american political poetry in the 21st century - STIBA Malang
american political poetry in the 21st century - STIBA Malang
american political poetry in the 21st century - STIBA Malang
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
20 AMERICAN POLITICAL POETRY<br />
for a tangible sacrifice <strong>in</strong> depth—of a specific poet or hip-hop artist,<br />
specific “school” of <strong>poetry</strong>, or a def<strong>in</strong>ed period of literary history—for<br />
breadth.<br />
My framework for read<strong>in</strong>g contemporary <strong>political</strong> <strong>poetry</strong> is<br />
twofold. My first consideration is <strong>the</strong> dist<strong>in</strong>ctive rhetorical strategies<br />
and figures of voice that characterize <strong>political</strong> poems. Categoriz<strong>in</strong>g<br />
strategies of <strong>political</strong> <strong>poetry</strong> makes rhetorical strategy primary. The<br />
categories depart from previous formulations of <strong>political</strong> <strong>poetry</strong> <strong>in</strong><br />
that <strong>the</strong>y foreground <strong>the</strong> uses of language <strong>in</strong> poems—figures of voice,<br />
k<strong>in</strong>ds of narrative trajectory, types of “evidence,” tones of authority,<br />
and <strong>the</strong> types of images and rhetorical figures. I set out to see how<br />
poems act <strong>political</strong>ly. These categories, moreover, are not selfconta<strong>in</strong>ed;<br />
<strong>the</strong>re is significant overlap and slippage between strategies.<br />
In <strong>the</strong> conclusion I discuss a poem that actualizes multiple strategies.<br />
My categories are not nearly as rigid as Northrop Frye’s four narrative<br />
categories <strong>in</strong>to which any work of literature can fit. One poem may<br />
embody multiple strategies; however, I choose <strong>the</strong> one that governs<br />
<strong>the</strong> poem, that shapes its action, power, impact, and this reader’s<br />
response to it. Fur<strong>the</strong>r, <strong>the</strong>re are significant changes <strong>in</strong> strategy from<br />
poem to poem or from volume to volume <strong>in</strong> a poet’s career. For<br />
<strong>in</strong>stance, Forché abandoned her lyric-narrative, free verse <strong>poetry</strong> of<br />
The Country between Us for <strong>the</strong> stag<strong>in</strong>g of multiple voices <strong>in</strong> The<br />
Angel of History, 11 and rappers often change <strong>the</strong>ir voice, style, and<br />
persona from song to song. Most importantly, <strong>the</strong> categories are not<br />
poet-generated; <strong>in</strong>stead, I formulated <strong>the</strong>m <strong>in</strong> order to clarify and<br />
illum<strong>in</strong>ate <strong>the</strong> <strong>political</strong> work of contemporary American <strong>poetry</strong>. But to<br />
be clear, <strong>the</strong> <strong>poetry</strong> is generative of <strong>the</strong> strategies—I did not read<br />
<strong>poetry</strong> and listen to hip-hop for years with this framework <strong>in</strong> m<strong>in</strong>d;<br />
ra<strong>the</strong>r, <strong>the</strong> framework comes from years of try<strong>in</strong>g to understand <strong>the</strong><br />
<strong>political</strong> work of pr<strong>in</strong>ted <strong>poetry</strong> and hip-hop.<br />
While <strong>the</strong> categories are an emergent quality of <strong>the</strong> <strong>poetry</strong> itself, this<br />
book certa<strong>in</strong>ly reveals my preferences. Gibbons claims that <strong>the</strong><br />
“evaluation of <strong>political</strong> <strong>poetry</strong>” must always lead to <strong>the</strong> phrase<br />
“<strong>political</strong> evaluation of <strong>poetry</strong>” (297). My evaluative methods and<br />
choices are <strong>political</strong> <strong>in</strong> that I do not evaluate <strong>political</strong>ly conservative<br />
poems, and I occasionally value representative breadth above aes<strong>the</strong>tic<br />
brilliance. Explicitly conservative poems (<strong>in</strong> terms of viewpo<strong>in</strong>t, ra<strong>the</strong>r<br />
than <strong>in</strong> terms of style) are, <strong>in</strong> any case, difficult to f<strong>in</strong>d. Poets generally<br />
seem a progressive lot <strong>the</strong>se days, even if not stylistically. Fur<strong>the</strong>r,<br />
though I do not evaluate what I consider “bad” poems, I do not feel<br />
<strong>in</strong>debted to traditional Western, Anglo-European aes<strong>the</strong>tic paradigms.<br />
Giv<strong>in</strong>g space and consideration to poems that refute Western aes<strong>the</strong>tics