What Makes a Poet an Academic Poet?
This came up at my Tuesday night workshop. What qualities make a poet an academic poet? Is it writing in a certain style, form vs. free verse? Does it refer to the use of obscure (or obtuse) language and references? If the poet writes in an accessible style, can he/she still be considered an academic poet?
If a poet also teaches, does that make him/her an academic poet? Does that make him/her part of “the system?” Does having tenure make a difference? Or am I talking about two different things, teaching vs. writing? What if you went to college and studied poetry. Does that give you entry into that club?
When I hear people say he/she is an academic poet, it carries a negative connotation, as if academics write for a small, exclusive group of like-minded poets. Why is that? I mean, that's always been my understanding going back more than 20 years.
What is wrong with being an academic poet? Or, put another way, are "academic poets" keeping poetry alive or are they driving readers away from poetry?
Thoughts? I'm especially interested in hearing from poets who consider themselves academic poets.
If a poet also teaches, does that make him/her an academic poet? Does that make him/her part of “the system?” Does having tenure make a difference? Or am I talking about two different things, teaching vs. writing? What if you went to college and studied poetry. Does that give you entry into that club?
When I hear people say he/she is an academic poet, it carries a negative connotation, as if academics write for a small, exclusive group of like-minded poets. Why is that? I mean, that's always been my understanding going back more than 20 years.
What is wrong with being an academic poet? Or, put another way, are "academic poets" keeping poetry alive or are they driving readers away from poetry?
Thoughts? I'm especially interested in hearing from poets who consider themselves academic poets.
Comments
I feel I live in several worlds, which makes me at home in none. I have a Ph.D. in 19th century British Lit, so I understand that academic arena. But I've also spent much of my life teaching in community colleges and other schools who serve students who have certain disadvantages, and I understand their problems with academic poetry (both the academic poetry of the past and present). I want to write poems that those students can find, read, and treasure--and I want those same poems to be accepted by academics with Ph.D.s.
I don't know if I'm successful yet, but those are my thoughts.
It would be nice to write a few poems that are memorable and live on beyond us.
Is there a difference between academics with PhD's and those without? And is this a issue with other genres? Is there such a thing as an academic fiction writer?
Thanks for thoughts, Kristin.
So, it is this small, insular group of readers and writers keeping poetry alive?
"academic" poet just because she is canonized?
And @KateBB, who is "the real reading audience?" (I really want to know what you mean :)
The reason given was always that the academic poets' work was "richer," "more aesthetically rigorous," and such. But I think a lot of it was really about snobbery over degrees and ivy league institutions.
(Stories with names named from my 1986 stay at Yaddo or my judging for the Ohio Arts Council available for an SASE...a PLAIN SASenvelope!)
Today, so many poets have MFA degrees and so many poets don't teach in graduate programs or even in academia. The term doesn't seem as applicable to me now. And styles seem to have little to do with who is in and who is out of academia.
Many people mean "academic" as "high-falutin'". Creating for a learned audience, maybe.
I don't know how many poets go into their writing being choosy about who their reader is. That is a turn-off, for me.
But there is nothing wrong with being schooled in technique and craft--I very much appreciate that in poets (I'm thinking of Jason Guriel, whose Pure Product I really enjoyed, partially because of his technical ability).
I think of those musicians who play and create for other musicians--the listener has to be "in" on what they are doing to fully appreciate it.
All these divisions...it is indeed interesting.
The good thing is--there is room for every kind of writer.
Diane—I’m always interested in stories! I agree that “academic poet” label seem to fit today’s poet but the distinction is still prevalent. There is a bias toward academics, but I wonder if they created it by isolating themselves.
Hannah—None of us choose our readership. Do you think, however, that poets who publish multiple books write to please their audience or write for themselves?
Evelyn—Is it possible to be an academic poet if he/she didn’t complete an MFA or PhD program? I can think of a few names who might fit the bill.
Cindy—This is where I get hung up. Many of us go through MFA programs, but don’t consider ourselves academic poets. I lean toward being an academic poet but not an academic. For me, it comes down to the style of writing and not education, but I’m not sure. I do think the term academic poet may be outdated, however.
I hear academic poet often as a negative term and I don't know that I would call myself one probably because of that access issue. I think the lack of access and what truly makes the term academic as so many people seem to define now is if they use many references that would only be aware of if you were in academics.
A poet, perhaps, who wrote more obscure allusions to other authors, books or who primarily wrote in older forms without much modern anchor. I would consider them a bit more academic or schooled...scholarly?
I don't personally see it as a negative but yet I wouldn't call myself one.
G. Tod Slone, PhD and Founding Editor (since 1998)
The American Dissident, a Journal of Literature, Democracy & Dissidence
A 501 c3 Nonprofit Providing a Forum for Vigorous Debate, Cornerstone of Democracy
todslone@yahoo.com
http://wwwtheamericandissidentorg.blogspot.com/
www.theamericandissident.org
1837 Main St.
Concord, MA 01742
G. Tod