... Jeanpaul: Stop! Leave Ancient Greece, Mythology & Buddhism Out of It!: Guest Blog* by Jeanpaul Ferro.
Some of us have spent decades living with these things. Of course, I am an interested party, having published this time last year a poem about Orpheus and Eurydice. People should write about what they are moved to write about. Writing about what you see out your window may not get you anything better than journalism.
I think it's him, too. I also agree with your comment about journalism, Frank.
ReplyDeleteHere's what I posted on that comment thread over there, which I doubt will get approved. I hope you don't mind my re-posting it here, as a safety:
•
Wow. Quite a bit of vitriol.
You're right about one thing: dropping an allusion into your poem doesn't make one smarter, or more enlightened. Neither does name-dropping. And most poems that are purely philosophical—of which there are indeed many—could have been written as essays, and probably should have been.
But you're oversimplifying the reality. Not to mention risking throwing out the baby with the bathwater. I sense the real objection here is about superficial name-dropping, or mythos-dropping if you will. It is an objection against superficial allusions that puff up the poet's ego, which is I agree a very legitimate objection.
But not every poem that mentions a Greek, philosophical, or Buddhist—or Christian, or Islamic, or Judaic—image or idea, is as you say. A great deal of such poetry is genuine and alive to the beauty of the world. In fact, that's one source of inspiration for such poetry. For those poets who are genuinely dedicated to personal development, of whatever path, and who also happen to be poets, there is a depth and sincerity that they seek in their writing that is the opposite of superficial name-dropping.
One might also mention the haiku tradition, which observes the world around one with great depth and awareness. And which, BTW, happens to be at least partially Zen-influenced, from its very origins.
As for this comment: There are not a lot of writers who are trying to reflect modern society within their writing now. What, you haven't been reading any modern fiction and poetry lately? That's pretty much what the vast mainstream of fiction and poetry ONLY do these days: reflect modern society, portray the poet/writer's place in that society, etc. I have no idea where one could get an idea like this; your reading sample must have been unusually selective.
Nothing is more narcissistic than the mainstream post-confessional lyric. The vast majority of published poetry that uses the personality-ego "I" in it these days, which is the dominant voice in the mainstream and has been for decades, is a poetry of narcissism, even solipsism at its worst. The endless psychological self-regard. If anything, we need LESS poems that "reflect modern society" and all the whiny voices that inhabit it. Just as urban poetry dominates what is published these days, the poetry of self-regard, self-conscious of its audience in the extreme, is the mainstream, NOT the exception. So, your cri de couer strikes one as merely demanding more of the same.
Finally, the reason people cite myths is that they're archetypes. The old stories keep recurring in the new tellings, because they are archetypal human stories, that are constantly renewed and revitalized. The love-triangle is a story that is renewed each generation; granted, one need not cite Greek names to tell that story, but the story elements themselves endure.
So, your objections have a point. But they also miss the mark by a mile.
Actually I did approve your comment a few minutes ago and was a little surprised to stop by here and see that you didn't expect us to.It just takes a while because I'm the only one who receives comments, and like Frank, I sent most of this glorious day outside. No problem with a little disagreement as long as it's well expressed and not mean spirited. I would like to point out, however, that the post you commented on was a Guest Blog. That is, the views expressed are necessarily those of the zine, blah, blah, blah...
ReplyDeleteThanks, Nannette. Thanks again to Frank, as always.
ReplyDeleteBig whoops there. Should have been, "the views expressed are not necessarily those of the zine...
ReplyDeleteIn this case it's important to note because if he were speaking for the zine it might imply something about what we look for in submissions.
All points well taken! My objections were more along the lines of allusions being dropped into poems vs. only Greek Mythology, Buddhism, etc. These were simply used as examples.
ReplyDeleteAnd I was also referring to poems that simply live in some old 2,000 year old world without any connection to anything else outside of that realm.
And I don't see anything objectionable in any of the comments here. Blogs are open to debate and so are opinions. I certainly don't think my opinions are gospel or infallible. Debate is wonderful! We need more of it.
Cheers,
Jeanpaul Ferro