How accurate is this image?

slam poetry is rap for white people

rap is rap for white people

I'm trying to control my sexism, but I can't help but see this as the insidious influence of women dominating the field in the late 20th century with their "muh feels" colective artistic voice

>ignores Auden
>Acts like Eliot's not the most overrated poet in history

slam poetry is rap for black people

nice graphic op, well done senpai

will keep it handy

Eliot is underrated if anything

Of course we can, it's Veeky Forums
don't be a killjoy :)

It isn't that accurate or at least not objective but the link between poetry and fascist shit is pretty interesting. But it doesn't make right wing good, it makes poetry suspicious.

It proves that Plato was right when he said (in Republic) that poets should be expelled and only let back in the republic after they've convincingly defended themselves.

Plato was a fascist

...Plato was a proto-fascist.

Authoritarian or something, maybe, but (proto-)fascist? Nah.He was much closer to communist than fascist.

He was for a form of equality, he wasn't nationalist (as if people back then could, in the modern sense, be), etc. He was for a new utopia, not for any old order.

Aristotle would be worse; he considered slaves okay, he considered women inferior (both of which Plato was against, quite remarkably), he considered peace and unity and order as more important than forming some sort of new utopia.

>t.s. eliot is underrated
by fucking who? by high schoolers forced to read prufrock in your junior english class, maybe, but don't be ridiculous

Eliot is better than Shakespeare

cool opinion dude
has nothing to do with eliot being overrated or underrated

Have you read Plato?

>Communist
He believed in class divisions: a worker class, a merchant class, a ruling class, etc.
He believed that some men and born better than others.
He believed in currency.
How is that communist?
>Wasn't nationalist
...he was? What do you call a man who believes in a closed society with strong traditions and strict hierarchy?
>For a new utopia, not an old order
How are those mutually exclusive? How does fascism have anything to do with any "old order"? Fascism calls for a new utopia as well...
>Didn't believe women were inferior
...he did? Have you read the republic? He said that women should be given the same opportunities as men, but also that they are inherently weaker/inferior.

Please read The Republic before talking about it.

He's not properly rated as being better than Shakespeare and one of the top five writers in the history of the English language. That makes him underrated

>Some men are* born
>The Republic*
>Traditions and a* strict hierarchy
Sorry, I'm on mobile.

MUH VOLKISCHE CULTURE

WE WUZ VIKANGZ N SHIET

MY COUNTRY IS GOOD

t. Right-wing "Poet"

t. liberal faggot

>gucci mane
>leftist

...

He's properly rated as one of the greatest Modernist poets. I can see an argument for him being the greatest. That's it. It's nice to see your being passionate about him though.

bases comrade guwo

>>Some men are* born
Made to wave the flag?

I'm just a pedant with OCD.

>...he did? Have you read the republic? He said that women should be given the same opportunities as men, but also that they are inherently weaker/inferior.
As far as politics go, doesn't matter. Women probably were inferior, considering their situation. I don't remember what he exactly said about them: nonetheless, same opportunities is enough compared to Aristotle, who didn't want to give them.

>He believed in class divisions: a worker class, a merchant class, a ruling class, etc.
Which was based purely on their ability and "reason", not wealth or heritage or anything: thus, a form of equality, no natural order. And the classes were workers/merchants/etc, warriors and the philosophers-rulers; there was no separate "capitalist" or merchant class, the "lowest" includes that one. Only warriors and philosophers (= rulers) were separated from the mass. Its a class society still, but a radically different one, far more equal than the one Plato lived in.

>He believed in currency.
Yeah, he didn't take that part far enough. He wanted socialized stuff for the rulers but not the ones to be ruled.

>How does fascism have anything to do with any "old order"? Fascism calls for a new utopia as well...
Fascism is obsessed with societal decay/regression and so on. They're practically extremist conservatives, though obviously not conservatives. Look at how they justify themselves.

>...he was? What do you call a man who believes in a closed society with strong traditions and strict hierarchy?
There are some problems there, yeah, like the "noble lie" thing. But I try to look at the general picture, as we should do when considering whether someone is proto-something or not. In spirit, Plato is not that fascist; thus, he is not proto-fascist. Aristotle, however, well, in reality he'd just be a conservative. But in spirit, he is closer to fascism by accepting a "natural order" of slaves, women being oppressed, etc.

Back to my original poetry point: Plato opposed poetry for the reason that it might cause unjustified, feeling-based judgement in the young; isn't this pretty anti-fascist? A fascist would love poetry that causes a right kind of national feeling.

go read a book on fascism seriously instead of like guessing at what it is

you know just enough to have opinions and not enough for them to be any good

>Allen "Ginsburg"
>Popular music lyricist

Hey, I'm the guy you replied to.

is right. You seem to understand fascism at a superficial, pop culture level.

As far as your point goes, Plato actually believed that only certain kinds of music should be allowed in his society: the kinds of music that inspire order and militarism (if I recall correctly). Sounds pretty fascist to me, friend.

None of this is a slight against Plato, since I myself am somewhat of a traditionalist. I just really hate it when people try to force philosophers to correspond to their personal worldview. If you want Plato, you'll get Plato. In all his Athens-hating Sparta-loving insanity.

cherry picked. try reading ezra pound. and it should be obvious that there are many horrible right-wing "poets" as well

Haha Plato super fascist warman You get your butt kicked loser frog!
@QingWoo#1
T. Qing Woo

>the side I disagree with is in comic sans
this is nice chart

Qing Woo? More like KING JEW.

all poetry is garbage done by no talent hacks learn a real art.

(different user here)
Plato was of course, like most of the ancient greeks, an authoritarian by modern standards but calling him a fascist completely misses the point of fascism, which is it being a form auf authoritarianism with a specific character formed by the era of modernity. Someone who pre-dates the enlightment by like 1800 years can't be fascist by definition.

Calling him a communist is just as silly obviously, since that is a modern ideology as well.

What do you have against Ezra Pound?

"A Girl" is a nice poem. And Hemingway thought highly of him.

Papyrus too though

>brown people

disregarded immeadiately

My attitude exactly, fellow racist

>/pol/ shilling
>a perverse fixation on hip hop
>*brown* people
So it's more important what people are rather what they do?

Also, Plath is the only interesting person. Oscar Brand is where it's at!

More Veeky Forums than /pol/.

>hating on Platon
Sokrates is asking people if they want this and that in their ideal state. Yes, they answer. So he finish them off by saying something like "Ok, go ahead and just fix it".

Do one for Catholic and non-Catholic writers.

>never heard of Percy Shelley

slam poetry is for people who cant make poetry or rap

>vers libre is viewed with a wary eye
>include Pound and Eliot

This is an obvious bait image - but almost every poet who gets put into "right-wing poetry" here has an incredible nuanced position on things which, shockingly, don't fit well into right/left wing. They would be disgusted by the people who try to appropriate them on this website.

Not gonna waste my time on people who clearly know nothing about poetry and poets but yeah.

Fascists took some influence from Plato.

Pretty accurate

Left-wing poets off the top of my head:
Milton, Byron, Shelley (the most consciously radical author in the English language), Whitman

Nice try

Do you not know what "a wary eye" means or something?

>Yeats
>right-wing
10/10

Yeah I do.

I do not understand why'd include it alongside poets who mainly wrote in free verse, unless of course you have it there for mongoloids who know nothing about poetry and want confirmation bias.

No, you don't, because for some unknown reason you seem to think it means a uniform disapproval of all free verse. It obviously means a healthy suspicion of free verse that can be alleviated by a demonstration of ability

Christopher Ricks, one of the leading critics on all things Eliot related, regards Dylan as a master poet. Just feel like that's worth saying in this thread.

>that font change
>obviously racist and sexist
>cherry picking the fuck out of both sides
>right-wing on left side
>left-wing on right side
gr8 b8 m8

>>right-wing on left side
>>left-wing on right side
This was by far the most triggering aspect.

>obviously racist and sexist

Bob, or, Thomas?

Pound fucking invented free verse you tard

Bob.

Well, that's an opinion.

Don't remember saying he didn't, you tard

Communism is "a pure Idea of equality, the communist hypothesis has no doubt existed since the beginnings of the state. As soon as mass action opposes state coercion in the name of egalitarian justice, rudiments or fragments of the hypothesis start to appear" (Alain Badiou)

I suppose everyone was just looking at it from a different angle, eh.

s/poetry/art/g

Do the romantics count as left-wing?

(Barring late-WW maybe).

youtu.be/nrdl4ijru8o
Whatever mothbreather created that graphic has done no research whatsoever into leftist poetry. Link related. I can post more, there's no shortage

Sylvia Plath is obviously the whiner

Pete Seeger etc.

>hip-hop
>left wing
ayyy lmao

>African Americans (Toni Morrison), slam poets (Kendrick Lamar, Sylvia Plath) and popular music lyricists (Bob Dylan, Paul Simon, Allen Ginsburg)

it couldn't be more obvious that it is a bait.

what are you even doing.

Philip Levine.

Everyone responding to this is wrong wrong wrong.

*Plato* doesn't speak in the dialogues. Literally never. I'll wait while you fail to disprove this.

His dramatic characters speak. Each of which has a specific character and attendant understanding (be it coherent or wildly inconsistent) of the good. This is what motivates their dialogic (verbal) responses.

In addition to this, many dialogues feature another *character*, Socrates. Now part of Socrates approach to philosophy, attested to repeatedly in the dialogues, is that dialectic is two, i.e. there are two forms of dialectic which Socrates uses as required. One contradicts and refutes and the other confirms and leads.

In The Republic the first form is used most obviously against Thrasymachus. SOCRATES USES THE SECOND FORM WITH ADEIMANTUS AND GLAUCON. Why am I yelling? Because the so-called "Platonic" argument against poetry in the city in speech comes from Adeimantus. Again, go look it up. I'll wait. Socrates cannot respond to this with what he truly believes (and doesn't Socrates demonstrate quite the command of Greek poetry and music?) without angering Adeimantus, which Socrates cannot do. (Why he cannot afford this is an interesting question, answered in the very, very beginning of Book I, the specifics of which I leave to those willing to investigate.)

So it is not *Plato* anywhere. And censorship comes from Adeimantus, who is far more moral than Glaucon. This pattern is repeated in virtually all the dialogues. Learn to read them and stop pretending that you have any goddamn idea what Plato thought.

The problem here is that you've got classic poets from the right and contemporary poets from the left. If you'd used the classic left, you'd have a very different outcome. Now find some contemporary right-wing poetry.

...

>this
Fuck that pretentious empty bullshit, shit aint even fire rhymes and it isn't pleasing in a literary sense. I think it's tasteless personally.