I slept badly last night, as usual . . . this time with intermittent odd dreams about trying to take violin lessons from Elizabeth Warren, who kept telling me she doesn't play the violin. Now I'm drinking my black coffee and attempting to feel enthusiastic about cramming all of my weekend chores into a single day. Tomorrow I have to drive up to Monson for a Monday class, so I don't have the option of puttering slowly through my housework. I'm looking forward to the class, though. We're going to focus on revising the group draft that the kids wrote last time. I'm also going to have them work on identifying their own writing prompts. It seems important to train them to notice writing triggers in what they read and discuss, not just depend on a teacher to prompt them. Along the way, we'll read pieces by Leo Connellan, Tracy K. Smith, and Wislawa Symborska: all poems in which the speaker is observing young people.
Lately I've been thinking about point of view in poetry--both its delights and dangers. As I think I mentioned, I recently wrote a small essay about Longfellow for my friend Teresa's email series, an essay that did not spend much time on the problematics of Longfellow's public poetry--by which I mean large narrative poems such as "Hiawatha" and "Evangeline." To a contemporary eye, both poems romanticize (at best) and racialize (at worst) topics that don't belong to the poet: an upper-middle-class white Protestant Harvard guy. A more historical critique might argue that Longfellow was a humanist who was earnestly trying to give voice to groups that were, at that time, more or less voiceless: Native Americans and the Franco population of Atlantic Canada and northern Maine.
Parallel issues exist in current work, of course. I think of poems in which a male speaker passionately idealizes/worships/desires/instructs an often younger female entity--sometimes human, sometimes metaphoric. I'm sure you're familiar with that trope: it's been a constant for millennia, and it lies at the root of some gorgeous poetry. Some gorgeous old poetry. In contemporary work, the trope clanks and sours. I think of Roethke's "Elegy for Jane," which now makes me wince. If I were a journal editor, I would find it difficult to publish such a piece, no matter how beautifully it was written. And yet, of course, the beauty would exist, despite the poet's blindness or indifference to his own subtext.