Skip to main content

Poem by Heather Phillipson

Eyewear is very glad to feature a poem by the poet, musician and visual artist Heather Phillipson this Friday.

Phillipson (pictured) is one of the best of an emergent generation of younger poets now redefining poetry in London and the UK more generally, and, as such, Faber will be publishing her pamphlet later this year, along with three other younger poets. She has been Artist-in-Residence at the London College of Fashion. She was awarded the Michael Donaghy Poetry Prize from Birkbeck College in 2007, received an Eric Gregory Award in 2008, and won a Faber New Poets Award in 2009.

Forthcoming publications include Stop Sharpening Your Knives 3, S/S/Y/K/3 (Eggbox, 2009), City State: The New London Poetry (Penned in the the Margins, 2009) and Voice Recognition: 21 Poets for the 21st Century (Bloodaxe, 2009).

German Phenomenology Makes Me Want to Strip and Run through North London

Page seven – I’ve had enough of Being and Time
and of clothing. Many streakers seek quieter locations
and Marlborough Road’s unreasonably quiet tonight.
If it were winter I’d be intellectual, but it’s Tuesday
and I’d rather be outside, naked, than learned –
rather lap the tarmac escarpment of Archway Roundabout
wearing only a rucksack. It might come in useful.
I can’t read any more of Heidegger’s dasein-diction,
I say as I jettison my slippers.

When I speak of my ambition
it is not to be a Doctor of Letters
or to marry Friedrich Nietzsche, it turns out,
or to think better.
It is to give up this fashion for dressing.
It is to drop my robe on the communal stairs
and open the front door onto the commuter hour,
my neighbour, his Labrador, and say nothing
of what I know or do not know, except what my body announces.

poem by Heather Phillipson; reprinted with permission of the author
This poem was originally published by Magma, and appears at ther site as well.

Comments

Janet Vickers said…
How fresh and how yes. Lovely.
Andrew Shields said…
I love the title of this poem! And the poem lives up to it!
Anonymous said…
I know just the feeling..am sitting here blogging in the buff...could be a title for a collection?
Enri Zoltz said…
Really nice piece. I love any naked truth.

Popular posts from this blog

A  poem for my mother, July 15 When she was dying And I was in a different country I dreamt I was there with her Flying over the ocean very quickly, And arriving in the room like a dream And I was a dream, but the meaning was more Than a dream has – it was a moving over time And land, over water, to get love across Fast enough, to be there, before she died, To lean over the small, huddled figure, In the dark, and without bothering her Even with apologies, and be a kiss in the air, A dream of a kiss, or even less, the thought of one, And when I woke, none of this had happened, She was still far distant, and we had not spoken.

Poetry vs. Literature

Poetry is, of course, a part of literature. But, increasingly, over the 20th century, it has become marginalised - and, famously, has less of an audience than "before". I think that, when one considers the sort of criticism levelled against Seamus Heaney and "mainstream poetry", by poet-critics like Jeffrey Side , one ought to see the wider context for poetry in the "Anglo-Saxon" world. This phrase was used by one of the UK's leading literary cultural figures, in a private conversation recently, when they spoke eloquently about the supremacy of "Anglo-Saxon novels" and their impressive command of narrative. My heart sank as I listened, for what became clear to me, in a flash, is that nothing has changed since Victorian England (for some in the literary establishment). Britain (now allied to America) and the English language with its marvellous fiction machine, still rule the waves. I personally find this an uncomfortable position - but when ...

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....