Skip to main content

Martin Amis and Philip Larkin

Are his poems on the Richter Scale?
The August 20-21 weekend issue of the FT had an article by Martin Amis, on the poems of Philip Larkin, excerpted from his forthcoming Selected for Faber.  I am not sure why Larkin needs a Selected.  All his work is now available, and all is worth reading; nor is there so much of it to wade through, and he is the most readable of modern poets.  That being said, Amis, because of his father's close association with Larkin, is an intriguing choice of editor for such a book.  Amis makes the argument that Larkin is not so much a poet's poet, as a novelist's poet, because of his pithy lines, and his impressive imagery - though in fact effective image and metaphor, and memorable lines, have always been poetic gifts to the reader, and were only later borrowed by novelists.

Amis is I think correct to cite Larkin as the great English poet of the second half of the 20th century.  Indeed, after Hardy, and Auden, he seems undeniably major (I mean English, not British, here); no other poet has lodged whole poems in the imagination of readers in the same way, up to and including Hughes or Heaney.   Amis opens his essay with an interesting claim about literary criticism and evaluation.  He writes that "evaluative criticism is rhetorical criticism: it adds nothing to knowledge; it simply adds to the history of taste."

Well, the history of taste is a knowledge - a vital one - knowing what and why people have preferred some things to others; and Bourdieu and Foucault and Barthes have written well about it.  But what is most striking is that Amis proceeds to make claims about Larkin's work that are unexamined and cliched, as if he had forgotten his own opinion of taste and fact.  No editor can make a bad selection of Larkin's poems, because any selection would be worthwhile - but Amis has made a catastrophic error.  As he writes: "In quality, Larkin's four volumes of verse are logarithmic, like the Richter scale: they get stronger and stronger by a factor of 10."  This is nonsense, as is his choice of only one poem from The North Ship.  As my doctoral research revealed to me, Larkin's poetry did not so much improve or develop over time, as return endlessly to certain themes, tropes, and manners.  I find it also meaningless to argue that The Less Deceived is only 1/300th as good as High Windows, or even half as good.

But, the main point is, given that Amis knows, or claims to know, that evaluative claims are rhetorical, what did he think he was doing by selecting the poems with such an imbalance - rather than celebrating and recovering the many brilliant early poems - repeating the tedious claims for late flowering, that, given Larkin's sad personal history of emotional decline, do not add up to scrutiny.  While it is true that several of the very last poems are scandalously brilliant, so too are many early poems.  The truth is, Larkin is too great to be manhandled by any novelist, and this selection should have been put together by a poet-critic, with a more subtle and complex understanding of poetry.

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…