Skip to main content

IQ AND THE POETS - ARE YOU SMART?

When you open your mouth to speak, are you smart?  A funny question from a great song, but also, a good one, when it comes to poets, and poetry. We tend to have a very ambiguous view of intelligence in poetry, one that I'd say is dysfunctional.  Basically, it goes like this: once you are safely dead, it no longer matters how smart you were.  For instance, Auden was smarter than Yeats, but most would still say Yeats is the finer poet; Eliot is clearly highly intelligent, but how much of Larkin's work required a high IQ?  Meanwhile, poets while alive tend to be celebrated if they are deemed intelligent: Anne Carson, Geoffrey Hill, and Jorie Graham, are all, clearly, very intelligent people, aside from their work as poets.  But who reads Marianne Moore now, or Robert Lowell, smart poets? Or, Pound?  How smart could Pound be with his madcap views?

Less intelligent poets are often more popular.  John Betjeman was not a very smart poet, per se.  What do I mean by smart?  Well, I suppose poetic intelligence is not IQ at all - I mean, what sort of IQ is deployed in a poet's work?  Complexity of manipulation of symbols, concepts, especially with regards to numbers, and science, perhaps.  Use of multiple languages, for another.  Paul Muldoon seems to have a high IQ.  Some poets don't. Does this matter?  No.  Poetic genius is not the genius of Mensa.  But if you look at IQ scores you will see that doctors, lawyers and most professionals score between 115 and 125 (superior intelligence) just below 140, which is where genius is said to begin.  Most PhDs score around 110-120.  So, in fact, it is likely that many poets would score between 100 and 125, with a few around 140, but not many.

I imagine Roddy Lumsden's is very high - he is a master of puzzles, after all.  But who knows, did Plath have a high IQ? Again, it seems a shabby sort of thing to think about, when looking at poets one loves, raising the question - what role do ideas, and ideas properly deployed and engaged with, really have to do with poems? Lionel Trilling has a book titled THE MORAL OBLIGATION TO BE INTELLIGENT - I can think of few titles more lofty, and perhaps pompous. Do we still want our poets smart?
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…