Odds and Ends Essays, Blogs, Internet Discussions, Interviews and Miscellany

Essays
The following essays contain material that is duplicated between them. This is because the essays were all drawn
from my PhD thesis, and as a result, they rehearse many arguments and polemical positions that my thesis contains.
And as each essay was intended as an apologia for my various ideas about poetry, each essay was tailored to present
this apologia to different readerships, hence the various duplications.
Poetry in Turbulence (Or How to Enjoy Poetry without Really Understanding It)
First published in The Argotist Online
2005
To many non-specialists of literature, poetry is deeply unsatisfying. There are several reasons for this, but two in
particular come to mind. The first is that most poetry is overly descriptive, leaving little to the imagination; the
second is that the rest of it is abstruse. This presents the non-specialist with a dilemma: either to persevere in the
thankless task of attempting to unravel (what must be to them) an increasingly unrewarding literary crossword; or
to make do with the superficialities of descriptive verse and the resultant ennui. Both projects would presumably
confirm any prejudices that these readers entertained about the relevancy of poetry to their lives. In circumstances
such as these, I think it would be appropriate to introduce a method of poetic appreciation, which, although
admittedly unorthodox, would encourage the non-specialist to revise any negative opinion of poetry held.
The first thing that has to be drawn to the attention of these readers is the fact that it is up to them to come to an
understanding of the poem. The poem is unlikely to facilitate such a response without this active participation on
their part. The main thing to point out to them is that valuable time and effort would be wasted in attempting to look
for the poem’s intended meaning. Rather, a more helpful course would be to encourage readers to actively engage in
their own particular and personal exegetical responses to the text-however idiosyncratic or perverse the results of
this may appear.
It is of minor importance whether the commonly received meaning of the poem is discerned by the reader or not, as
the ultimate aim of such a personal response is to enhance the enjoyment value of the work as opposed to engaging
in a scholastic deciphering of its hermetic aspects. What the poem is meant to mean (either from a textual or
authorial viewpoint) should not be of paramount concern for readers wishing to gain satisfaction and enjoyment
from the work. On the contrary, surface meaning can sometimes be more of a disadvantage than a blessing, as in such
instances the poem disallows the mind an active part in the creative process that the enjoyment of literature requires.
Incidentally, the more specific and apparent the surface meaning of a poem is, the harder it is to identify with. Keats
came to a similar conclusion when he said that a poem ‘should surprise by a fine excess and not by singularity… it
should strike the reader as a wording of his own highest thoughts, and appear almost a remembrance’ (letter to John
Taylor, 27 February 1818).
However, there are poets who disagree: aiming to delight by pure observational descriptive accuracy. They use
poetry in the same way a novice art student uses a pencil to draw a still life. A satisfying poem, on the other hand, is
one that enters the readers’ minds and turns the key to their imagination. It enables them to find meanings and
emotions that hold a particular significance and relevance to their experience because of the process of filtration via
memory. A poem that fails to satisfy does the opposite: it tells you what it is about, the emotions you are to feel and
the understanding you are to have.
Each reader should be permitted the fundamental privilege of formulating a meaning which would (for that reader)
be the quintessence of the poem’s significance. The poem, in and of itself, is of little consequence other than as a
cipher for this practice to occur. The words and images of a poem should be looked upon as devices that enable
readers to recall their own experiences, reflect present circumstances, and anticipate future desires. Each word
should be twisted, stretched, moulded and free-associated from in order to signify anything the reader wants them
to signify. By doing this, the reader becomes, in effect, the composer of the poem, and the definer of its limits. Such an
approach to reading poetry, if widely understood and accepted, could possibly restore poetry to its status as an
important and popular art form.
7