March 28th, 2011 / 4:20 pm
Random & Web Hype

Hot, Young Poets!

I find it sometimes necessary, when recommending a poet’s work to a non-poetry reader to say, “I don’t read poetry, but…” and then plug whomever it may be.  This is a half-true statement. I don’t read much poetry. I read a little and the little that I read (Berryman, Lasky, Flynn, Nelson) I absolutely love. But poetry, as a whole, seems to exist for poets. It’s something that poets read either in the hopes of being better poets or because they have a nice time reading it. I don’t know anyone who reads poetry who doesn’t also write it.  True, there are exceptions. A lot of fiction and non-fiction writers read a little poetry (like myself) but for the most part, poetry is consumed by poets.

Which leads me to wonder: Do any poets read Oprah Magazine? And do any poets wear very simple, straightforward $341 shirts? Does this seem like an irrelevant question? And how could it not?

Oprah Magazine just published a fashion shoot in which young female poets are dressed up in very nice clothes. To make it obvious that they were poets, their words were scattered artfully around the image. Supposedly, this is part of Oprah’s “National Poetry Month” Issue, the Oprah empire’s attempt to get your mom to read some poetry, which I feel is a worthy, albeit fraught, endeavor. If every non-poetry reader (or non-poet) found at least one poet whose voice they liked, and if we all bought a book by that poet, I feel the effect could be tremendously positive. But is that what is really going on here?

Here we see full-color spreads of the young, female poets, their words lying disjointed around them. Some of these poets have not yet even published a collection, or if they do, they’re not mentioned in the little blurbs accompanying the shots. One is Anna Moschovakis, an editor at Ugly Duckling. One is modeling a style deemed ‘Perfectly Punk,’ and looking up at a line of (her own?) poetry that references a studded belt.

And it’s just a little depressing, somehow. Is fashion really a good way to sell poetry, to get the O-reading masses to read some poems? Or is this, as I suspect, just fashion for fashion’s sake, and the poetesses is just the unlikely vehicle for the clothing the needs advertising?

I really do want your mom to read poetry. I want your dad to read it to. But really, I will settle for them reading a book of any kind. Sadly, I think this fashion shoot  is going to sell a lot more $995 jackets designed by ‘Haute Hippie.’ (I am depressed that I now know a clothing designer named ‘Haute Hippie’ even exists.)

Tags:

44 Comments

  1. Anonymous

      Who’s on the cover of O this month?

  2. Frank Tas

      This girl I was seeing for a while made me go to the Tyra show with her a year or so back. The hype man was this chubby gaysian who had us clap and dance around to that Black Eyed Peas’ song, Tonight’s Gonna Be a Good Night, and Tyra gave me and all of the audience members a free tanning gun, an underarmour girdle, and a kit we could use to have a perfume designed based on our DNA.

      I get the same really ticklish confused feeling I got back then when I read this.

  3. Sean

      Sarah doesn’t look comfortable in that photo, and she forgot to say her poetry is also airbrushed, er, photo-shopped.

      Seems pretty harmless by Oprah. I don’t think anyone is going to buy poetry because of this, though. But Oprah is so often openly affected. She has to remind us all SHE reads poetry, blah, blah. She’s a big reminder. Did she mention the refrigerator magnets where ANYONE can make poetry? That’s really cool, because the poem can hold up a drawing by your kid or a pizza menu. It is touching and practical and elicits your own artistic side. You can go in your back yard and get brown grass and shove it beneath the magnets and make it all naturalistic and shit. Also you can make YOUR own poem. It is yours. In magnets.

      I think O’s book club sold books.

      Strained smiles are a sort of poetry.

      I sort of figure Oprah is like a large, low cloud.

      Her ‘boyfriend’ (not really sure his status–it’s always an enigma) is a Ball State grad, I shit you not.

      Sarah looks like she is sitting on a bowling ball.

      At least we don’t have to read O’s poetry. We don’t, right? She didn’t include her own poetry, did she?

      Did she include the poet’s poetry? Is that in the piece, poems?

      Now that would be a concept. Poems.

  4. Catherine Lacey

      I’m not sure, because I only have what’s on the web, but I do not think they published any poetry with it and that sucks.

  5. Marian May Kaufman

      Great post! It made me wonder why these poets would even do this. Then I thought wait I’m a poet and I’m really poor if Oprah offered me those clothes for free I’d do it too. Is it weird that I want that to be their reason?

  6. Marian May Kaufman

      Great post! It made me wonder why these poets would even do this. Then I thought wait I’m a poet and I’m really poor if Oprah offered me those clothes for free I’d do it too. Is it weird that I want that to be their reason?

  7. Leigh Stein
  8. Christopher Higgs
  9. Roxane

      I don’t believe there is a right or wrong way to “sell” poetry. O Magazine doing something this significant where poetry is concerned feels pretty important. This doesn’t mean we need to prostrate ourselves in gratitude or to uncritically suck at the O-teat but I do think this was an interesting idea. Fashion is used to sell all sorts of things, so why not poetry? People are often displayed in magazine with products they don’t use or cannot afford. I’m pretty sure no one wants to see a poet/writer in their real environment. My couch is boring and I bought it at IKEA. The only issue I had with this spread was that it wasn’t really that great as a fashion spread. I don’t understand why the poetry had to be fucked with “artistically.” It would have been more interesting to display some non ugly clothes in non ugly settings and to more effectively showcase the poetry.

  10. Roxane

      I don’t believe there is a right or wrong way to “sell” poetry. O Magazine doing something this significant where poetry is concerned feels pretty important. This doesn’t mean we need to prostrate ourselves in gratitude or to uncritically suck at the O-teat but I do think this was an interesting idea. Fashion is used to sell all sorts of things, so why not poetry? People are often displayed in magazine with products they don’t use or cannot afford. I’m pretty sure no one wants to see a poet/writer in their real environment. My couch is boring and I bought it at IKEA. The only issue I had with this spread was that it wasn’t really that great as a fashion spread. I don’t understand why the poetry had to be fucked with “artistically.” It would have been more interesting to display some non ugly clothes in non ugly settings and to more effectively showcase the poetry.

  11. drew kalbach

      i’m pretty sure oprah is publishing poetry. because my mom sent me a link to the o magazine website and said i should submit something. i’m going to.

  12. Nick Antosca
  13. Nick Antosca
  14. Nick Antosca
  15. stephen

      I like when people dress nice. I don’t think 28 or 40 is “young.”

  16. Anonymous

      Seriously? Oprah promote psychics and shit. The Secret. Wha- you though her/her company was smart, caring and thoughtful?

  17. Sean
  18. Sean
  19. Amber

      I read tons of poetry and I don’t write it. I mean, for fun sometimes but not for publication hardly ever. But I know that most people probably don’t read it, ever. So I generally feel like any publicity is good publicity. If someone wanted me to do a fashion spread with my fiction all scattered around me I would. I would do it just get to wear gorgeous clothes, really. (Though Roxane is right–weird fashion fail in this spread.) The older i get the more i just want nice things. The older i get the more resigned i am to the smallness of the arts audience and the futility of standing on one’s high horse when the horse is pretty much invisible. These days I get excited when someone tells me they read a magazine or anything with words at all. I have no cynicism left, or maybe that’s all I’m left with.

      But if O Magazine did rip off Kate Durbin’s idea, shame on them. If they thought it was a neat idea they should have included her and given her credit.

  20. Paul Clark

      i like hot, young poets.

  21. alex crowley

      Did all the poets take the clothes or did any choose the cash equivalents? I could live for a month on what any of those outfits costs.

  22. phill

      I was working a bookstore the year that fucking book came out. Being a physics graduate and having to talk to fanatics as they babbled on about the universe providing for them was like getting teeth pulled with pliers made out of salt.

  23. Osmon Steele

  24. NLY

      I think the idea–which you’re far from alone in–that ‘poetry is for poets’ is very, very sad.

  25. nliu

      I don’t think think they got to keep the clothes.

  26. Anonymous

      I think it’s okay that not everyone reads or understands poetry. Poetry and philosophy, high art and intelligent writing in general, can be a dangerous medium for the general public. Mao for instance used to say that he wanted to write his poetry on the clean slate he was making in China. Hitler was a painter. Slobodan Milosevic was a poet. Rising democracy in culture sometimes directly corresponds with oppression and totalitarianism in politics. In teaching, I usually say Ginsberg is the greatest poet of his generation, but he didn’t write the greatest poetry. Berryman was better. Most people get excited that they kind of understand Ginsberg, while many don’t enjoy Berryman because they don’t understand Berryman. It’s okay to have hierarchy in culture that excludes a populist, democratic base. That means the most talented writers often write toward a talented readership. It takes talent to understand some things, intelligence. That’s okay. We are American. The elite in America is often prescribed to people with education and brains rather than economic or political power. That’s okay. Look what happened to Manhattan. The richer it gets, the less interesting. Poetry for poets is sad, but poetry isn’t just for poets. All books of great philosophy constantly po-drop, history po-drops, even op-ed articles po-drop. Intelligent people read poetry. Not just poets. All the great writers I know, in other genres, generally like to read poetry as well. That’s because they are intelligent. Intelligent people read complicated and intelligent things. They like those things. There’s no harm in that. We just need more intelligent people. We don’t need to re-market poetry, we just need to create a more sophisticated class of readers. If people can’t understand Rilke or Celan or Matthea Harvey or C.D Wright or Anne Carson, it doesn’t mean they don’t have a soul. It just means they are either undereducated or unintelligent or have no taste. It’s okay if people are stupid and don’t have taste. There I said it, and again, people are generally stupid and don’t have taste. If Glenn Beck endorsed Zach Schomburg for a Pullitzer, I’d have to kill myself. Then the world would really be fucked.

  27. Catherine Lacey

      Oh, wow. Her complaint seems pretty thin, though… the whole felt letters thing, anyway… I would imagine the person in charge of designing the shoot wasn’t the same person scouting the people… But who knows?

  28. Catherine Lacey

      There is definitely more complexity here to parse… do another post about it. I couldn’t quite figure out how I felt, just that it seemed really depressing…

  29. Catherine Lacey

      Right, the poet/actress/artist/health blogger/…?

      I mean, she may be a great poet, I don’t know, but she hasn’t even published a book of poems yet. Seems like a stretch to call this person an ‘up and coming’ poet. It seems like an opportunity to promote a poet who’s focused on poetry a little more seriously was missed… and that sucks.

  30. Catherine Lacey

      shut up. forty is young.

  31. beardobees

      Yeah, but I’m pretty sure from experience 41 isn’t.

  32. beardobees

      I was hoping Kate would address the idea of appropriation in regard to what O allegedly did. After all, Kate has been a part of Vanessa Place’s Factory Project, which is all about appropriation.

      In an interview, VP says:

      VP: The Factory Series is my version of Warhol’s practice of having “art-workers” help him create his paintings. I invited about 10 artists and writers to make chapbooks for me. It’s very transparent.

      Is transparency all that separates the Factory Project from what O allegedly did to Kate? If they had given credit or asked for her input, what that have made the difference?

      Yet, Conceptualist writing appropriates all the time without seeking permission. It often stands against the notion of originality. Why write when you can copy and paste?

      Fashion has found itself grappling with the same quandary. There have been attempts to patent designs, as fashion’s trickle-downs from the high fashion houses have left them feeling ripped off by the chains. After all, it’s not uncommon to see a “rip-off” of couture at your local Forever 21.

  33. Tim Jones-Yelvington

      I want that perfume kit.

  34. Tim Jones-Yelvington
  35. deadgod

      – but “transparency” is a pretty important difference, no?

      – and both the platform (“Oprah” reaches a lot of people, and in a way that doesn’t always, eh, foreground the political-economic or environmental effects of their consumer behavior) and the circulatory role (what kickbacks obtain in the case of “Oprah”-patronage? none??) might be relevant differences (to Durbin – and maybe to you and me).

  36. deadgod

      consume and critique

      consume transformatively

      consume in a way that dissolves or counterengineers the mechanisms of accumulation?

      consume against MallWart, the Choch bros., (not-Richard) Halliburton, etc!

      Pessimistically, I think that scarcity crisis/systems collapse will happen in/to modernity long before ‘resistance couture’ evolves into general non-commodified (non-political-economic) fashion, but ‘critical consumption’ is an angelic idea.

  37. deadgod

      – and ‘o-faced is very good.

  38. Adam J Maynard

      poets

  39. Gus

      one thing i like about oprah magazine is they always have fashion shoots with real smart ladies in them, like doctors and social workers, people who are ‘beautiful’ and also ‘real’ and ‘admirable’ (diverse ages and faces but generally still ‘beautiful’). with both clothes that are high end and clothes that are from kmart.

      seems refreshing when its doctors but when its poets it annoys, me go figure.

  40. beardobees

      Maybe it’s important.

      Then again, it may only be the difference between me robbing you at gunpoint or stealing from you in your home at night while you sleep.

  41. deadgod

      Ha ha – or the difference between either of those robbers and you being the president of ‘my’ insurance company.

      “Transparency” doesn’t describe the relationship between originator and appropriator themselves; it describes the relationship between them that everyone can see. If conglomerate Oprah stole Durbin’s graphic/sartorial ideas, it isn’t like Warhol making zillions copying Campbell’s zillion-dollar package; it’s more like Campbell’s wrapping soup, to the tune of zillions, in a package designed by a serf.

  42. ladyblogblah

      fashion is the only way to sell poetry

  43. Nick Antosca

      I hung out with her a couple times maybe four years ago in NY. She was smart and nice. Pretty sure I remember she was taking classes to be a real estate agent. Was completely nonplussed to recognize her in this feature. If she’s really putting out a book of poetry, godspeed.

  44. Elisa

      “I don’t think anyone is going to buy poetry because of this, though.” Wrong. I bet all of the poets featured see a spike in sales (“spike” being a relative term). Oprah’s Book Club Effect on a smaller scale.