The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should

The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should

22/09/2025
18/10/2025

The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should poetry escape?

The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should poetry escape?
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should poetry escape?
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should poetry escape?
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should poetry escape?
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should poetry escape?
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should poetry escape?
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should poetry escape?
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should poetry escape?
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should poetry escape?
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should
The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should

In the ever-changing tide of artistic movements, there arises a time when the world shifts, and the very foundations upon which creativity stands are altered. John Crowe Ransom captures this moment of transformation with the insight, “The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism—how should poetry escape?” Here, Ransom speaks not just to the evolution of artistic forms, but to the pressure that every art form feels to adapt to the currents of its time. Modernism, that great wave of change that swept through the world in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, demanded that all artistic expression conform to a new set of rules—rules that rejected the old ways and sought new forms of truth and expression. But what of poetry? Can it, too, escape the grip of Modernism, or must it, like all else, bend to the forces of progress?

Consider the rise of Modernism, that great artistic revolution that took shape in the wake of two world wars, technological advancements, and the collapse of long-held cultural and societal norms. The artists of this era, from James Joyce to T.S. Eliot, were faced with a world no longer governed by the stability and order of past traditions. They sought to express the fragmented, disordered experience of modern life through their works, experimenting with form, language, and meaning. Modernism rejected the old, the comfortable, the predictable in favor of the unknown and the disruptive. The traditional forms of poetry, once steeped in rhythm and structure, now seemed to hold no relevance in the face of a world that felt fragmented, chaotic, and uncertain.

Yet, as Ransom points out, poetry, that ancient form of artistic expression, could not escape this tide of change. The poet, like the painter, the sculptor, and the writer, was forced to reckon with the revolutionary forces of Modernism. The long, steady lines of rhyme and meter that had once carried the weight of meaning in poetry were now questioned, even abandoned. The modern poets like Ezra Pound and Gertrude Stein sought to free themselves from the constraints of tradition, exploring the freedom of fragmented language and open forms. But in doing so, were they abandoning something sacred in the art? Was there a loss of the beauty that poetry once carried, a beauty that could be shaped and sculpted with precision and grace?

This dilemma has been the struggle of all great periods of artistic transition. Consider the Renaissance, when the artists of Italy, such as Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo, turned from the rigid structures of medieval art to explore a new world of perspective and humanism. They too faced the weight of tradition, but they embraced it with innovation, transforming it into something new and timeless. Shakespeare, too, worked within the boundaries of poetic tradition but stretched and bent those boundaries in ways that would forever change the way the world saw language and human experience. Just as Modernism sought to break with the past, so did the great masters of earlier ages, yet each in their own way found a way to honor the tradition while making it their own.

The lesson in Ransom’s words is clear: no art form, not even poetry, can stand outside of the great tide of history. Just as the poet in ancient Greece could not ignore the rising influence of tragedy and comedy, so too must the modern poet confront the forces of Modernism that have reshaped the landscape of artistic creation. Yet, Ransom also suggests a question: is there a way for poetry to move forward, to transform, while still holding on to its essence? Can poetry evolve without losing its heart?

The challenge, then, is one of balance. Poetry, like all art, must evolve, but it must not do so at the cost of its soul. The true poet must confront the modern world’s disorder, its brokenness, its uncertainty, but they must also remember that poetry is more than just a reflection of the world—it is the bridge between the world and the soul. As we stand in this modern age, poetry must continue to speak not just to the intellect, but to the heart. The poet must continue to create, to shape, to find beauty in a world that often feels fragmented and lost.

In your own life, dear listener, the challenge is this: as you move through a world that is constantly changing, do not forget the truths that have come before you. Embrace the innovations of your time, but do not abandon the traditions that have given art its depth and power. Seek to find balance in your own creative journey, to honor what has come before while transforming it into something that speaks to the future. For just as poetry cannot escape the forces of Modernism, neither can you escape the forces of your time. Yet in your hands, you hold the power to shape the world anew, to make poetry that reaches into the heart of humanity, no matter the era in which it is written.

John Crowe Ransom
John Crowe Ransom

American - Poet April 30, 1888 - July 3, 1974

Tocpics Related
Notable authors
Have 6 Comment The arts generally have had to recognize Modernism - how should

HVHai van

This makes me think about the interplay between literary history and innovation. Does recognizing Modernism mean merely adopting its techniques, or understanding and responding to its philosophy? Could some poets engage with Modernism critically rather than mimetically, using its principles to challenge expectations rather than conform? I’d be interested in perspectives on whether poetry, with its adaptability, has more freedom than other arts to reinterpret, ignore, or transcend dominant movements like Modernism.

Reply.
Information sender

DDDii Dii

I’m intrigued by the implicit question of artistic autonomy here. Can poetry escape the influence of Modernism, or is the very act of writing in its time inevitably Modernist by contrast? How do poets negotiate the balance between participating in cultural shifts and maintaining unique stylistic or thematic identities? I’d like to explore whether Modernist influence is always visible in content and form, or whether it sometimes operates at subtler, conceptual levels in poetry.

Reply.
Information sender

VDBui Van Duc

This perspective prompts me to consider the pressures on poets to adapt. How much of engagement with Modernism is driven by audience expectation versus personal experimentation? Could ignoring Modernist currents risk irrelevance, or might it produce a purer expression of individual vision? I’m also curious whether the quote reflects a concern about homogenization across the arts, and if poetry has a particular responsibility to respond thoughtfully to broader artistic movements.

Reply.
Information sender

AAmma

Reading this, I question whether Modernism is a horizon that shapes all subsequent artistic expression. Are there ways in which poetry might resist Modernism without becoming isolated or archaic? Does the internal structure of poetry, with its forms, meter, and language play, offer distinct strategies for grappling with Modernist concepts differently than architecture or painting? I’d like to know how poets historically responded to this tension between embracing and evading contemporary artistic trends.

Reply.
Information sender

HMNguyen Ha My

I find this quote provocative because it frames Modernism as a force that all art forms must contend with. Does this imply that poetry, due to its flexibility and historical depth, could reinterpret or even transform Modernist ideas uniquely? Could the poet’s role involve negotiating between tradition and innovation, and how does that compare to challenges faced by painters or composers? I’m curious about examples where poetry both acknowledged and subverted Modernist principles.

Reply.
Information sender
Leave the question
Click here to rate
Information sender