Skip to main content

Do we dig them too?

Sean O'Brien's review of the latest (12th) Seamus Heaney collection, Human Chain, in this weekend's Financial Times - a rather blue chip journal - opens with the statement, unqualified, that Heaney is the English-language world's greatest living poet.  The certainty of the statement (unverifiable?) took me aback, though I am sure that many poets, critics, and readers enjoy the idea of there being such a poet, and that great poet being Heaney.

I find the rectitude in some of Heaney's work to be too fine, too crafted - as if his genius had been sifted through a mesh that categorically removed the grit and rage and lust, and left only nobler particles.  He is without doubt one of the greatest.  The Greatest?  Ali had that title, but he was Ali.  I recall a time when, in the late Thirties, co-living poets would have included WB Yeats, TS Eliot, WH Auden, Dylan Thomas, Wallace Stevens and Ezra Pound, as well as HD, Marianne Moore and Robert Frost.  Now, that time is not surpassed by our great fortune, and even then, it would have been unwise to anoint one to be the greatest, though if I could have, I might have said Yeats and Eliot were tied.

Heaney, it seems to me, is among a constellation of greatness, that would have to include Derek Walcott, Anne Carson, Derek Mahon, Michael Longley, John Ashbery, Medbh McGuckian, Geoffrey Hill, and a few others.  I understand why, for many British and Irish readers, Heaney's work rears titanic - not least because he seems to follow directly from the line of Hughes - and because his rather wonderful sense of the sound and sense of poetry combines the organic rootedness of Wordsworth with the sometimes classical imaginary of Frost, or later Eliot. He is an exemplary poetic figure for our deracinated times, and seems to offer the quality control we feel might have been lost by the infamous "too many poets" there actually are.  With a lot of jabber at the gates, crown a king.

There's rather a bit too much Virgil in Heaney, for my liking - how many times can one poet descend to the underground before they should get a season ticket? - I consider Larkin a greater poet, and his myth-kitty was subtly bare.  I look forward to his letters to Monica.  By the way, Anthony Thwaite seems to me to be a great English poet, as is Dannie Absie a great Welsh poet.  Where is the advocacy for these older poets?  Effortless praise has raised the oeuvre of Heaney out of the sometimes sensible range of human discussion.  It is time to widen the casting of praise to reach more open ground.

Comments

Poetry Pleases! said…
Dear Todd

Despite being a fine poet, I think that Seamus Heaney has had an absolutely baleful effect on British poetry in general. Like Tiger Woods in golf or Roger Federer in tennis, he has swallowed all the oxygen (and the prizes!) and left precious little for anybody else. He has now become a sort of plaster saint who is beyond criticism. I often wonder whether he'd be quite such a famous Seamus had he been published by Carcanet rather than Faber & Faber who have never missed an opportunity to push and hype his work.

Best wishes from Simon
Sheenagh Pugh said…
I'll go along with you on Abse, who at his best can be unforgettably moving and also has a deep vein of humour, which I think all the best serious poets need. Louise Glück would come high up my list too..
Peter Eustace said…
"The Greatest Living .." has always annoyed me. Why not "The Greatest Dead Poet" ...??
Eliot said Dante and Shakespeare were the two greats and that no one, no one at all comes second.

Popular posts from this blog

CLIVE WILMER'S THOM GUNN SELECTED POEMS IS A MUST-READ

THAT HANDSOME MAN  A PERSONAL BRIEF REVIEW BY TODD SWIFT I could lie and claim Larkin, Yeats , or Dylan Thomas most excited me as a young poet, or even Pound or FT Prince - but the truth be told, it was Thom Gunn I first and most loved when I was young. Precisely, I fell in love with his first two collections, written under a formalist, Elizabethan ( Fulke Greville mainly), Yvor Winters triad of influences - uniquely fused with an interest in homerotica, pop culture ( Brando, Elvis , motorcycles). His best poem 'On The Move' is oddly presented here without the quote that began it usually - Man, you gotta go - which I loved. Gunn was - and remains - so thrilling, to me at least, because so odd. His elegance, poise, and intelligence is all about display, about surface - but the surface of a panther, who ripples with strength beneath the skin. With Gunn, you dressed to have sex. Or so I thought.  Because I was queer (I maintain the right to lay claim to that

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?

"I have crossed oceans of time to find you..."

In terms of great films about, and of, love, we have Vertigo, In The Mood for Love , and Casablanca , Doctor Zhivago , An Officer and a Gentleman , at the apex; as well as odder, more troubling versions, such as Sophie's Choice and  Silence of the Lambs .  I think my favourite remains Bram Stoker's Dracula , with the great immortal line "I have crossed oceans of time to find you...".