Modernist Poetry

Do you honestly believe rupi kaur has read, understood and is reacting against Eliot??

Against his influence at least.

i'm sort of dumbfounded by all the effort you put into some very pointless claims. pitting two artists' work against each other and declaring a "winner" is literally high school cafeteria talk.

good thread op

>T.S. Eliot
>t. can't Latin

>Why? Because the poet is not a mere literary historian or museum curator whose task it is to arrange what past poets have done in a new way; rather, the task of the poet is to rediscover what is truly and eternally poetic, which all good poets of the past also happened to discover. As Goethe put it: "All intelligent thoughts have already been thought; what is necessary is only to try to think them again."
You're misreading this quote, read again.
>Poets are rightly sick-to-death of having to put on haughty airs of profundity and erudition, just to write damned poetry that wouldn't be sneered at by the damned academic snobs.
I quite like it and write like it. You're making the base assumption that you A, understand poetry -while admitting shortcomings in your research-, and B that you can then evaluate others on this self-evident paradigm.

Don't be a pussy-bitch, Pessoa user wrote a good essay.

It's true that Eliot's hermeticism comes from his referential style and it does, indeed, make some of his poetry impenetrable for people who have not yet developed the kind of canonical awareness required to decode every allusion. It's still an interesting hypothetical game to play. I definitely think you're right about the current Watts essay controversy - the post-Eliot style that led to the construction of poetry as a kind of academic discipline, or institution, leaves it open to exactly the same criticism as other western institutions ("my authentic woman of colour experience will take down ebil white male poetry").

This poem is dumpster fire. The people that keep poetry alive are academics, almost all have read snippets of Virgil. I'd respect it if his poem were well written.
>If science wants to be truthful,
What science is more truthful than the science of things without science?
Did he die from a curable disease? Golly i hope so
>valid.
>implying you know valid in a schema that is trying to disrupt conceptions of valis

Modernism is fucking over clichés. Let's provide the terminal logic to this:
>Write poetry about not reading poetry
>encourage others to do the same
>they do and write their own and ignore yours
>Writer's are trash and think their "genius (lol)" is unique
The modern poetry is for idiots that get to feel coddled in their unintelligence by the nascent accessibility of their own vindication through tumblr and insta

I'm glad you put so much effort into this thread OP.