Skip to main content

Cap In Hand

Should poets in Britain go cap in hand to the government? A.S. Byatt, interviewed on the BBC yesterday, didn't think the Poetry Book Society, described by Carol Ann Duffy as the sacred core of British poetry life, was doing the job the Arts Council wanted - to bring poetry to young and different audiences, using new media.  So - a clash of requirements.  That's a smaller debate, for me, than the wider issue that has arisen, as British poets rise up in anger at having money withdrawn from (some) of their societies and publishers.  The wider issue is one of poetry's moral compass.  Where is it going, and for what?

Now, I think that poems need to be about verbal music first, and message second; and political poetry only works if it is written firstly as art (as Yeats or Auden did).  I am not talking about poets having to write poems about global warming.  But I do think they need to become radically less self-directed at this stage in our history as a species on the brink of destroying Gaia.  Bluntly, poets tend to exaggerate their wider significance.  Very few poems are good enough to justify the ego explosions that occur when poets meet in large groups.  I am a poet.  I know that insecurity, sensitivity, and confidence mix strangely and necessarily for most poets; and it is a very challenging role, because society is moving from an interest in the poem to computer games.  The gaming industry is worth £19 billion a year in America alone; it doesn't require government spending, because people want it.

This to me is the crux of hypocrisy that mainstream UK poetry needs to extricate itself from - it cannot continue to play it both ways, by claiming poetry is now more popular and relevant than ever but also prone to collapse without government subsidies.  The truth is that the only poets who sell are those marketed by larger presses, and studied at school, where their poems are on exams; also, a few poets get on radio and the telly.  The rest of the hundreds of published UK poets sell only a few hundred copies to family, friends, and a small coterie of like-minded poets.  There are only a few thousand active poetry readers in the UK.  Poets sell books mostly at poetry readings.

There is no huge demand for what we do.  But, rather than this humbling poets into assuming modesty, it seems to be galvanising poets to try and assert ever-more-unlikely claims about their importance.  It is true that poems of genius are what I love most of all, and they equal the greatest music, painting, and film. But this cannot justify the money that poets now want showered on them in a time of austerity.  Poets, finally, need to look outward to their larger societies, not inwards to their own needs and interests.  The world is poised, literally, on the brink of environmental destruction.  The West is facing years of financial decline.  Millions of young people are unemployed.  The old are treated like rubbish in care homes.  One in five children cannot read in London.  A billion people go to sleep hungry every night.

In such a world, I cannot expect money from any government for my personal decision to practice an elite art form - the tennis or yachting of the literary world - and if it does come, I am grateful for it.  To demand more is to lose sight of the world beyond our words.

Popular posts from this blog


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…


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…


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…