Dear Angela,
I recently read your article in The Spectator, and I have to say, it’s not very sportsmanlike. So, you have a problem with the surge of prose poetry in—let’s say—the last seven years. You would be correct in that people have steered away from traditional verse, rarely trying to stick to the strict format of a Villanelle. However, we are out there.
I, like yourself, am a huge fan of classic poets such as Plath and Tennyson, BUT I can also recognise the value that a prose poem provides. I recently came across a brilliant prose poem by Susan L. Leary, called ‘THERE ARE NO WARNING SIGNS’.
Somewhat like the title suggests, the first line feels like it’s been taken from somewhere else. We are dropped right in, a little discombobulated. You’ll notice the date was only a few months ago, but I’m not sure you understand the history of prose poetry. It was most notably the 19th Century French symbolists who paved the way for future prose poets.
You speak of the winning poems from the most recent National Poetry Competition as being like “diary entries” and “reportage”. You make the bold claim that “poetry is not prosaic,” inadvertently tarring all prose poetry with the same sapling brush. While the winning poems may not be to your taste, there is a world outside of this one competition. It would seem you hold The Poetry Society in high regard, and as is clear, they have disappointed you.
Another famous example of a prose poem is Allen Ginsberg’s ‘Mugging (I)’.
This extraordinary prose poem is like a movie. We are privy to every minute detail—absolutely nothing is out of place. This is far from prosaic, Ms. Patmore. Your belief that poetry mustn’t have long lines is depriving you of an experience. Short lines are effective, but longer lines dance to the beat of their own drum. Poetry can be sprawling and effective. Allen Ginsberg was one of the most prominent figures to have lived, yet he took pleasure in his poetic prose.
You call this whole thing a “betrayal”, an insult to “those like myself who have loved and written and studied poetry for decades,” but you have misunderstood the purpose of poetry. You are stuck in a trap of your own making. Poetry is fun when nobody is hanging over your shoulder pointing out rule-breaks. Confirmation bias is killing your mind. You only seek out the prose poetry you despise, not the ones that elevate the soul, such as Mariosa Di Giorgio and the examples given above.
You point out how school children end up wanting to “stab the poet’s eyes out,” and you aren’t wrong. Poetry is taught wrong. In high school, we were subjected to the war poets, which is something I find baffling. Relatability is not the most important quality in poetry, but as a first introduction, finding something people can connect to would be useful. Except, I don’t believe anyone can enjoy poetry in a school setting because you have to be tested on it. If I had to be tested on every book I read, I would never read again. I love to discuss, but to be reduced to a letter is antithetical to the beauty of art.
My final advice to you, Ms. Patmore, is to really research prose poetry. Force yourself to find one you like, no matter what decade / century it comes from. Buy a bunch of books on the form. However, the most vital advice is to not take competitions as gospel. By doing so, you are removing the chance of finding one you’d love because you are guzzling on the nipples of The National Poetry Society. Move away from the tap and visit the ocean.