In exploring the intersection between poetry and social justice, there is a question of definition. What makes an expression political? Does it have to be explicit? How does one measure or classify what a piece of work is doing in politicized expression? underlying it all: can you define what it means to be a poet? Is there some kind of criteria It seems that as poetry moves forward, especially into realms of social justice and activism, the move is pushing back against these ideas of qualifying expression. If poetry is meant to be an open and available tool for active expression and communication, there should not be boundaries. But then again, how does it maintain faculty without some kind of expectation or criteria. It becomes a kind of paradox, trying to define or codify something that is put forth as free and organic. I think that perhaps it boils down to intentionality. Intention is something that we can search for in poetry, but not something that can necessarily be homogenized or measured to look a specific way. There are a million different ways to map intention. There are a million different ways that one can put forth their own intention, and then many different ways that it can travel forth and be interpreted. But especially when we take poetry as something political, as something that strives to communicate urgency and enact awareness and change, it seems that there necessarily must be some kind of intension that moves through.
In some ways, we must necessarily reach beyond aesthetics. But this is not to say that the page is not a tool, that the form and use of artistic techniques would undermine rather than support. One might even say that in poetry of politics is where these tools become all the more important. Perhaps a message could be conveyed more effectively through aesthetic manipulation on the page or the use of the spoken word than through a more direct discourse. ‘Tool’ becomes a word that can apply to any way that a writer chooses to use their voice.
But then, does the question of how to be a poet, or more specifically of how to be a poet of social justice, intone community? It seems difficult to fight for justice in a vacuum. This then is where we can find on aspect of poetry as social justice. It presents an opportunity for one to expose their own reality and fight for something that they may have ‘ownership’ of in some sense, but it also allows a space for support. Support through artistic expression. Solidarity is something like recognition. But where does recognition fit into a fight for justice? It cannot be synonymous with definition; it should not be synonymous with any kind of condescending patronage. It should be inclusionary.
So first, what is a poet? And second, how can you define poetry as political? In many ways, the answer for both of these questions is that there isn’t one. In a conversation I had recently with Baltimore-based artist Olu Butterfly Woods, she remarked that she didn’t quite consider herself a poet. In a way, this was reassuring to hear as one who aspires to ‘be a poet’. There is something to be said for artistic expression that defies classification but is nevertheless supported by intention.
In some ways, we must necessarily reach beyond aesthetics. But this is not to say that the page is not a tool, that the form and use of artistic techniques would undermine rather than support. One might even say that in poetry of politics is where these tools become all the more important. Perhaps a message could be conveyed more effectively through aesthetic manipulation on the page or the use of the spoken word than through a more direct discourse. ‘Tool’ becomes a word that can apply to any way that a writer chooses to use their voice.
But then, does the question of how to be a poet, or more specifically of how to be a poet of social justice, intone community? It seems difficult to fight for justice in a vacuum. This then is where we can find on aspect of poetry as social justice. It presents an opportunity for one to expose their own reality and fight for something that they may have ‘ownership’ of in some sense, but it also allows a space for support. Support through artistic expression. Solidarity is something like recognition. But where does recognition fit into a fight for justice? It cannot be synonymous with definition; it should not be synonymous with any kind of condescending patronage. It should be inclusionary.
So first, what is a poet? And second, how can you define poetry as political? In many ways, the answer for both of these questions is that there isn’t one. In a conversation I had recently with Baltimore-based artist Olu Butterfly Woods, she remarked that she didn’t quite consider herself a poet. In a way, this was reassuring to hear as one who aspires to ‘be a poet’. There is something to be said for artistic expression that defies classification but is nevertheless supported by intention.
RSS Feed
