Why isn't poetry popular like other arts?

[Shaman_Raman]

poetry does not make a film a book does. it works that way because media needs its feeds popularity and contingency. money is all this and a book is all that. a poet is a mere figment of the imagination because it takes no longer then two to three lines to fill whereas a book manages pages of it which requires time. the longer the book the less memory and the less memory means more words to produce. poetry however takes less words but more room to think and hardly any to turn into a catalogue of images and media sponsors.

I agree that novels constantly inspire films. But I don't think it's done always out of some shallow get rich quick intention. As for poetry, I think it just as much has the potential for giving feelings and ideas to people, which can be converted to one or a thousand images. Who's to say a films never been inspired by a poem? Or a novel or short story for that matter?

Can't say I have an example on stand by. Does anyone know of any poetic work inspiring other mediums of art?

[Sameer Telkar]

I assume you mean Shelley, not Shirley, there...

As for the 20th century, well, how about T. S. Eliot, Philip Larkin, Dylan Thomas, W. B. Yeats (sort of), W. H. Auden, J. L. Borges, Pablo Neruda, Sylvia Plath, William Carlos Williams? Those are names that all spring readily to mind, and some of them are easily as popular as those you mention.

Actually I meant James Shirley.Sorry if I said something wrong,I am a newbie to poetry.I can see that some of the poets of the 19th century were indeed popular.I can see that T.S. Eliot and Yeats were popular.Also Yeats began to write in the 19th century.The rest you mentioned including Dylan Thomas,are only popular in the west or only amongst poets?Are their works included in high school syllabus?or are they known to society?I think one major limitation of poetry is that it can't evolve,like painting evolved to animation,novels/short stories evolved into films.Also don't you notice a general trend of decline in the popularity of poetry over the years?

[MorpheusSandman]

Is it not arguable that poetry, or even the humanities in general, were at least more respected in the past?

I guess it depends on what you mean by "respected;" One major thing that's taken place since the 19th century is the increase in literacy and globalization, both of which has affected poetry. The former affected it because it was no longer the elite that could write, publish, and patronize poetry. So there was, once upon a time, the perception that writing poetry was a much more elitist, difficult, even divine task than it does now. It would be more difficult to get into globalization's affect on poetry, but let's just say it meant the end for a lot of the "nationalist" poetics that was such a huge part of poetry for so long. If you'll notice, poetry tends to be most popular in developing countries that need a national, representative voice, and when you're already an established country already economically connected with others, a lot of that need disappears.

I don't think that the argument that people are distracted from reading poetry by the existence of over-long novels is justifiable. There have always been titanic works of literature, and poetry has always been popular.

While novels have been around for a long time they didn't attain to the level of poetry's popularity until roughly the 19th century.

What I meant to ask was,why isn't Poetry popular in the modern world?It was certainly popular in the 16th and 17th century when we had great poets like Tennyson,Keats and Shirley.Poetry was encouraged at that time.Today only traditional poets are quoted.Name one poet of 20th century who was as much of popular as those three.Everybody only talks of movies,music,animation etc.That's why I think,the art of poetry is dying.This may be because Poetry is difficult to understand and you can't get it in first read.Also the society of the 16th and 17th century was more spiritual,now its more materialistic and materialism means lack of time.

I think Luke and I addressed most of this in our posts. In the 16th and 17th centuries poetry didn't have to compete with film, TV, video games, the internet, and novels (at least, not nearly as much). Poetry was only "encouraged" in that time amongst the elitists and patrons that could read and write to begin with, so it was just a pastime (for the most part) like anything else. As I said in my last post, what people talk about is merely fashion, and fashions change; I think poetry has survived long enough to say it's not a fashion, and it will survive the modern popular fashions as well. As for popular 20th century poets, you have Eliot, Yeats (yes, he wrote in the 19th century, but most of his most popular work is from the 20th), WC Williams, Thomas, Stevens, et al. More people have probably memorized Red Wheelbarrow than just about anything else. I don't know what you think societies being more "spiritual" has to do with poetry at all (its popularity or otherwise). It's not as if all the great poets were spiritual to begin with, or wrote primarily about spiritual matters. Probably the best devotional poet was George Herbert, and it's not like everyone can rattle off Herbert quotes.

Poetry doesn't have the mainstream appeal like photography and painting.Every now and then there is a painting exhibition.Have you ever heard of a poetry exhibition?

Painting and photography have exhibits that are attended by a few select enthusiasts, no differently than how poetry has slams, meetings, readings, etc. that are attended by a few select enthusiasts. You can't "exhibit" poetry, nor could you ever do so, so that argument seems positively asinine.

The rest you mentioned including Dylan Thomas,are only popular in the west or only amongst poets?Are their works included in high school syllabus?or are they known to society?I think one major limitation of poetry is that it can't evolve,like painting evolved to animation,novels/short stories evolved into films.Also don't you notice a general trend of decline in the popularity of poetry over the years?

I think everyone with even passing experience in poetry (in school or otherwise) would know of Thomas' "Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night." As to whether it's included in any syllabus, it would probably depend on the school. I heard it quoted in movies and TV before I ever encountered it in print. I don't know what you mean that poetry "can't evolve." Painting didn't evolve into animation, and novels/short stories didn't evolve into film. The invention of new technology (mainly, the invention of photography and, eventually, moving photography) created both mediums. Sure, those mediums borrow from painting and novels, but they also borrow from poetry, and plenty of filmmakers have been more influenced by poetry than anything else (Brakhage and Cocteau come to mind).

[cafolini]

Good points, Sandman.

[cacian]

Poetry doesn't have the mainstream appeal like photography and painting.Every now and then there is a painting exhibition.Have you ever heard of a poetry exhibition?

no but you could always start one if you like who is to stop you?

[JCamilo]

There is poetry exibitions in every library. The books are all there...

Prose was more suitable for mainstream everyday reading when in the XIX century the literacy of population increased. It goes on newspapers, magazines, etc. That is all.

By the way, it is not so easy to measure the popularity of poets when 20% of population could read. When the majority of population narratives were oral, poetic forms could be more suited but even so, one could argue, the narratives in "oral prose" were possibly more popular. Some anedoctes seems to imply Ariosto or Dante had fame enough to have his poems sung by illiterate people but they didnt had the impact of Dom Quixote, that was spreed like crazy when released.

[Lokasenna]

Actually I meant James Shirley.Sorry if I said something wrong,I am a newbie to poetry.I can see that some of the poets of the 19th century were indeed popular.I can see that T.S. Eliot and Yeats were popular.Also Yeats began to write in the 19th century.The rest you mentioned including Dylan Thomas,are only popular in the west or only amongst poets?Are their works included in high school syllabus?or are they known to society?I think one major limitation of poetry is that it can't evolve,like painting evolved to animation,novels/short stories evolved into films.Also don't you notice a general trend of decline in the popularity of poetry over the years?

No need to apologize - it's an interesting debate! Well, I would argue that James Shirly is a relatively obscure figure - hence why I had assumed you had just made a typo for Shelley. I would suggest that the ones I mentioned eclipse him entirely. And I would think that their popularity is probably not limited to a purely western audience, or amongst poets. There are of course certain national poets who are very popular in their own country (Dylan Thomas is very popular in my homeland, though he does have a significant profile internationally); I might have listed John Betjeman, but whilst a great many British people could quote some snatches of his poetry he is probably much less well known outside the UK.

[stlukesguild]

Is it not arguable that poetry, or even the humanities in general, were at least more respected in the past? It was not too long ago that Literae Humaniores was the degree of choice for young gentlemen in Britain, especially those wanting to go into politics or civil service. Now it's largely considered irrelevant and 'soft'.

It's arguable... but not supported by fact. What we deem the "fine arts" and "humanities" have long been the preserve of a predominantly wealthy elite. The peasants in the Renaissance weren't reading Dante, discussing Michelangelo and Raphael, and attending performances of Gesualdo and Monteverdi. With the development of mass-production techniques (the Gutenberg press, sound recording, the camera, etc...) as well as the increase in "free time" and expendable income there followed an increase in literacy and a greater demand for the arts as entertainment. Still... the appreciation of the "fine arts" remains an "elitist" endeavor... but it is an "elitism" of choice not birth and wealth. Those who elect to put forth a great deal of time, effort... and even income in the study, appreciation, promotion, and preservation of any given art form remain a small percentage of the populace as a whole. In spite of this, the number of individuals reading Dante or listening to Mozart or studying Michelangelo today is far larger than it was during the lifetime of any of these artists.

What I meant to ask was,why isn't Poetry popular in the modern world?It was certainly popular in the 16th and 17th century when we had great poets like Tennyson,Keats and Shirley.Poetry was encouraged at that time.

I would be interested in where you got your facts to support this notion. As I recall, Keats' premature death has generally been ascribed (in part) to negative criticism. By the way... Keats and Tennyson lived in the 19th century, and Shirley was a dramatist... and "surely" no where near the finest of the era.

Poetry doesn't have the mainstream appeal like photography and painting.

Mainstream appeal? Really? Somehow as an artist I've missed out on this mass audience that exist hungry for paintings.

Every now and then there is a painting exhibition.Have you ever heard of a poetry exhibition?

Every now and then you hear of a poetry reading or the publication of a new collection of poetry by a given writer. I've rarely heard of such for a painter.

[OrphanPip]

Poetry's popularity as a commercially viable artform actually peaked in the Victorian era. The explosion of periodicals and news papers during the period also created new spaces for poetry, every periodical serializing the latest Dickens or Trollope was also publishing poems in the same editions. Poetry anthologies were also significantly popular during the period. Tennyson was immensely popular and he was a household name on both sides of the Atlantic. Prior to the 19th century the popularity of certain poets is harder to assess. Publishing books of poetry was a difficult undertaking because of the relatively higher cost of printing in the period. Wordsworth and Coleridge's Lyrical Ballads only sold roughly 100 copies, and this was considered to be a massive success in terms of poetry.

[JCamilo]

Yes, but what was commercial in XIX century is not like today, it could not imply a massive success, even if The Raven was a succes for a poem, it did not make Poe life a blast. Anyways, there was a list of poets who were quite popular even if not exactly best-sellers. Byron, Walter Scott, Elizabeth Barrett Browning, Longfellow but I dunno how he measure to "Other arts" considering literature is alongside cinema and music the most suited for mass media.

[Sameer Telkar]

Mainstream appeal? Really? Somehow as an artist I've missed out on this mass audience that exist hungry for paintings.

Overtime painting has evolved into animation.Painters enjoy opportunities in animes and mangas unlike poets.

By the way... Keats and Tennyson lived in the 19th century

Yeah sorry for that error.

Every now and then you hear of a poetry reading or the publication of a new collection of poetry by a given writer. I've rarely heard of such for a painter.

Sandman was right,we cannot exhibit poetry.Poetry reading is very rare and may be only popular in the west.

[MorpheusSandman]

Painting didn't "evolve" into animation... that's got to be one of the weirdest claims I've ever read, especially since the art of painting and animation are entirely different; and poets most certainly have the opportunity to, eg, write screenplays or stage plays or novels in order to make money. They can also (as most do) turn to teaching poetry.

Also, poetry readings aren't rare at all if you know where to go. Most every poet publishing with major publishers get booked to do readings, and there are more informal ones everywhere. Poetry slams, eg, have become quite popular in the US.

[mortalterror]

I think that literature is as popular as visual arts or music, but poetry is just one part of literature like sculpture is just one part of visual arts. Thus the question becomes, "Why isn't poetry as popular as prose" and the answer is simple: education. A child's education in literature consists largely of prose novels and short stories and we now spend less time learning to read and write poetry, because those skills have less crossover into useful career skills. Functional prose can help a person navigate the business world, surf the web, or read directions and modern education focuses on utility and practical life skills.

[stlukesguild]

Overtime painting has evolved into animation.Painters enjoy opportunities in animes and mangas unlike poets.

As MorpheusSandman suggested, this is without a doubt one of the weirdest claims I've ever heard concerning painting. I am a painter and my work most certainly has not evolved into animation or anime. Animation and anime are but one sub-category of the visual arts... more specifically one sub-category of the largely commercial aspect of the visual arts. You might as well suggest that poetry has evolved into writing lyrics for pop music, blurbs for Hallmark cards, TV commercials, or screenplays for TV sitcoms.

Painting is an art form that is very much alive... but like most art forms outside of those supported by popular culture and the mass-media, even the finest practitioners are largely unknown outside of the circle of those who are well informed painting lovers. By the same token... as a poetry lover I can easily rattle of a list of poets of real merit who have been active over the last 50 years.

Sandman was right,we cannot exhibit poetry.Poetry reading is very rare and may be only popular in the west.

Poetry is rarely "exhibited" in the manner of art... because it is not a visual art form. Rather, it is published... or read as part of poetry readings, discussion groups, etc...

[mortalterror]

I agree that novels constantly inspire films. But I don't think it's done always out of some shallow get rich quick intention. As for poetry, I think it just as much has the potential for giving feelings and ideas to people, which can be converted to one or a thousand images. Who's to say a films never been inspired by a poem? Or a novel or short story for that matter?

Can't say I have an example on stand by. Does anyone know of any poetic work inspiring other mediums of art?

I know that Beowulf, El Cid, Troy, Jabberwocky, and Gunga Din were definitely inspired by poems. Paintings inspired by poems, didn't StLukesGuild do a thread on that once? There must be thousands. Dore's illustrations of The Divine Comedy, Paradise Lost, Orlando Furioso, The Rime of the Ancient Mariner, The Raven, and Idylls of the King spring to mind. Besides their titles, I know there have been a few novels inspired by poems. Stephen King's Dark Tower series was inspired by Robert Browning's Childe Roland to the Dark Tower Came.