Simplicity in Poetry

[Leanne]

I think there’s been a great denial of the kinds of poets and poetries that could speak to a lot more people. Poetry has been kind of hoarded inside the schools, inside the universities. The activity of writing about poems and poetry--the activity of making it available and accessible--became the property of scholars and academics and became dependent on a certain kind of academic training, education, class background. (Adrienne Rich)

I love education, and loathe academia. Education is not a privilege for the pretentious, and neither is poetry. Almost everything I learned about poetry in 9 years at university was good only until I stopped writing for the pleasure of academics and stepped out into the world -- and yet, if I had not learned those academic skills I wouldn't be in a position to know which were valuable and which were only there to perpetuate institutionalised poetry.

The higher degrees in writing are excellent for discipline and challenging yourself to write in ways you would otherwise not consider. There is no "I really like cliches therefore I'm going to keep writing with them" if you want to get your piece of paper. Unfortunately, there is a particular group of academics that has made itself into a cliche, to the point where it's easy to predict the kind of writing that will be published in places like The New Yorker (that's if they DID publish emerging poets like they say they do, but of course they don't unless they're mentored by someone who doesn't represent a risk).

The full article from whence Madame Rich's quote was drawn is called Academia vs. Poetry: How the Gatekeepers of Contemporary Literature might be Killing It by Rosemarie Dombrowski, PhD. It's well worth a read whether you agree with it or not. She does not argue for simplicity, but neither does she advocate complexity: she advocates less wanking, more intercourse.