“[I]f you look at the dozens and hundreds of anthologies of contemporary USA poetry published over the past two decades, you’ll find compilations of poems or poets gathered and linked to represent many categories of differentiation and distinction,
with one exception. There are no anthologies based on class.”
This powerful observation comes from today’s installment of Bill Knott’s blog. [Note: The large break is in Knott’s original post]
He goes on to wonder specifically no “anthology of rich poets, poets who came from a background of wealth and privilege.” This is one of Knott’s favorite axes to grind, and I think it would make terrific fodder for an eye-opening Ph.D thesis. And imagine an anthology that grouped poets this way (using today’s statistics; statistics would have to be adjusted to reflect income distribution during the poets’ childhoods):
Rich Poets: $500,000+
Upper Middle Class Poets: $100,000-499,000
Lower Middle Class Poets: $35,000-99,000
Working Class Poets: $16,000-34,000
Working Poor Poets: Under $15,900
I wonder what commonalities and dissonances we might find within and between groups. Might it not accomplish what Knott would like to do? That is, wipe out once and for all the notion and art is somehow separate from life?
Or would it reinforce the idea that only art is completely egalitarian—the Reginald Shepherd notion that art can free one from “identity”—race, sexual preference, class, etc.? Would we see a kind of intellectual mobility that is missing from our everyday, class-bound lives?
Now there’s a grand project for the Library of America!
It’s funny how complicated something like this is — I was going to say “for adults,” but I suppose even children would have a hard time not seeing their names attached to their creations.<BR/><BR/>You mention the “taint of reputation,” and that’s part of it, of course; but even names themselves have a way of affecting how we approach a new work. Maybe Brian was onto something with his “variegated
William, I once had the notion to publish a little magazine without contributor names. The names would be listed in the subsequent issue. I was told it would create copyright havoc, but I still like the idea. Maybe do the thing online and "hide" the names so that readers would have to click to see them? I don’t know. But I do like the notion of removing all taint of reputation from the naked
Brian, perhaps you should consider “bearded, esoteric loon.” It works for me.
Regular Social Security.<BR/>-<BR/>Given that the employments I had<BR/>where not high-scale, and that I<BR/>had to start early, I now get <BR/>less than $900 monthly, over a<BR/>third of which is for renting the<BR/>apartment I’m in, I get by okay.<BR/>Not having a vehicle or a TV helps.<BR/>If I could stop myself from buying<BR/>certain services I don’t really<BR/>need, that would help more;
Like any anthology, one that grouped poets by class would soar or suffer according to the talents and limitations of the anthologist, and the motives and assumptions he or she has going in. And of course, class and how we perceive and identify with it is only one type of baggage we carry; our basic fears and limitations are common to all. Poems that shine light on them are a blessing, no matter
The pool for poetry would certainly expand if we made a category for non-working people. The gang that runs this joint has created a lot of them. How do you get by, Brian?
I might post a response to this,<BR/>but I will say here/ I do not fit<BR/>in any of the above categories as<BR/>they are defined. I am a non-<BR/>working poor poet/ because the <BR/>state of my health forced me to<BR/>stop working 5 days before I <BR/>turned 62.