphrase one of the great poets of our era, I got five on it.
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
I don't understand poetry. I wish I did, because I think I would be a better writer if I could understand what makes one poem decent, another good, and yet another worthless doggerel.
Imagery I understand. Meter I understand. But modern poetry, while rich in imagery, doesn't have a meter that I recognize. I just can't tell for the life of me why Poem A breaks its lines there, and Poem B breaks its lines there.
TNC, how can I learn to understand?
rhythm
I went to her website. Damn, she writes just fine! Her voice is clearly resonant in places with Obama's (as were, despite their ages, Frost's & JFK's), reason enough to pick her. What's the alternative -- John Ashbery? Let her be, let her speak -- I agree, it will be a highlight of the day.
& Thanks, TNC, for posting her!
Well first don't say you don't understand poetry. You almost certainly do. Frankly, the poetry I like the best is generally pretty accessible. People trying to confuse you and shit are showing off, and often not saying anything particularly deep. I'd ask you to search through this blog. We've done a poem every Friday for a while now. Look at some of those. Buy a nice anthology. Read through it. You won't like everything--in fact you'll hate most of it. But some of it you will like. Go buy the books of those authors. Then read up on those authors, if you like their book and find out who they like and who influenced them. And so on...
I've emailed a version of this to a couple people, but I think it bears repeating:
I found Packer's implication that Alexander only got the slot because she "knows" Obama to be incorrect and insulting. First, more than a cursory glance at her credentials will show her to be eminently qualified in her own right. Second, while it surely helped that he knew who she was in the first place, would someone who understands the power of words as deeply as Obama really give THIS platform to someone if he didn't understand and believe in what she was saying?
I took two African American Literature classes from Alexander while I was an undergrad at Yale; she was a wise, caring teacher, and she has been more than willing to stay in touch with students even after they leave. In addition to that, though, and in addition to her fine writing ability (she has multiple books of poetry as well as essays; the examples on her website are indicative but not fully representative of her range), she is a consummate literary historian. She is deeply steeped in the history of African American arts and letters, looking far beyond the "usual suspects" (Hughes, Brooks, Morrison, etc.) to their more obscure predecessors, their unpublished or unknown contemporaries, and their modern "heirs" whose more challenging work remains out of the mainstream. She sends her students into archives to research their context and correspondence, in an effort to show us the vibrant, holistic experience that lies behind the words on the page. She has fantastic connections all over the literary scene, she oversees workshops, festivals, and anthologies, and she mentors young writers.
It is for these reasons that I believe her selection is a further nod to the history that has allowed Obama to be where he is, especially coming from a man as conscious of the cultural and literary past as he has shown himself to be. She is no dilettante: rather, she is someone who has earned her understanding of what this moment represents, and how it will be expressed and remembered. I am sure she will only make it better for being there.
What's the alternative -- John Ashbery?
Well, one really bold move would be to invite Adrienne Rich. That would begin to balance out Rick Warren, and I'm sure she'd be memorable. But I'm not sure she'd accept the offer.
Robert Frost, while not my favorite poet by a long shot, was one of the best and most influential writers in American letters. How dare he lose his place at the Inauguration! Jesus.
Alexander was on NPR talking about the poem yesterday, and what it's like writing a poem for An Event. She seems prepared, and thoughtful, and suitable.
No poets born after 1874?
And no hip hop recorded after 1996? Ha ha...
That Elizabeth Alexander stuff sounds pretty good, and as the other commenter said, perfectly in sync with what Obama is trying to do.
And I have to say that even though Robert Frost may have flubbed his lines at the Kennedy inaugural, who really knew that? I grew up not knowing about the flub, but knowing that Frost played an important part in the Inaugural. And that recognition - as opposed to the performance, which is basically forgotten - has been very important in keeping Frost (an often misunderstood poet who is more complex - and cynical - than given credit for) alive, and with Frost, poetry.
I still remember hearing about Maya Angelou when Clinton picked her to do his inaugural. Am I a big fan of hers? Not really. Not sure why, what I read of hers always seemed a little dopey. But I still read "I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings" and you still had Ben Stiller in Reality Bites making a joke using those very words, which means Bill Clinton gave poetry a forum, and it seeped into the popular culture, which is important.
This coming from someone who believes that Nasir Jones might very well be the greatest living American poet. Imagine if Obama let him get up there and he dropped something like this?
"Dear people of the globe
I hoped you in good health
By the time my voice hit you
I hope in all wells wit you
My mission is to bail wit you
Touch upon some real issues
Senators, Government Officials
Sit at the conference and listen
Have a Coke and a Mineral water
And say I'm reminiscing, George L. Jackson
Malcolm X last win when I'm rappin
Americans, Africans, Asians, Russians, and Arab men
Send your clergymen to journey wit Nas from Queens projects
I promise unforgettable experience
compare me wit, Imhotep get M.O. Dep
History was stolen, get in my zone
what makes the power that beef? less gangsta then Al Capone
The Rosetta stone was stolen like Chicago was
Think I'm a thug?, lets talk about some conquerors
Napoleon, Sun Tzu, Genghis Khan
Hitler, Edi Amin, I'm Attila the Hun
Let's bring back to the cat that invented the gun
From the Indians all the way to the Pentagon
I'm sittin on Capitol Hill
I'm composin this rhyme, guaranteed to make all of y'all feel
The beauty that was trapped under siege
Believe in yourself you'll be free, take it from me"
- Nas, "We March As Millions"
"Well, one really bold move would be to invite Adrienne Rich.
That would begin to balance out Rick Warren,
and I'm sure she'd be memorable.
But I'm not sure she'd accept the offer."
I agree -- on all counts. Thanx for mentioning her.
"And no hip hop recorded after 1996?"
The Doom line is from 2004-05ish.
These alone seem like the kind of qualifications that entitle Caroline Kennedy to a Senate seat.
Am I the only one who sees this and thinks: "He asked her to write him a poem. He's not giving her a Senate seat! He's not inviting her to start making policy in his administration."? Am I?
To be fair, Packer's main point isn't Alexander. It's not even poetry. It's the idea of poetry on-demand. Hence the quote from Derek Walcott about how few poets rise for a predetermined occasion. And in terms of artistic creation, that makes some sense. It's the same reason that I don't think John Williams's composition, even while played by Perlman and Yo-Yo Ma, is going to equal his other stuff-- music isn't a take-out order.
I'm still looking forward to Alexander.
I'd hate to be in Alexander's shoes, but that's because it once took me 13 years to get a haiku where I wanted it. I can't imagine I'd be able to produce anything decent in just a few weeks. At that point, I'm usually just at the stage where I hate what I've written.
So, TNC, who would you pick if it were your inaugural? I'd probably want B.H. Fairfield or David Bottoms, but that's because they speak to the particulars of my experience, which might not be the right way to go for an inaugural.
Not that it'd ever come up.
What is the goal of Packer's ridiculous commentary? It seems pointless to argue with people like this about the value of poetry. We shouldn't have to "defend" the rights of artist or the right of the President-elect to want to commemorate this national event through art. So much of the inspirational force of Obama's candidacy came through creative artists, poets, actors, etc. Alexander is a great poet and a great person (I also took a class with her) and I think Packer's personal criticism of her work further invalidates his argument about "presidential poetry" - is it the act of writing a poem for this occasion that bothers him so much? or the style and content of her particular work? Arg.
I was hoping that Obama would invite Toni Morrison to do a reading. She's not a poet but she is one of our best American writers -- and she was one of O's earliest endorers.
Kevin Drum, who is usually one of my favorite bloggers, had a post yesterday similar to Packer's-- basically hating on poetry generally, and using an excerpt from one of Alexander's poems to hate on her specifically. It's confusing to me why these people whose opinions I usually respect could be so far off on this issue. It seems to be wrapped up in some kind of anti-intellectualism mixed with disdain for symbolic activities lacking in empiricism.
But ceremony is important; symbols are important. They clarify the stories we tell ourselves about ourselves. Denying that just seems foolishly literal-minded.
I am apalled that Packer would compare Alexander and Kennedy. There is quite a difference in being asked to write a poem and being asked to serve in the Senate. And even if there weren't, Alexander is a veteran poet whereas Kennedy has no experience as an elected official.
"...Kennedy has no experience as an elected official."
Many people run for - or are appointed to - fairly high offices with no experience as elected officials. I don't recall Hillary Clinton running for any more local office (mayor, say, or town supervisor, or even State Assembleywoman), before becoming our (quite good) US Senator.