Skip to main content

Alien vs. Predator, review of a review

The Financial Times doesn't review poetry all that often, but it had George Pendle review Alien vs. Predator by Michael Robbins (Penguin, 2012), a book I have not yet read, and intend to.  This is a review of that review - or rather, a brief lament at so many of the assumptions and lazy claims made in it.  The main problem for me is Pendle's claim is that this collection "could take poetry to a new readership" because of its "ephemeral appreciation of pop culture" and that this pop culture poetry, that references "rap", is like "Wallace Stevens playing Xbox".  Paul Muldoon and John Ashbery and Ginsberg are cited as presiding spirits. Blogs and tweets are mentioned.  It is a "gory B-movie mash-up" with a "bouncing, colloquial firestorm of pop and poetical reference".  Sigh.

Where to begin?  Firstly, there is nothing new about this sort of pop reference in poetry.  Gargoyle has been publishing work like this for two decades.  Most slam poets have mined this.  David Trinidad in America, and David McGimpsey, in Canada, are geniuses at this combination of TV, film, and poetic reference.  Indeed, I edited a "B-poetry" anthology of pop sci-fi poems half a decade or more ago. In fact, the default position of most poets born since 1976 is to include or reference, pop culture with their poetry.  It is true that few such earlier books have been marketed with quite the brazen simplicity of this new one, which wears its sleeve on its heart, as it were.  However, from what I have seen of "new readerships" for poetry, they don't exist.  This is for two reasons: 1) the nature of poetry is that, however much it seeks to, or seems to, pander to pop culture desires, it always, if actual poetry, exceeds those pleasures and makes demands that prove resistant to mere consumerist impulse; and 2) the nature of readers is that those who love poetry inevitably seek more and deeper pleasures than mere surface pop culture skits and pastiche; and those who don't move on to books, games, TV, films, and other online entertainments, instead.

Canny readers will see these are the same coin, two sides.  What I mean to say is this - poetry can't sell out - even when it tries, it fails.  No slam poet, no comedian poet, no sex poet, no stripper poet, no movie star poet, no model poet, no rock star poet, no TV poet, has ever become truly famous, and critically loved, as a poet qua poet.  The poets who resonate, who last, who quicken us, who signify, in the end, the integrity and deep vocational labour of poetry, are those who plough their furrow, without heed of "new readership".  Poetry readers are few and far between - there is no mass market for poetry - and never will be.  It is a dream of marketing teams, and it cheapens poetry to think it might even be desirable, or possible, to have a poetry that could effortlessly appeal to millions.  Poetry is the hook that must catch a little in the throat, and whose bait is the sweetmeat of the gods.
Post a 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…