The Gatekeeping of Literature
And why we should ignore it
Quick house keeping note - if you are here for knitted animals only you can set up what you receive by clicking on the relevant sections only. This post will go into the ‘Life’ section. Deselect that section and you won’t get these posts. Visa versa don’t want poetry, deselect that section. This link takes you through the process here.
Dear Red Cabbage Heads,
A while ago I read something along the lines of (and I’m seriously paraphrasing here as I am throughout this section) bad poetry is about the self, good poetry isn’t. And I’d like to take umbrage with that.
I also read that good poetry should be economical in effort and labour. And I take umbrage in that.
I also read that poems that are easy to read and don’t require deep thought aren’t proper poems at all and we should all be scratching our heads in an effort to decipher meaning. And I also take umbrage at that.
I agree with these boys.
Gatekeeping within the literary world isn’t new. And only recently a renowned author (Bill Bryson, Times article here) said that there were too many books being self published and actually quite scathing, saying the self-publishing world has become too big with far too many books about “some anonymous person's life”. The person who came to fame by writing a memoir about his childhood, a book about an anonymous person’s life. Bryson said too many people now wrote because they “think it suddenly makes you a writer”. What he didn’t consider is how hard it is to be taken on by a conventional publisher, most of whom won’t accept you without an agent, that the publishing world is still mainly run by old cis risk averse white men.
And Bill is wrong. If you write you are a writer. If you make visual art you are an artist. If you take photos you are a photographer. You might not be any good. You might be brilliant. But … it’s not up to some other person who is not you to decide who or what you are. (Especially galling that it is a he, an old he, and a privileged he.)
I write a lot of poetry and a fair bit of prose and a lot of it is ‘I’ based. My writing helps me process my world. And unlike the implication within the bit I read, that the young write about the self mainly, and therefore to old don’t, I am old and I do and I disagree. I’ve changed since I started writing poetry aged 13. In the following 45 years I have grown and changed immeasurably and I think that’s something that is really important and interesting to explore. It’s not exclusive to the young only. It’s not something that should ever stop when you are alive. Gosh, imagine only ever knowing, understanding, thinking, or believing what your 18 year old self knew, understood, thought, or believed! I’m still learning and growing and the way I process that best is through words. If I share those words and others see something they recognise in it, that’s fab.
I also enjoy writing about ants, or Spring, or death, or birds, or flowers, or poetry itself etc. but I also enjoy writing about feelings, thoughts, my illness. To deny that writing about the ‘I’ can also be good, denies so much of life.
Poetry can be economical in labour and effort, sometimes the words drips off the pen and arrange themselves beautifully, sometimes time needs to pass for them to become clear in form, sometimes there is a struggle to wrest those words into any meaningful form, sometimes blood, sweat and tears ensue. I’ve experienced a full range to these scenarios when writing, and the same range when reading. Admittedly, now I prefer slightly easier poems to read, due mainly to my brain fog that makes concentrating difficult and interpretation hard. It doesn’t have to be economical in effort or labour to write or understand in order to be poetry.
Which brings me onto my last point. ‘Easy’ poetry is just as valid as ‘tough’ poetry. It takes away the ‘I need a classical education to understand this stuff’ shite. It’s like my father used to be. Let me explain. I was brought up on classical music almost exclusively. Aged 4 I could recognise different composers from the first few bars of their music and my father very much enjoyed testing me and showing off my talent. I was late to the pop world because of this. Many people my age are well versed in the 70s, my pop eduction began in the 80s. My father’s reaction to me exploring the pop world wasn’t good. He was a music snob. I feel those who disparage popular poetry are also snobs. I enjoy Shakespeare and Milton and Donne, alongside Oliver and Kaur and me!
Times move on. Write with a pen, or pencil, or on a typewriter or a computer. Write what makes you happy: because it makes you happy.
So at the end of my rambling, let’s agree that both is good. The economical and the intensive, the hard and the easy, and that writing about anything at all is better than writing nothing.
So, that’s all folks, til next time…. Tx
If you have enjoyed my ramblings I’d love for you to click the ❤️. It pleases the social algorithm, lets others know there’s something interesting here, as well as letting me know you liked it and giving me a little virtual hug. Without virtual hugs I have been know to get sad 😜. Shares are good too and a comment buoys me up even more 😁 A comment of what you liked, what you didn’t etc would be most gratefully appreciated.
Hear hear!! I agree!! 👍🏼
I was just fretting this morning about how self-focused my poetry is ("bad poetry is about the self, good poetry isn’t"). But then, like you, poetry is how I process my life. It has to please me first (and maybe only me) to serve its main purpose. Every time I try to write for someone else, it's just bad.