But I don't think that poetry is a good, to use a contemporary
But I don't think that poetry is a good, to use a contemporary word, venue, for current events.
Hear the wisdom of Diane Wakoski, who shares her reflection on the nature of poetry: “But I don't think that poetry is a good, to use a contemporary word, venue, for current events.” In these words, Wakoski cautions against using poetry as a mere tool for addressing current events, suggesting that the art of poetry transcends the transient, fleeting nature of day-to-day politics and news. Poetry, she argues, is not meant to serve the immediate concerns of the moment, but rather to speak to the eternal, to reach beyond the fleeting concerns of the present and offer a deeper, more universal understanding of human experience. It is not a venue for the temporary noise of daily life but a sanctuary for the lasting truths of the soul.
The ancients understood this distinction well. Homer, in his great epics—the Iliad and the Odyssey—did not concern himself with the politics or the immediate conflicts of his day. Instead, he wrote about eternal themes—honor, fate, love, and loss. His work was not bound by the fleeting events of his time but sought to capture universal truths that would resonate through the ages. The same can be said for Virgil, whose Aeneid transcended the politics of Rome’s rise and fall to explore themes of duty, destiny, and sacrifice. These works were not written for the moment; they were written to speak to the human condition across centuries. Poetry, for the ancients, was not simply a reflection of current events; it was an exploration of the enduring forces that shape us all.
Consider William Blake, a poet who was deeply engaged with the social and political issues of his time, particularly in his critiques of industrialization and the oppression of the poor. Yet, despite the social themes in his work, Blake’s poetry was not simply a response to current events—it was a profound vision of the human soul, the divine, and the world itself. Blake’s work transcends the immediate concerns of his time because it is rooted in a deeper spiritual and philosophical questioning. He understood that poetry could engage with the world but should always seek to lift the soul beyond the confines of temporary issues. Poetry for Blake was never just a venue for current events—it was a sacred space where the poet could transcend the mundane and explore the divine.
Wakoski’s words remind us that while poetry can certainly reflect the world around us, it is not bound to it. Poetry does not exist to capture the ephemeral moment but to distill its essence, to transform the fleeting into the eternal. Consider the work of Emily Dickinson, whose poems are not about political events or current trends but about the inner landscape of the self. Her poetry speaks to the universal experience of isolation, death, and longing, offering readers a glimpse into the deeper forces that shape the human spirit. Dickinson’s poetry does not serve as a commentary on the news of her time; instead, it serves as a mirror for the soul, offering eternal truths that transcend any specific event.
The lesson here is one of timelessness. Poetry should not be a reactionary force, driven by the need to address immediate concerns. Instead, it should be a creative act that rises above the noise of the moment and speaks to the eternal. By looking inward and embracing the universal, poetry has the power to offer insights that will resonate long after the events of today have passed into history. Poetry, in its highest form, is not tied to the politics of its time but speaks to the forces of the human heart, the deep questions of existence, and the mysteries of the universe.
Practical actions follow. If you are a poet, do not let your work be solely dictated by the events of the day. Write from the heart, from the place where universal truths are born, and let your poetry rise above the currents of the moment. While it is important to engage with the world, do so in a way that speaks to the deeper forces at play. If you are a reader, seek out poetry that challenges you, that moves you beyond the immediate and into the eternal. Understand that the greatest poetry is not just a reflection of current events but an exploration of the forces that shape the human experience.
Thus, Wakoski’s words serve as a reminder that poetry is an art that speaks to the soul and to the timeless nature of human existence. It is not a venue for reacting to the moment but a space for discovering what endures, what rises above the noise and chaos of daily life. In this way, poetry becomes a bridge between the self and the eternal, between the temporary and the timeless. Let us then write and read poetry that transcends the moment, that speaks to the deeper truths within us all.
HHHuy Hoang
I find her statement refreshing in a way—it resists the idea that poets must constantly react to the world around them. Maybe she’s defending the autonomy of art, insisting that poetry should exist beyond political urgency. Yet I wonder if that stance risks alienating readers who turn to poetry precisely because they seek meaning in turbulent times. Can poetry remain apolitical and still feel relevant today?
LDngoc lan dinh
This quote makes me think about the pace of art versus the pace of news. Poetry demands time, revision, and reflection, while current events move fast. Perhaps Wakoski believes that poetry needs emotional fermentation—that it’s only after time passes that truth can be expressed poetically. But then again, isn’t immediacy part of poetry’s raw power? I’d love to know how she reconciles those two opposing forces.
PN8a1 Phan Nhan
I can understand where she’s coming from—poetry often requires distance to turn events into meaning. Still, I can’t help questioning whether detaching poetry from current events limits its social power. Some of the most powerful poems, from Ginsberg to contemporary voices, speak directly to their times. Maybe the issue isn’t whether poetry should respond to the present, but how to do it without reducing art to commentary.
NNNhi Nguyen
This perspective feels both traditional and provocative. Wakoski seems to value poetry as something that transcends the immediate, focusing instead on universal human experiences. But does avoiding current events risk making poetry feel detached from real life? I wonder if she sees poetry’s role as offering reflection rather than reaction—a space for contemplation rather than confrontation. That’s an interesting distinction in an age driven by instant responses.
QDTrung Quoc Duong
I find this comment intriguing because it challenges the modern trend of politically or socially engaged poetry. Wakoski seems to suggest that poetry isn’t the right medium for immediate commentary. But I’m curious—why not? Couldn’t poetry actually deepen our understanding of current events by translating facts into emotion and imagery? Maybe she’s warning that topical poetry risks losing artistic subtlety if it becomes too tied to the news cycle.