Politics in collision with Poetry...

[Doreen Peri]

Ewwwwwww, Lrod.

Stop it.

I didn't say "Rod McKuen."

I said, "Ohhhh....Rod, i love what yer doin'!"

[perezoso]

Hey its all good really, I just have a thing against Eliot the Poet King, having read about his life, his "conversion" to the Church and Crown of Merry Olde England. But I hate Shakespeare as well ( as did Bukowski.)

And about half-way through Song of Myself I thought, this freak needed a real proficient editor. Walt has some nice lines here and there, true, but I think he got carried away.....probably on those days he didn't have enough, um, twinkies

[Doreen Peri]

I think Song of Myself is way too long but agree, there are some really good lines in it.

I love Shakespeare.

I'm not much of a Bukowski fan, though.

Isn't art great? It's a smorgasborg.(sp?)

We all have different tastes.

I don't *get* the popularity of a lot of writers.

The popularity of some of the beat writers totally escapes me. Especially Burrows. Who wants to read about dope addiction for pages and pages and pages. It bored me just as much in real life.

I like what I like in all the arts. *shrug*

[perezoso]

Bukowski was not a rocket scientist to be sure, but his writing says a lot about El Lay. I really don't read much poetry anyways, and I think a lot of beat stuff is just ugly...but life for those of us that never made it into Hollywood Hills or San Francisco mansions IS ugly. The same with writers such as Kerouac and Saroyan: although I tend to favor more sophisticated writers (say Pynchon) to JK, nonetheless, the Kerouac/Saroyan voice of tragedy and melancholy is an authentic one.

[Lightning Rod]

pere and peri---

this is the thing about poets
all artists, really.

I can't think of a poet that I admire, or any writer or artist
that didn't also produce works that made me want to hold my nose.

it goes with the territory
Babe Ruth struck out many more times than he hit homers

the other side of this theory is that if you keep doing it often enough
you will finally get it right. I don't know of a valid artist that doesn't leave behind a certian amount of debris. It's the nature of sculpture.

[mnaz]

Beyond singling out poetry which is lacking in depth, style, or brevity, what affect, if any, does knowing a poet's political stance have on the perception of his/her poetry? It seems to me this poetry could never be seen in quite the same light thereafter, especially if the political stance in question tended toward the "extreme"...

[perezoso]

There was a debate similiar to this on William Gibson's board. Most of the cyber-punk types wanted to say the writings of Celine could be appreciated and enjoyed and recommended notwithstanding the fact that Celine was Vichy French and collaborated with the nazis. I find some of Celine's writing amusing (having read Mort A Credit--Death on the Installment PLan a while back) but it is difficult to really appreciate after learning about his fascist tendencies. The same I guess for Pound and Eliot.

[abcrystcats]

CONTENT versus CONTEXT ... It's possible to appreciate the beauty of a piece of writing even though you may not agree with the politics of the writer.

Is ART essentially political? I don't think so. I can't support my point of view, really, but that is my opinion.

The heading "Poetry and Politics" in Litkicks seemed peculiar to me. I quickly realized the discussion board was really "Poets in Politics". There was no poetry and all of it was politics discussed by poets.

If something is good, it's good, even if it was written by a Nazi, it's still good. I never felt guilty for driving my little VW, even though I knew they were Hitler's "cars of the people." And I wouldn't feel weird enjoying a poem by a Nazi for the same reason.

Doreen, your response to L-Rod has me LMAO. I took me a second, but then it clicked.

[mnaz]

Well Cat.... the odd thing is.... I agree. You're right. In a purely theoretical sense.

Yet knowledge alters perception, in general....

Maybe that's why I sometimes have an aversion to "learning too much" about art; particularly art which I connect with more deeply...

[perezoso]

Is it possible to separate form or content of writing or art from from the political or biological context? I don't think so. And that's not just a "marxist" viewpoint. I think people can separate it, but there is tendency to always associate the poet/artist with the creation. We look at some silly watercolors of a city and are not impressed; but when hearing they were painted by Hitler, they take on an entirely new meaning. You may view an interesting and surreal painting online, but then noting the artist, C. Manson, your interpretation of it changes, does it not. Don't we hear Wagner's music a lot differently knowing that he was an anti-semite and a model for the nazis? I think we do. So with a certain amount of information about the context our interpretation changes.

[abcrystcats]

Hitler's watercolors WERE silly, and I never much cared for Wagner anyways.

I admit that the context has altered my perception at times -- but of the artist more than the art. For instance, knowing Vincent Van Gogh was mentally ill, and that his paintings have been compared to paintings done by schizophrenics has made me realize that the mentally ill may be closer to God. If I saw Charles Manson's pictures I might react the same way. I'd still admire the picture. It wouldn't alter my admiration for it or make me tend to dismiss it.

There was a thread around here somewhere about poetry and drinking. You have to admit that disturbed people, or people in some state of altered consciousness, have typically provided most of the beautiful things the world has to offer. Do I despise an artist's work because I know he was a womanizer, or got thrown in jail a few times, or took drugs, or killed someone? No. Do I judge the work differently as having come from THAT type of person? No again.

Then why should I let my political beliefs alter my appreciation of art? Going even further (getting away from art) my disgust with Dennis Prager's political stance doesn't alter my appreciation for his religious views. I may not like HIM because of his political beliefs, but if he gave a lecture or wrote a book on one of the subjects I most admire him for, I would not hesitate to plunk my money down. And my knowledge of his right-wing sellout would not color my appreciation for what he had to say on the other topic.

[Lightning Rod]

Perezoso and Cat,

so, knowing that Pound was a Nazi or that Britany Spears is, well....Britany Spears (not to mention that she endorsed Bush) makes you think differently of their work?

If I told you that Britany's poem was written by Pound, would that make a difference?

Henry the VIII claims to have written Greensleeves. Do you believe it? It's a traditional tune.

Britany had a team of speechwriters working on that poem
And Pounds works were written by Geobels
oh yes

and Bush thinks of every word he says, yeah sure.

if Picasso signs it, does that make it art?

foolish questions.

when Manson carves a swastika on his forehead, that's art

[perezoso]

It's not that simple. When reading say Pound and noting a certain elitism or admiration for war or violence (IM thinking of that Calvacanti piece) , it's difficult not to associate that with EP's blackshirt tendencies. Didn't the New Left used to say "the personal is political"? The poem or writing or artwork reflects and embodies not only the creator but the political and historical culture that he/she is a part of. YOu are right it is pop-Freudianism to just say that well, some painting of Van Gogh represents his disordered mind (though that is probably somewhat true), ; looking at his drawings of Flemish peasants and prostitutes, the rational person sees that this was what the society of VG's time was: there was poverty and injustice and tragedy, but we recognize VG's own signature, own style of presenting these objective themes.

I do think the art of Wagner or Pound is superior to a Manson or Eminem or a Spears--im not just saying everything is relative man. However, those types of "high art" elitists like Pound Eliot and Wagner fall short of well, say a Charlie Parker or Pynchon or Kesey, who avoid the totalitarian (mostly).....AS Aristotle said the authentic and serious work of art is a pleasing and cathartic mixture of form and content; if the political content is tyrannical
(or trivial or inane) can it still be great art? I don't think so. Norman Rockwell was a great illustrator but his themes and ideas were mostly sentimental, so his art fails in terms in content.

[abcrystcats]

Well, now you're talking about people taking credit for other's peoples work. That's a totally different subject.

Did Sir Francis Bacon write all of Shakepeare's plays?

Yes, I have believed Henry VIII wrote "Greensleeves". Am I wrong?

In partial answer to your question I sometimes see things that are scoffed at by other people (who are smart, well-read, have Ph.Ds and ought to know ...) and I LOVE then. I look at this, that or the other thing and wonder why it's considered second-rate, or why it has no merit. Labels applied to things don't mean much to me.

I didn't stop reading Matthew Arnold because Zlatko told me he was "the best of the second-rate poets" ... and I still don't get it.

I didn't stop reading Anais Nin's diaries UNTIL I read a biography of her and realized I was reading fiction masquerading as nonfiction. I was warned, but the warnings didn't stop me.

And (shhhh, don't tell anyone) I actually have a Jewel CD and I sometimes play it. i like it. please don't kick me out of S-8 for this confession.

So, no. I really tend to judge things on their own merit. It gets me in trouble. A lot. But I still judge things on their own merit.

[perezoso]

Now that I know Hank the 8th--a fat, sadistic, syphillitic murderer--was responsible for the ditty Greensleeves I dislike it more than I did previously.

Most art may be viewed in Darwinian terms as territorial or manipulative in intent; not far from courtship rituals (as you learn after a few nauseating reads of Shakespearean "comedies"). Beauty is overrated. Ellington above Wagner; Raymond Chandler over Keats. Bugs Bunny over Beethoven. David Lynch above Shakespeare. Ren over Stimpy. Butthead over Beavis. Roadrunner over Wile Coyote.. Shirley over Laverne; Pepa over Salt.