Still Ignorant (2)
I liked Richard Greenfield's comment below, so I'm putting it in its own entry field:
This part of the Wojahn interview was left out:
"For there have developed, in recent years, whole schools of verbalizers, nerveless, slick and often macabre; squeezers of the obvious, vulgar jostlers with words; cerebral gibberers and wild-eyed affirmers; helter-skelter impressionists and frantic improvisers; pip-squeak euphuists..."
"The trouble lies in the age itself...in the [poets'] willingness to seek refuge in words rather than transcending them. The language dictates; they are the used. The cohabitation of their images is, as it were, a mere fornication of residues. One can say that the poetry of the future will not come from such as these."
Or is it? Actually, this is by Theodore Roethke (mentioned by Wojahn as one of those major figures forgotten by young poets), from the January 1946 issue of Poetry, speaking of young poets writing within the lineage(s) of Modernism(s).
This part of the Wojahn interview was left out:
"For there have developed, in recent years, whole schools of verbalizers, nerveless, slick and often macabre; squeezers of the obvious, vulgar jostlers with words; cerebral gibberers and wild-eyed affirmers; helter-skelter impressionists and frantic improvisers; pip-squeak euphuists..."
"The trouble lies in the age itself...in the [poets'] willingness to seek refuge in words rather than transcending them. The language dictates; they are the used. The cohabitation of their images is, as it were, a mere fornication of residues. One can say that the poetry of the future will not come from such as these."
Or is it? Actually, this is by Theodore Roethke (mentioned by Wojahn as one of those major figures forgotten by young poets), from the January 1946 issue of Poetry, speaking of young poets writing within the lineage(s) of Modernism(s).
posted by Johannes at 6:22 PM
5 Comments:
Man, that's some angry rhetoric - a bit excessive in itself? "seek[ing] refuge in words rather than transcending them? if you wanted to "transcend" or move beyond language, would that not mean moving beyond or abandoning a medium whose exclusive use of words is clearly insuficient?
The rest of the quote seems to highlight the idological differences between those who subscribe to the Hoagland/Wojahn and now Roethke viewpoint, and those who (I guess) read this blog - I for one find most of the pejoritives used strangely compelling...
I like "the fornication of images". Somebody should write that essay....
Oh, and Ross, thanks for writing about my poems for the NZ journal.
Johannes
I like "the fornication of images". Somebody should write that essay....
Oh, and Ross, thanks for writing about my poems for the NZ journal.
Johannes
One thing I love about this Wojahn quote is its fussy, pedantic, fuddy-duddy (sorry, but that really is the best word) rhetorical removal from engagement with what all sorts of contemporary language, poetry and otherwise, might be about. He might as well be a character from Henry James' The Bostonians, looking on with offended, refined horror as the NYC masses roil and heave and cough up someone like Whitman. Honestly--without quite bringing in Silliman's "history" of Quietude--his tone really could be that of many 19th century American Victorian-era parlor poets. Fascinating. "Oh, this modern world--quelle horreur."
Not to say that there aren't, I'm sure, many other annoying poets all around us. But am I the only one who feels like Wojahn is himself here too much like an example of what he's attempting to decry?
Ah, sorry, I missed that it was from Roethke--that is, I'd read it, earlier, but had forgotten when I later wrote my comment. Still, in a funny way that just reinforces my point.
Post a Comment
<< Home