Poetry is the only thing in my life that has made me feel close to being born again. This isn't to say that I conflate art with religious faith, which I do not. But it is my vocation; I believe in it seriously and without irony, with fervor and conviction, with struggle and also with all the innocence and honesty I can muster. I think this is why I am so sad about the haughtiness, the shrillness, the cruel rejoinders, the one-upsmanship, the put-downs. I do understand that one can speak critically--that is, one can examine and consider and weigh points of view. I have done so myself on this blog. I have opinions. I don't love most of the poems I read, nor do I love most of what's written about poetry. But the meanness: I hate that so much. And I do not feel that Dove's letter made anything better on that count.
3 comments:
I agree, Dawn, that the whole thing cheapens poetry as a life (which I think is a view of it you and I share). The meanness of Vendler's "review" renders her a bitter example of what is wrong with literary critique. Poets at all levels do struggle to put what impassions them onto the page. It is not that different whether one is a Whitman or a no-reputation poet in terms of the struggle. But what is different and maybe BETTER(?) is that the no-name poet is not usually subjected to public floggings. I hate that so much. Of course Vendler has every right to publicly voice her criticisms. Rah rah rah for our freedom of speech. But what disturbs me about her review is the vitriol. I don't know for sure of course, but it seems to me she got to a particular point in her reading where she shut down to what was there and flamed on in a mean-spirited rebuke of Dove.
In a way, I wish Dove had just let it lie and die. But I think possibly Dove felt blindsided by the nature of the review and reacted out of this feeling of shock. the whole thing reminds me of the hatefulness of the comments when Kay Ryan was chosen as US Laureate. That too got very mean-spirited and personal. Perhaps it is the culture of abuse we are in at political levels which fosters this kind of ugliness. I, for one, just want to be at my life of poetry, enjoying what I read or not. I want to think that other poets are at it too. I want to not be afraid to put my work out there lest it be denigrated and I be humiliated. I want us all to realize that poetry is art, not warfare.
So, let's keep on writing and reading and living our art daily. I promise not to trash any poet who does this honestly. It's the right thing to do. My dad used to say "if you have nothing nice to say, say nothing." I would agree to a point. If we are critiquing, keep it to the work itself. Ad hominem attacks serve no good purpose.
I guess I fail to see the meanness in Vendler's review. She is blunt, for sure. And I don't doubt, essentially, that this summation gets it right: "it seems to me she got to a particular point in her reading where she shut down to what was there and flamed on in a mean-spirited rebuke of Dove."
Vitriol? I welcomed the chance to read someone speaking her mind, as Vendler does, and be damned the consequences. As I say, there is all too little of this in American letters. The opposite of this, I think, is what has become to be defined by the term "snark," which I think refers to egregious attacks that are stylistic rather than substantive. That may not sound too clear, but I'll take vitriol any day.
The truth hurts, or it doesn't. I say that not having seen Rita Dove's letter.
I should say that I have never edited an anthology (I am curious to see Dawn's), but I have published poetry, and what I got of reviews--actually probably my one and only unbiased and objective report on the book in question--had all the earmarkings of being excessively mean-spirited and hostile, though I will not impute that to the author.
I did not wither under the attack, and neither should Dove.
Vendler's review brought to me a breath of fresh air. I am no fan of her criticism, and I won't address the points of it. But I say, touche. Good to speak your mind after all those years of pussyfooting. And even if it is pigheaded or wrongly aimed, must people have such thick skins about everything?
Buck up. It's only poetry. There is meanness all about us (on every side) in America. I just don't think Vendler's review is a particularly good example of it.
For those who are interested, here's the link to Dove's rebuttal: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/dec/22/defending-anthology/
Post a Comment