Skip to main content

TS Eliots 2010

The TS Eliot Prize - there were apparently 123 eligible books this year.  I'd like to see the longlist of the other 113 - it would be far more refreshing.  What's set in?  Acclaim fatigue.  Heaney and Walcott, with their Nobels, don't need the attention or the money.  Either, of course, has a book good enough to win such a prize.  As do all of the other eight on this list. It seems sad the big news angle is that one of the poets is a "recovering heroin addict"!  Most poets I know are recovering from, or entering into, one addiction or another, at any given time, or facing some life crisis - as are we all.  That is the media's fault, the media that has managed to almost kill poetry dead in the UK with its stop-start attention.  Is it good that Annie Freud and Fiona Sampson and Pascale Petit - three of the best poets now writing in England - are noted?  Yes.  I think most exciting is the presence of Brian Turner here - a poet not widely known in the UK, yet.  Turner is arguably the most important "War poet" of this decade.  Of the others on the list, none is weak.  Robin Robertson is a poet's poet.  Armitage is a crowd pleaser.  Willets is a big debut.  Haynes is increasingly a formalist maestro.  All could win, if they could get from under the famous shadow.  Turner's winning the prize would be most appropriate as a summation of the 00s, if nothing else.  Walcott's White Egrets is one of the greatest late works in the high modernist style since Yeats.  Too close to call.  But - where are the Salt books?  Where is the breakthrough of the performance poets, the avant-garde, the youth wave?  In those other 113, lies the future of British poetry, unless in Britain, poetry's future is endlessly repressed, always to return as the angry margin.
Labels:

Comments

AquaMarina said…
Brian Turner read here in Manchester at Poets and Players at the Whitworth Art Gallery last year. He read from his collection 'Here Bullet' - it was a very moving experience listening to him talking about his writing and being in the army, the atmosphere was electric when he read his poems.
Fri Oct 22, 08:32:00 pm 2010
Poetry Pleases! said…
Dear Todd

It looks like yet another tedious round-up of the usual suspects to me. And people wonder why the British public has lost all interest in contemporary poetry.

Best wishes from Simon
Sat Oct 23, 10:32:00 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