From time to time we talk about poetry here, and I know we have several poetry enthusiasts. I was wondering how people felt about Elizabeth Alexander's " Praise Song for the Day ." At first I didn't much like it, but after reading Mary Schmich's column today, I've had second thoughts, as you can see from my Blog entry.

Schmich is right that the general public (at least in the U.S.) doesn't appreciate poetry, especially poetry that sounds more like prose, as this one did. She stimulated me to read it again, and I did begin to like it more. Perhaps I reacted too quickly. Maybe it was her reading, which I didn't think was very vibrant. However, maybe it shouldn't have been an animated delivery, given the subject.

I am just wondering what others think.

It seems to me to tie lots of the loose ends of American aspirations together. I don't like the style, but the substance seems right on target to me.

I thought she was reading a grocery list by mistake. And about as poetic.

Am I the only one shocked that Ms Alexander's poem was only the fourth one read at a presidential inauguration? Robert Frost recited "The Gift Outright" (link) in 1961, Maya Angelou "On the Pulse at the Morning" (link) in 1993, and Miller Williams "Of History and Hope" (link) in 1997. Frost had written a special poem for the occasion but owing to his advanced age and the bright glare off the snow, he fell back on a poem he had written in 1942, and he recited that one from memory.

Here in the UK we have a Poet Laureate whose job it is to write poems to order about similar occasions.

The present incumbent, Andrew Motion, has said that the appointment has been "very, very damaging to [his] work".

quote:

Poet Laureate

we have one of those too; but I've never been able to figure out what it is exactly s/he does! link

Here in the UK we have a Poet Laureate whose job it is to write poems to order about similar occasions.

Yes, and you've had poets laureate since at least Ben Jonson was appointed by James I (VI of Scotland). Dryden was, too, as well as (probably the best known) Alfred Lord Tennyson. (I was pleased after following tsuwm's link to see that I knew a few of the poets who'd been named consultants in poetry to the LOC / poets laureate. There was some talk last week about appointing a Secretary of Art to the cabinet, but I doubt things would go that far. Maybe they can restore some of the NEA's funding.

[Corrected typo.]

This message has been edited. Last edited by: zmježd,

Well I read along as I listened to it and a number of things occurred to me. First of all I think we need to separate the performance from the poem because, frankly, the performance wasn't very good. It sounded like someone reading someone else's poem. The pauses fell in the wrong places, there was no real rhythm to it. That's why it sounded like prose.

What of the poem then.

Critical notes first.
My first feeling is that it's at least a couple of stanzas too long. It is in three line stanzas and built into the structure are frequent triptychs but the form isn't maintained so the rhythm gets broken. So shortening it and more careful attention to form would improve it.

None of that makes it a bad poem. In its favour it has some strong imagery and some strong themes.

I like, for example

A woman and her son wait for the bus.
A farmer considers the changing sky.
A teacher says, Take out your pencils. Begin.

In fact those early stanzas create a fine word portrait of America going about its business and has some nice allusion to the importance of communication.

It starts to get a bit muddled as it goes on, especially when it switches over to its ostensible purpose and becomes more political. It's still not bad but it feels like a new poem has begun with "Say it plain: that many have died for this day." The themes of the two halves don't, for me, seem to mesh.

Final word then. It's an OK poem (though not a great one) that could have been saved with a good recitation, which unfortunately it didn't get. Nevertheless it's great to see a President who is prepared to include poetry in his inauguration and for that reason, if no other, it is to be applauded.

Final, final word, if you want to hear a piece of brilliantly written non-rhyming poetry read brilliantly, try this.

Or for a great piece of rhyming poetry read brilliantly try this, though sadly it's not a great recording of it.

quote:

at of the poem then.

It's still not bad but it feels like a new poem has begun with "Say it plain: that many have died for this day." The themes of the two halves don't, for me, seem to mesh.

My reaction is that the break was intentional, suggesting the break with the past that this President represents. In the context of the overall American experience, it seems spot-on; the style and execution are another matter.

quote:

Am I the only one shocked that Ms Alexander's poem was only the fourth one read at a presidential inauguration?

Not at all, z. I was surprised by that, too. However, given those 3 poets, Alexander wasn't in bad company, that's for sure.

[Edited after realizing that I don't really know how I feel about the poem. Perhaps, like Mary Schmich in the above link, I was being too protective. The fact is, I don't think I like the poem.]

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Kalleh,

A day late and a dollar short catching up, always wonder if anyone ever sees my posts teehee.

Kalleh, so glad you wrote about this, & I enjoyed your blog entry, too. I didn't wax more protective of the poet reading the column; my feeling then & now was, hey we've got so many great established poets with terrific works for any occasion-- why not one of them? I'd rather see a heavy hitter up there making a big impression since there are so few occasions when a vast public is exposed to poetry.

Shmich's suggestion that poets aren't used to reading & big audiences struck me as a little weak. The poetry scene is rife with readings. Poetry is more like song than prose, & must be heard. And as there's such a slight publication & circulation, without readings there wouldn't be much discussion & feedback.

BobHale, I think your critique of the poem is right on. Lots of vague and derivative stuff, with a couple of sharply observed and stately stanzas sparkling out. I was turned off by "brambles and thorns; ancestors on our tonges"-- all she needed was a bone & a rock to complete the workshoppy cliche. I also object to the thud with which the beautiful 9th stanza was dropped, right after cotton and lettuce in the 10th: "glittering edifices"-- remote, with a clunky rhyme to "lettuce"; "they would then keep clean and work inside of" awkwardly prosaic.

How can I be so picky? I kid you not: every single one of the specifics I mentioned is a quote almost word for word chosen from a teacher's comments on two or three of my lesser efforts in the 1980's, which included almost identical images!

I would like to read the poem Elizabeth Alexander would write that would deserve the 5th and 9th stanza, and some other lovelies, like: "We walk into that which we cannot yet see."

As I said before I didn't think the poem was rubbish, I thought it was OK (and remember I'm British, to me "OK" is quite high praise. )

And I was really pleased to see the presence of a poet at all.

I just felt that it could have been so much better with a bit of editing or (and I know how much the word can be disliked ) workshopping.

As for the performance thing, if you aren't used to reading your work out loud it can be quite difficult. The key is to practice a lot before the reading to get the rhythm right.

I've tried in the past, purely as an exercise, to write "civic" poetry about real events and it's very hard to strike the right tone.

quote:

Originally posted by BobHale:
As I said before I didn't think the poem was rubbish, I thought it was OK (and remember I'm British, to me "OK" is quite high praise. )

Hm, I shall keep this in mind in the future . I didn't think it rubbish either but I'm not OK with a just "OK" (American style) poem used at the inaugural address.

quote:

I just felt that it could have been so much better with a bit of editing or (and I know how much the word can be disliked ) workshopping.

Exactly, now you're making my point. Why not choose a poem by you or me-- we too have some fairly decent works which with a bit of massage, etc? And you and I would surely put in enough practice to get the rhythm right! Ditto, civic poetry is tough. Just sick of poetry being the little cousin that hardly ever gets called to read and when she does there are lots of excuses. Bring on a Poet Laureate for heavens sake! Or one of our many accomplished political poets; Carolyn Forché jumps to mind.

regarding the comment "Schmich is right that the general public (at least in the U.S.) doesn't appreciate poetry, especially poetry that sounds more like prose, as this one did."

... this is hatefully condescending and inaccurate, if not racist. All people are righteously thought to appreciate freedom, equality, a good slow cooked beef, poetry, a happy child and a sunrise, among others.

What is the word for someone so awed by their own cultural elitism that they regard most other cultures as sub-standard?

quote:

What is the word for someone so awed by their own cultural elitism that they regard most other cultures as sub-standard?

A century ago it would probably have been "An Englishman". I will leave to others to decide who now wears that mantle.

quote:

What is the word for someone so awed by their own cultural elitism that they regard most other cultures as sub-standard?

Practically ever culture that has ever existed. Greeks, Romans, Vikings ...

quote:

Originally posted by arnie:

quote:

What is the word for someone so awed by their own cultural elitism that they regard most other cultures as sub-standard?

Practically ever culture that has ever existed. Greeks, Romans, Vikings ...

and British, American . . .

quote:

What is the word for someone so awed by their own cultural elitism that they regard most other cultures as sub-standard?

Practically ever culture that has ever existed. Greeks, Romans, Vikings ...
and British, American . . .

We do not consider our culttual inferiors as sub-standard. Every man is created equal -- we're just more equal than others.

I think the poem is not very good. Lousy, even. I like and appreciate great imagery and poetry that sounds like prose, and creative rhymes, too, but I feel this particular poem was just plain poorly done. The imagery didn't carry through the poem, the thing needed much more editing.

Now - the performance of the poem!? Even worse! Her reading was worse than flat. I was happy to turn off the radio and leave my car . . .and I love poetry!

It's a shame that this very public, much-listened-to forum was wasted on such drivel. At the very least they should have found someone who is good at reading/performing to handle the actual recitation.

We have some great poets around this country - and the choice they made (whoever "they" are) was, sadly, not a good representation of the talent and creativity that our country has to offer the world of poetry.

IMHO, they should have brought Ms. Angelou back for another inaugural poem.

quote:

... this is hatefully condescending and inaccurate, if not racist. All people are righteously thought to appreciate freedom, equality, a good slow cooked beef, poetry, a happy child and a sunrise, among others.

I would disagree. People have different preferences, and many don't prefer poetry. That's not hatefully condescending or racist, in my opinion; it's just fact. For example, with all the inaugurations there have only been 4 poets? Mary Schmich might not be the best reporter (indeed, she's rather mediocre, much like the poem), but one thing she's not is condescending or racist.