Printable View
I hope this is not posted elsewhere and I am just overlooking it.
Did anyone hear the inaugural poet, Elizabeth Alexander, read her poem? I did not especially care for Praise Song for the Day.
You can hear it here. What do you think?
(link takes you to YouTube)
Thanks for that Psyche. I guess it was ok. I heard it today and now a second time with the words in front of me. I don't think it will be one of the great American poems. It's probably below average actually, but the spirit of it was noble. It was definitely better than Maya Angelou. ;)
I didn't really enjoy her poem. But, I think part of it was she didn't put much emotion when she said it.
Impressive poem, in the literal sense, but, yes, I could not really get attached to it, not like Robert Frost reading 'The Gift Outright.'
Is that even poetry? God, I'm seriously considering which was worse, this, or Angelou's. She seems to deliberately use clichés.
Is this even poetry, or merely stupid brown nosing? Lets be honest, as a Canadian, how could I possibly care for a poem like that.
The irony is, this quite literally is a period piece.
JBI, I completely agree with you. It was an absolutely atrocious assemblage of words. It was a real shame to follow up that beautiful musical arrangement with a horrible attempt at poetry.
While watching the ceremony on the "teevee" yesterday, I really enjoyed hearing the poem, and the final presentation by the elderly preacher who quoted an old Pete Seeger song in his benediction.
I confess I'd never heard of Ms Alexander before, but you can be sure that I will make an attempt to read more of her works. I loved the language in her inaugural poem, which was what her poem was about -- words. She showed how everyday speech or a conversation style can be elegant and how such discourse need not include coarse epithets to be emotionally expressive. I also enjoyed her reading of the poem, emphasizing the stresses and the meter as she read. (That's a lesson that HBO has yet to learn.)
And Virgil, in a way I agree with your comment above. I don't dislike Maya Angelou or her works at all, but it seems whenever there's an official function in which poetry would be appropriate
Maya is the "go-to" gal. I'm glad this time another poet was given the chance.
Did anyone else see the interview with Elizabeth Alexander on The Colbert Report? :lol:
I could hardly understand how Alexander could keep a straight face and continue the interview while Stephen Colbert, one of the kings of sarcasm, in my opinion, made so many borderline-insulting comments!
Mono! It is very nice to see you back 'round!
One way to measure, evaluate contemporary poetry is to read it as prose. In this case, astonishingly bad prose.
Maya Angelou would crush Elizabeth Alexander in a cage match.
I'll just say I wasn't a fan. Surely something better could have been found.
I think we ought to do away with this whole nonsense of reading a poem at an inaugural. What is the point? There are too many natural restrictions to make it worthwhile. It has to be patriotic but not flag waving, it has to not be offensive, it has to be simple for the average person, it has to not be too long and yet not too epigrammic, and so on. It's a wste of time. 95% of the people don't give a damn about poetry and for those that do it's bound to be a disappointment. This was what the fourth or fifth time we've had it? Let's drop it.
She is pleased that Obama has been able to reach around and give back.:lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by mono
I totally agree, Virgil.
I have to admit, though, after starting this thread I looked into some other works by Elizabeth Alexander that impressed me much more than what she wrote for the inauguration. She isn't totally my cup o' tea, but she is far from all bad.
Alexander's poem uses references to American poetry (Whitman and Sandburg) and joins it to African praise song to express the voice and spirit of contemporary America by appealing for a new and wider sense of community to combat our present economic and spiritual problems.
I think a more careful reading with some respect would be beneficial.
Personally, I like it. And I especially love the idea that "we encounter each other in words" and that language makes up our reality. That we can manipulate our reality by choosing more positive words to express, like love. Alexander is by no means the first to convey that message, but I thought she did in a very nice way, very relevant to our times.
I found a bit of information regarding the historical allusions in the poem, as well as a bit of interpretation here:
http://blog.shmoop.com/2009/01/21/sh...eth-alexander/
Honestly - only Americans with their aesthetic in their hearts, and not in their heads can possibly view this as a good poem. Think people - it's almost ridiculous, and that article is rubbish too - it brown noses all the other mediocre poems before this one. Even Frost's was doggerel.
As aesthetics comes from a Greek word meaning "things perceptible to the senses" , which was also what Kant meant when he used the term, it is difficult to understand the implied insistence that appreciation is confined to the intellect.
I mean people aren't thinking, and they are preoccupied with the context of the poem, in the new "phase" of America, with the new "hope" that Obama somehow will bring about a change, and an age of prosperity. The poem then gets its semi-good reputation, from the fact that it is the poem of "the new age", the first poem, and people judge it like that, rather than looking at it and saying, "A 12 year old could have written this."