I was apprehensive. I feared every time I talked about poetry
I was apprehensive. I feared every time I talked about poetry, it would be filtered through the lens of race, sex, and age.
Hear the voice of Rita Dove, who confessed with unflinching honesty: “I was apprehensive. I feared every time I talked about poetry, it would be filtered through the lens of race, sex, and age.” These words are the cry of a soul burdened with the knowledge that truth, once spoken, may not be received as truth, but as commentary distorted by the listener’s prejudice. Dove, a poet of deep vision, feared that her art would not be heard for what it was—a song of humanity—but instead dissected by categories not of her making. Her apprehension was not cowardice, but the awareness of how heavy the chains of perception can be.
For in her time, as in ours, the poet who is Black, the poet who is woman, the poet who is young or old, finds that her voice is too often bound to labels before it can be heard. Poetry is meant to soar beyond boundaries, to speak to the universal, to awaken in all hearts the echo of recognition. Yet when ears are clouded with prejudice, the universal is diminished to the particular, the eternal reduced to stereotype. Dove feared this fate—not for her own honor alone, but for the sanctity of the art itself.
The ancients too knew this danger. Consider Sappho of Lesbos, whose verses of love and longing were immortal, yet whose name was tangled with scandal because she was a woman. The purity of her poetry was judged not by its music but by her sex, and her legacy has long been filtered through that lens. Or think of Phyllis Wheatley, the enslaved African girl who wrote verse in eighteenth-century America. Her race was the first thing critics saw; many doubted she had even written her poems. The art was hidden behind the categories imposed upon the artist.
Yet Dove’s fear was also a fire. For though she was apprehensive, she still spoke, and still wrote, and in doing so shattered the very filters she dreaded. She became the first African American Poet Laureate of the United States, her work read not only as “Black poetry” or “women’s poetry,” but as poetry itself. Her courage revealed that the true voice, if steady and unflinching, can cut through the veils of prejudice, though not without struggle. This is the heroic task of the artist: to persist even when misunderstood, trusting that truth will endure beyond distortion.
We must take this as lesson and warning. Too often we hear through lenses instead of hearts. We ask first: who speaks? man or woman, young or old, of this race or that—and only then do we weigh the words. Such listening diminishes both speaker and hearer. True wisdom requires that we lay aside the filters of prejudice, and first hear the art, the thought, the humanity. For poetry, like all truth, is not bound to bloodlines or categories, but springs from the well of existence shared by all.
Yet let us also honor the reality that race, sex, and age do shape experience. They add depth, pain, and color to a poet’s song. The error is not in acknowledging these, but in reducing the poet entirely to them. When we say only “this is a woman’s poem” or “this is a Black poem,” we cut the wings of the work, forcing it to crawl instead of fly. Rita Dove reminds us that a poem may rise from a particular place, yet still speak universally. To deny either truth is to fail the poem itself.
Practical actions must follow this wisdom. When you read or hear poetry, attend first to the humanity within it, not merely the category of its maker. Teach children to value voices for their music, their vision, their depth, not for the labels society attaches. And if you are a creator, like Dove, do not be silenced by fear of misunderstanding. Write boldly, speak clearly, and trust that even through filters, some will hear the eternal flame within your words.
Thus Rita Dove’s confession is both lament and courage. She feared, as all true poets fear, that her art would be diminished by prejudice. Yet she lived and wrote beyond fear, and her words endure. Let us learn from her: to listen with open hearts, to speak with fearless voices, and to let poetry be what it was meant to be—not a mirror of categories, but a beacon for all humanity.
VT30 Phan Van Thuan
This makes me consider the intersection of identity and artistic reception. Is it possible for anyone to separate a poet’s work from who they are, or is context inseparable from content? Could acknowledging these lenses actually deepen understanding, or does it risk overshadowing the artistry itself? It also leads me to question what responsibility society has in creating spaces where artists can be evaluated primarily for the merit of their work rather than their demographic characteristics.
NNNhu Nguyen
Reading this, I feel a mix of empathy and curiosity. How often do artists navigate the tension between personal expression and external expectations? Does this apprehension push poets to self-censor or modify their work to avoid misinterpretation? I also wonder how cultural and social contexts shape the reception of poetry differently across time, and whether audiences today are more capable of appreciating work without filtering it through identity-based assumptions.
NMNguyen Minh
I’m struck by the vulnerability expressed here. It makes me ask whether this filtering of perception is inevitable for artists from marginalized groups. How can audiences engage with poetry on its own terms without imposing assumptions based on race, sex, or age? This also prompts reflection on whether these lenses can ever enrich the interpretation of art or if they predominantly create limitations and misunderstandings.
HKNguyen Huu Khue
This statement resonates deeply, as it highlights the pressure many artists feel to represent more than their work alone. I wonder how much her apprehension affected the way she wrote or spoke about poetry. Did she ever feel boxed in by societal expectations, or did she find ways to assert her voice authentically? It raises broader questions about how identity can both inform and complicate public reception of art.