Skip to main content

The New Establishment

In the 1970s, there was a moment when Hamilton, Larkin, Hughes and Heaney were all still alive and knew each other - and were, arguably, the poetic establishment of these isles.  A little later, Motion, Raine, Cope and Muldoon took that position (with Heaney still there of course).  However, a seismic shift has now taken place in 2009/2010, a real changing of the guard.

For it is now that a clear new triumvirate in British poetry has emerged and been confirmed as heads above the rest of us mere mortals, in terms of gongs and honours: Duffy, Paterson, and Armitage.  These are the poets that will be - for good or ill - anthologised in most future anthologies of this period - they are this period's "key" mainstream figures; there are others, of course, but that's not the point - in the race to become household names, "national treasures", these are the ones that secured the honour.  For, observe closely - first Duffy was made Poet Laureate, then Paterson was awarded the Queen's Gold Medal, and now, in her majesty's birthday honours, yesterday, Simon Armitage was made a CBE.

In terms of who represents the new "shadow" establishment, building on the work of Graham, Bunting, Prynne, Riley, Cobbing and Mitchell, there has yet to be consensus.  I'd - off the cuff - nominate Keston Sutherland, Andrea Brady, Zoe Skoulding,Chris McCabe and Giles Goodland.  Arise!
Labels:

Comments

Tom Phillips said…
It does, indeed, seem to be true that English poetry can't bear too much celebrity - which is maybe a good thing - though the idea of Duffy, Paterson and Armitage lining up outside Buckingham Palace in their bearskin hats is rather amusing. Perhaps that should be the cover pic for one of those putative future anthologies.
Sat Jun 12, 06:29:00 pm 2010
Coirí Filíochta said…
Hey Todd, I think you must have accidently deleted my last post that said as a British-Canadian-Irish person, as you claim (or poet at least), you will be able to articulate these cultural subtleties.

If I was a parnoid person I'd think you were deliberately not publishing the comment because you only want posts on here which don't gently giggle.

Come on, you're a fellow brit and Irish comrade in Letters, don't shatter my dream you're a stand up guy, please.

chant - is the word verification
Sun Jun 13, 03:44:00 am 2010
Post a Comment

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.
Post a Comment
Read more

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 ...
15 comments
Read more

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....
3 comments
Read more