I'm as much influenced by Joseph Smith and the Mormons as I am
I'm as much influenced by Joseph Smith and the Mormons as I am, more so, than by Eliot. Actually, I'm much more influenced by the poetry of the Mormons.
Hear the voice of Marguerite Young, visionary author of the vast and the strange, who declared: “I’m as much influenced by Joseph Smith and the Mormons as I am, more so, than by Eliot. Actually, I’m much more influenced by the poetry of the Mormons.” These words strike like a bell in the temple of literature, for they place side by side two sources of influence: the formal grandeur of T.S. Eliot, architect of modernist verse, and the prophetic voice of Joseph Smith, founder of a faith, whose followers poured their longing, their migration, their visions into words. Young confesses here that she found not only in the canonized halls of poetry her nourishment, but in the living hymns, the rough, fervent poetry of the Mormons.
The meaning is this: poetry is not only in the refined structures of literary elites, but in the chants, hymns, and declarations of those who dreamed and struggled in the wilderness. For the Mormons, poetry was not an ornament but a force of survival, carrying across plains, deserts, and persecution their vision of a promised land. To be “influenced” by them, as Young says, is to draw from a well of communal imagination, where every line is soaked in faith, endurance, and prophecy. Against Eliot’s polished modernist despair, she found in Mormon verse a raw, untamed affirmation of hope.
The ancients themselves would have understood this. The Hebrews in exile sang psalms, rough with anguish and radiant with longing. The Greeks wove their myths into hymns that were both worship and art. Homer’s epics were not only entertainment; they were scripture of a people, recited as identity and memory. So too the Mormons sang their journeys, their losses, their revelations. In them, Young recognized a voice older than criticism and more enduring than analysis: the poetic fire of a people bound together by vision.
History gives us examples of this pattern. Think of Walt Whitman, whose Leaves of Grass did not spring from aristocratic tradition but from the democratic spirit of America itself, the voices of workers, wanderers, soldiers, and singers. Or consider William Blake, whose “prophetic books” were infused with his own mystical visions, often dismissed in his time but later revered as genius. Both Whitman and Blake remind us that the most enduring poetry often arises not from polished literary salons but from raw vision. Young, in turning to the Mormons, aligned herself with this lineage of prophetic voices.
Her words also reveal her courage. In an age when T.S. Eliot’s influence loomed like a colossus over English poetry, she dared to say that she drew more from Joseph Smith. This was no rejection of Eliot’s craft, but an assertion that true inspiration comes from unexpected places. She teaches us that one should not bow only to the canon but should listen to the music of living faiths, communities, and movements. For the poet’s task is not only to echo tradition but to discover fresh fountains of meaning.
The lesson for us is clear: do not limit your influences to what the world declares “great.” Look beyond, to the voices of the marginalized, the believers, the wanderers, the dreamers. Poetry is not always bound in books—it is in hymns sung on dusty roads, in chants whispered in secret meetings, in stories carried by those who refuse to be silenced. The richness of your art will grow not from narrowing your vision, but from opening it to the breadth of human expression.
Practical wisdom flows from this. Read Eliot, yes, but also read the psalms of common folk, the ballads of pioneers, the chants of monks, the songs of protestors. Seek poetry where life is raw and urgent. Write not only with the voice of the academy, but with the heartbeat of the people. And if you find a prophetic fire in unexpected places, embrace it. For true poetry is not about prestige, but about power—the power to shape the soul and carry it through hardship into hope.
Thus Marguerite Young’s words endure as a reminder: inspiration is not only in the canon, but in the songs of those who believed enough to sing while suffering. Let this truth be passed to future generations—that poetry is both craft and prophecy, and that the greatest voices may rise not from the ivory towers, but from the wandering camps of the faithful, whose verses keep alive the dream of a promised land.
STStudio Tao
Reading this, I’m struck by the interplay between cultural, spiritual, and literary influences. How does Young reconcile her admiration for Mormon poetry with her broader literary ambitions? I also wonder whether the Mormons’ poetic style inspired particular methods of expression, storytelling, or thematic exploration in her work. Could acknowledging such an unconventional influence reflect a deliberate embrace of diverse, non-canonical traditions, enriching her literary perspective and setting her apart from contemporaries?
VTVu Thanh
This quote raises questions about how unconventional influences shape artistic identity. Does Young perceive the poetry of the Mormons as offering insights into narrative, ritual, or communal experience that Eliot does not? I also question whether literary influence is measured by technical mastery or emotional and spiritual resonance. Could drawing from an unexpected tradition provide a unique voice and perspective that challenges prevailing literary norms?
PNThi Phuong Nguyen
I find this perspective fascinating because it challenges assumptions about literary hierarchy. Could Young be suggesting that personal resonance with a poetic tradition matters more than critical acclaim or canonical status? I also wonder whether this influence shaped her content, form, or worldview in ways that differ from conventional modernist techniques. How might immersion in the poetic practices of a religious community enrich or complicate a writer’s engagement with mainstream literary influences?
AHPhuong anh Hoang
This statement makes me curious about the sources of literary inspiration. Does Young find the poetry of the Mormons more emotionally or spiritually compelling than the modernist innovations of Eliot? I also question whether this influence reflects thematic focus, narrative style, or rhythm and cadence. How does integrating a religious or less mainstream literary tradition affect a writer’s approach, and can such influences be reconciled with broader literary canons?
DTDuong Do tuan
Reading this, I’m intrigued by Young’s claim of influence from Joseph Smith and the Mormons over a figure like Eliot. Does this suggest that spiritual or religious frameworks had a profound effect on her literary perspective? I also wonder what aspects of Mormon poetry resonate with her—structure, themes, storytelling, or moral vision? Could it be that her work draws more from cultural or ritualistic patterns than from mainstream literary traditions, and how might that distinguish her voice?