Skip to main content

You Just Haven't Earned It Yet, Baby

Simon Armitage is one of the better-known English poets of the last quarter-century: he is published by Faber, his poems are studied by students across the land, and he regularly appears on the BBC and in print; he's also a sometime-journalist, rock musician, and novelist.  If not exactly the Dylan Thomas or WH Auden of his generation, until Don Paterson, his unchecked rise made him the most-talked of and admired young poet of his time.  He was, in short, short-listed for the recently-vacant post of Poet Laureate, one his friend Carol Ann Duffy eventually came to occupy.

In today's Guardian magazine, Armitage has an interview with Morrissey, onetime-frontman of The Smiths, with Pixies, the most important and intelligent indie band of the 1980s.  Morrissey is the closest thing Britain has to Oscar Wilde in these dumbed-down times (Stephen Fry is an impostor) - and has something of the aphoristic caustic wit of Larkin's little-Englandism.  In short, he is a musical genius - and a genius on several levels actually - as a vocalist, lyricist, and tunesmith.  Morrissey is beloved and famous in a way that Armitage (any poet) cannot now be.  And Armitage makes this point clear - the treatment of Morrissey is that afforded to a star on the world stage.  There is something falsely modest and belittling about Armitage's fawning humility.  He is, after all, standard-bearer for a generation of poets.  Yeats did not bow to anyone.  Dylan Thomas met Chaplin as an equal.  TS Eliot and Marilyn Monroe went to the same cocktail party one night in London - and no one need assume that the Old Possum felt unequal to the task.

No, this is a very contemporary, and especially, English disease - this swooning over celebrity.  The interview could have been a meeting of minds about language and wit (Armitage is witty), and the nature of identity politics.  Instead, it devolves into rant and obsequiousness.  It also undercuts Morrissey by outing him yet again as a racist - or rather, someone who makes large statements about peoples and nations with rude squalor and ignorance.  Calling the Chinese people a "subspecies" is wrong - they are supremely civilised in countless ways.  But it is Swiftian - because it questions the nature of what being a human is, in relation to an animal - he uses a zoological term.  The Sumatran Tiger is a subspecies for example - but that does not make the Sumatran Tiger inferior to the species of big cat.  I found it sad that Armitage had to ingratiate himself to Morrissey by handing over a copy of his latest "slim volume" and his CD of his band.  Morrissey knows his work.

By the way, Armitage's statement that Morrissey is "not a poet" struck me as defensive and a bit limiting.  Certain lines, phrases, images, and moments in his songs are more memorable and effective - as words - than anything written by the current crop of English poets.  Surely, his genius is more than sub-poetic?
1 comment

Popular posts from this blog

AMERICA PSYCHO

According to the latest CBS, ABC, etc, polls, Clinton is still likely to beat Trump - by percentile odds of 66% to 33% and change. But the current popular vote is much closer, probably tied with the error of margin, around 44% each. Trump has to win more key battleground states to win, and may not - but he is ahead in Florida...

We will all know, in a week, whether we live in a world gone madder, or just relatively mad.

While it seems likely calmer heads will prevail, the recent Brexit win shows that polls can mislead, especially when one of the options is considered a bit embarrassing, rude or even racist - and Trump qualifies for these, at least.

If 42-45% of Americans admit they would vote for Trump, what does that say about the ones not so vocal? For surely, they must be there, as well. Some of the undecided will slide, and more likely they will slide to the wilder and more exciting fringe candidate. As may the libertarians.

Eyewear predicts that Trump will just about manage to win th…

DANGER, MAN

Like a crazed killer clown, whether we are thrilled, horrified, shocked, or angered (or all of these) by Donald Trump, we cannot claim to be rid of him just yet. He bestrides the world stage like a silverback gorilla (according to one British thug), or a bad analogy, but he is there, a figure, no longer of fun, but grave concern.

There has long been a history of misogynistic behaviour in American gangster culture - one thinks of the grapefruit in the face in The Public Enemy, or Sinatra throwing a woman out of his hotel room and later commenting he didn't realise there was a pool below to break her fall, or the polluted womb in Pacino'sScarface... and of course, some gangsta rap is also sexist.  American culture has a difficult way with handling the combined aspects of male power, and male privilege, that, especially in heteronormative capitalist enclaves, where money/pussy both become grabbable, reified objects and objectives (The Wolf of Wall Street for instance), an ugly fus…

OSCAR SMOSHCAR

The Oscars - Academy Awards officially - were once huge cultural events - in 1975, Frank Sinatra, Sammy Davis Jr, Shirley MacLaineandBob Hope co-hosted, for example - and Best Picture noms included The Conversation and Chinatown. Godfather Part 2 won. Last two years, movies titled Birdman and Spotlight won, and the hosts and those films are retrospectively minor, trifling. This year, some important, resonant films are up for consideration - including Hidden Figures and Moonlight, two favourites of this blog. Viola Davis and Denzel Washington will hopefully win for their sterling performances in Fences. However, La La Land - the most superficial and empty Best Picture contender since Gigi in 1959 (which beat Vertigo) - could smite all comers, and render this year's awards historically trivial, even idiotic.

The Oscars often opt for safe, optimistic films, or safe, pessimistic films, that are usually about white men (less often, white women) finding their path to doing the right thin…