Jon Stone's Mustard Poem and Michaela Clarke

Following on from a recent post, I have tasked Kingston undergrads in my Poetry Now class with trying to outdo Jon Stone's clever Mustard anagram sonnet in Best British Poetry 2011. Here's another clever version, from second-year-student poet Michaela Clarke, pictured.

Creative

What use is it, trying to be creative?

It’s as difficult as trying to motivate rice

to grow in the famine of your mind. Instead, starve: ice

cold in the pit of your imagination. Retire: cave

into your wallowing self. Or take no notice: rave

your life away. Or say, ‘C’est la vie’. React

to this challenge: this destructive race

against time to find the perfect words, and with instinctive care.

Hope to find peace in that inventive crate

in your head. To be creative is to believe: cart

away the doubt and be reckless. Take my advice: tear

it up. Even though doubt is a bond harder to break than to tie, crave,

need, embrace, nurture. Someday, you’ll find the live trace

that will make you more inspired, more ready, more reactive.

poem by Michaela Clarke; reprinted with permission of the poet.

Comments

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....

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 ...

"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...".

E Y E W E A R, THE BLOG - FREEDOM MEANS BEING UNAFRAID TO WRITE WHAT YOU THINK

Search This Blog