by John Ashbery
Should we really call traditional verse with its ornamentation and
elaborate description poetry?
Can the acts of nature be forced into a linguistic box and then called
poetry?
Why does one feel compelled to control nature by demarcating it with
imagery and lofty symbolism?
If it snows, it snows. We have no control over it. Forget about the
pretentious attempts to characterize it.
Is it possible to forget about ideas altogether (like I am trying to here)?
I don’t understand why poets revert back to tradition when we see the
possiblility in new forms. How can they not see the inadequacy of
tradtitional poetry as we, the New York Poets, so plainly see?
It goes back to school, where they try to teach you to abandon
creativity.
The mind is like a vast field full of life, potential, and possibility.
But they teach you not to see this and instead focus on a narrow
path of traditional bull shit. And that’s all it is: SHIT. The
only purpose it serves is to fertiliz the field and grow
more precious flowers to describe in their endless
cycle of bull shit.
by Jill E. Brown
