 |
 |
STIMULUS AND THE READER
Apart from the Internet, those people reading poetry in poetry books are minimal. Reduced sales in book shops and the offloading/downsizing of publications by major publishing houses attests to this.
As the Internet has one of the highest volumes of web sites after sex, it means that the general populace, teachers, institutions, organisations, universities and lovers of poetry in general can claim that it is still popular, that is thrives; that it is an art form worthy of transition from one media to the next.
Therefore, the reader benefits from being able to download as much poetry, to their preference as they like. However, it appears that most readers of poetry are writers of poetry.
Where does this leave the poet, trying to get published in book form? One might say, struggling in the silt water with a devious mind trying to surface for some recognition.
It has been my experience as an arts administrator running writing programs and competitions that this is especially true. Those poets struggling for recognition are beginning to break the rules and general guidelines of the past with multiple submissions of the same poem to various competitions, regardless of exposure, regardless of the time frame between competitions and regardless of their contemporaries. This heavy competition breeds, unfortunately, the malcontent, especially amongst administrators and committees of writing organisations, who are themselves ‘writers.’ And who are quite, often, foregoing their own writing time and success to work for the community good.
One might ask, is it all worth it?
Perhaps, this is occurring because of the diminishing print publication market.
Is it a big deal?
No! It isn’t to the general public, when you get the TV/video person saying, ‘poetry, do they still write that stuff?’
Maybe, there are alternatives to the problem.
The future of poetry lies with the young. If it is disappearing in public, private schools or at tertiary level, there should be some concerted effort to get poetry back into the curriculum. The young reader of poetry, studying the art form, should be taught that poetry works on all levels. There is no such thing as bad poetry - only people/writers misinformed of what poetry is. In our privileged society, as academics (as many on this site are) we should not be slapping our sides and laughing at the uneducated, misinformed writer of poetry. This is reductionism at its best. The purveyors of knowledge, the gatekeepers, those hierarchal powers of poetry can do well to take stock at their own readership/market disappearing. Those theorists and linguists, who have to justify their own existence, in their own genre of poetry criticism, may need to take a closer look at, not how we write poetry, but why!
Every poet should endeavour to elevate the status of the reader, because the new, or even old reader of poetry is already diminished by lack of knowledge of the art form.
· The reader of poetry needs to know/understand that poetry works on all levels. ie. The art has beginners, intermediates and published poets.
· The reader of poetry need not feel diminished by liking the classics.
· The reader/lover of poetry needs to be valued as the senior citizen – writing words in a book for the very first time, taking those words to the grave as “poetry.”
· The young reader of poetry could benefit if new century post-modernists could educate them to the point where we have gone beyond Shakespeare, Byron and Banjo Paterson.
· The reader of poetry for the future has to be young.
· The reader of poetry needs accessibility.
· The reader of poetry has to increase through education systems.
Poetry is being written today, with the reader left behind.
Helen Hagemann © 2001