By Hal G.P. Colebatch on 1.26.07 @ 12:08AM
Surely patriotism and associated values like honor, courage and respect for tradition and heritage are still worth celebrating.
The absence of patriotic poetry that is both popular and
poetically acccomplished in the present great clash of
civilizations and cultures is odd. America has a population of 300
million people. If one in a million is a real poet of ability --
which I think is a realistic guess -- surely there should be some
patriotic, positive, affirmative ones among those 300 who can
create words that sing and inspire.
Add a possible 130 real poets from the rest of the Anglomorph
world -- Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc., plus again
some from the large English-speaking populations of India, Africa
and elsewhere, at the same ratio of poets to population and the
lack of such good patriotic poetry (there is any amount of rubbish
written) becomes even more notable.
Yet patriotism and associated values like honor, courage and
respect for tradition and heritage are surely worth celebrating --
in fact they are celebrated by most non-poetic people -- look at
the success of The Lord of The Rings.
Previous ages, from that of Homer to that of Rudyard Kipling,
thought there was nothing odd about patriotic poetry, or about the
idea that great poetry could rouse and rally and inspire a nation
is a difficult struggle.
But perhaps Kipling was the last great patriotic poet who was
also technically accomplished, with highly effective use of
imagery, metaphor, rhyme, rhythm, assonance, onomatopoeia,
symbolism and even, sometimes, understatement. He combined poetic
strength and vigor with artistic sensitivity and intelligence. It
is sometimes forgotten that he won the Nobel Prize for Literature
relatively young. Also, of course, his patriotism wasn't mindless.
He could be very bitterly critical of his country with many poems
like "Rimmon," and "The Lesson," and his earlier poetry about the
failings of British Imperialism in India could be savage indeed,
but his criticisms were made from a position of basic loyalty.
Further, his poetry was all the stronger because he was able to
face the horrors, blunders and squalor of war, failure and official
stupidity and corruption realistically and without euphemism.
In the 19th century Tennyson in Britain and Whitman in the U.S.
wrote patriotic poetry, but it was neither their best nor their
best-surviving work (though Tennyson's line from Morte
d'Arthur, "The last dim weird battle of the West," has a
certain grim echo in the mind now). Others, like Macauley and,
later, G. K. Chesterton wrote some stirring sagas, but their best
works were set in past eras, like Macauley's "Lays of Ancient
Rome," and Chesterton's "Lepanto" and "The Ballad of the White
Horse," the latter a huge, breath-taking epic telling of Alfred the
Great's victory over the Vikings.
In 20th century Britain T. S. Eliot and John Betjeman wrote some
patriotic poetry, but it was largely wry, thin, spectral stuff.
Robert Graves remarked how odd it was that so few of the major
poets of the 20th century had military experience.
Alfred Noyes, Walter De La Mare, and John Masefield were among
those who made contributions (Masefield, a former sailor, also
wrote a stirring prose account of Dunkirk), but again, these are
not their best-remembered works.
"Political" poetry of almost every description gradually became
predominantly the province of the adversary culture, though in
Britain Roy Campbell (partly the inspiration for Aragorn in The
Lord of the Rings) roared out ballads against the left like a
great wounded bull.
In America the last major patriotic poet was probably Robert
Frost, who died in 1963, and even in Frost's case his patriotic
statements were largely indirect. Jack Kerouac, who died in 1969,
was, at least towards the end of his life, patriotic in his
personal values (patriotism and Bohemianism are not necessarily
incompatible), but cannot really be called a patriotic poet. E. E.
Cummings could perhaps be called a maverick patriot, but again not
primarily a patriotic poet.
The best post-war British poet, Philip Larkin, was a patriot and
a cultural and political conservative, and some of his satires
against the left, like "Naturally the foundation will bear your
expenses," still bite, but his work is filled with defeat, failure,
grayness and nihilism. The present British Poet Laureate, Andrew
Motion, commissioned to celebrate important national events in what
it was hoped would be imperishable verse, commemorated the death of
Princess Margaret in February 2002 with a leaden prosody. At the
beginning of 2003, when war with Iraq was imminent, Motion
expressed his concern in a 31-word ode ungrammatically titled,
"Causa [sic] Belli":
They read good books and
quote, but never learn
a language other than the
scream of rocket-burn.
Our straighter talk
is drowned but ironclad:
election, money,
empire, oil and Dad.
Just the stuff to give the troops! One can imagine the British
soldiers in Basra quoting the Queen's poet to one another. Or
perhaps not? In 2004, he commemorated English World Cup footballers
in verses whose infantilism -- "O Jonny the power of your boot/And
the accurate heart-stopping route" -- might have made any poetaster
cringe.
I know less about the major U.S. poets today, but those I do
know of appear to be mainly campus-tenured radicals, producing
pale, far-off copies of the style if not the substance of Whitman,
much of it being attempts to assert a self whose lack of assertion
would more welcome, very largely unreadable and unread.
Australia's best contemporary poet, Les Murray, has taken on the
adversary culture with work like the defiantly-titled Sub-Human
Redneck Poems, and his work is, for poetry, very popular.
Murray has shown that it is still possible to write on affirmative
themes and say positive things about the best of his country's
traditional culture and values without falling into bellicose
nationalism or Jingoism, without whitewash or euphemism, and while
maintaining the highest technical standards of poetry.
The very peculiar thing is that patriotic poetry is actually
flourishing: browse the Internet and you will come across groups of
poets with collective names like "I love America," and "Support Our
Troops!"
Unfortunately, the resulting poetry, as poetry, is generally
very poor, in its way almost as bad as that of the British Poet
Laureate -- filled with cliches and bathos as well as limping,
centipede rhymes and broken-backed meters as well as spelling and
grammatical errors. It seems as if there is nobody to teach
would-be poets of patriotic or conservative inclination the
art.
I don't say this to be unkind, but in the culture-war poetry
could be a very potent weapon if the edge of the blade was sharp
and well-balanced. Criticism of what is too often produced by
well-meaning amateurs is frequently impossible and it would be
pointlessly cruel to attempt it. (For example: "The terrorists shot
and killed/My glorious brother, saw his last/With bullets he was
filled"). Sometimes, however, one comes across efforts, such as
that containing the line "Isn't forever worth fighting for?" that
have a certain resonance about them. These are a hint of what might
be done.
topics:
Satire, Books, Military, Iraq, Africa, Oil