Fair Warning: This post has little to do with Dead Poet's Society. And only slightly more to do with a defense of poetry or a defense of that particular poem read at
the inauguration.
I'm not sure if any of those topics are pertinent anyway.
Especially since this post is so late—a
rabbit-with-a-pocket-watch-running-around-his-rabbit-hole late—and the
inauguration long past. Though timing may not matter. I can’t imagine too many
people are sitting around counting the drips from the faucet echoing down the
hall just waiting for a new defense of poetry (or, contrariwise, a eulogy for
poetry) to spring up on their facebook news feed. But nonetheless it’s still
kind of late, this post.
You might have missed it (I almost did) but in The Washington Post last week Alexandra Petri wrote an editorial called “Is Poetry Dead?” In her article she reacts to the inaugural poet Richard Blanco’s poem read before the nation last Monday. Leaving aside Petri’s criticism of the poem itself (which, I also thought was pretty bad, as most on-demand poems are), I’ll jump straight to her headlining question, Is poetry dead?
You might have missed it (I almost did) but in The Washington Post last week Alexandra Petri wrote an editorial called “Is Poetry Dead?” In her article she reacts to the inaugural poet Richard Blanco’s poem read before the nation last Monday. Leaving aside Petri’s criticism of the poem itself (which, I also thought was pretty bad, as most on-demand poems are), I’ll jump straight to her headlining question, Is poetry dead?
Who cares.
I’m not arguing that nobody should care about poetry. I’m
only arguing that no one should care about the Is-Poetry-Dead argument/question.
It's a ridiculous question. If we give it any credence then we
also must need to engage in many similar arguments about all kinds of other
things: Is backgammon dead? Is bocce ball dead? Are talent shows dead? Who cares.
