Quote here from Roy Harper: The poet Shelley famously wrote that 'the poet is the unacknowledged legislator of the world'. This was not intended by him as an airy-fairy bedsit aspiration that a moral force was somehow generated through the mere act of writing: but that there was an essential link between poetry, political philosophy, and the active confrontation of illegitimate authority.
We live in a time when hte politics is generally viewed as not working for the people, an certainly not the economics. So what are we, the poets, doing about it? I have heard soem rants recently that were understandable, but were they poetry?
I am not convinced that there is any good political poetry about, perhaps because it is difficult to write – to make serious, topical points and still be poetic?
What do you think?

I suppose it depends on what you look for in poetry. I think political poetry can be clever – whether one enjoys it or not is a different issue.

Chris Jam writes political stuff and wins slams. Elvis McGonagall won WOL poem of the month with an anti republican poem. I prefer Chris Jam’s non political stuff. I enjoyed Elvis’s poem because in the main it was an anti racism satire. I don’t think it’s possible to write a political poem that is beautiful – though that is a subjective word.

I wouldn’t choose to read political poetry because I don’t enjoy having someone rant their political views at me. I’d rather they wrote a letter to the newspaper and got it off their chest that way… From what I’ve seen it seems always to be very angry left wing stuff – in some cases idealistic and facile. In fact, I don’t think I’ve ever heard a right wing poem. Perhaps all the conservatives are quiet because they are too busy earning money or lining their own pockets? They don’t seem to be sat in garrets writing poems, do they? Unless they are responsible for all the poetry about unrequited love…

For the record, I don’t give a hoot what people write or rant about. Everyone should feel free to write about their passion, politics included. I recognise that I have the option to tune out – which I do, on a regular basis.

I’m not sure my contribution is the type of comment you were looking for Julian. As poets, many of us do react to events around us – the riots in particular brought forth a lot of political poetry – much of it anti establishment, anti bankers, anti politicians. Perhaps a lot of it wasn’t brilliant poetry because we were too wound up by the situation and couldn’t divorce ourselves from our feelings well enough to concentrate on expression. I seem to remember Scott Devon’s poem standing out from the crowd – because he divorced himself from emotion – the reader looked down upon the weird happenings much like an alien would have.

I seem to have prattled on a bit….

I too find political poetry awkward.
I doesn't seem quite the right receptacle for it - like drinking beer out of a cup.
On the other hand, I have no problem with political songs. There seems no awkwardness at all about "Hard Rain", "The White Rose of Athens", "Rat Trap" etc. Probably just my own dual standards. Of course, I'm allowed double standards.

I've just put up a poem, the subject of which makes me feel uncomfortable (to say the least), even though I wrote it.
Maybe that's one of the things that political poetry should do??

I'd recommend J H Prynne's Die A Millionaire poem if you want beautifully poised political poetry.

But it depends: a poem can be political without being ranting, or without preaching. Charles Reznikoff and other Objectivist poets could be political just by focussing on the underdog as subject for poetry. A sympathetic portrayal of a one-parent family is political in an age where the media wants to blame the poor, rather than capitalism, for their own poverty.

And really you can't not be political - silence on what's wrong with society is essentially complicity in it.

Steven, a prime point, as always. I agree that 'Political' is nearly as multi-faceted as 'Just'. And we know what a thorny issue that word raises.

Thanks for the names Steven. I like being introduced to poems/poets I haven't read before. I couldn't find the poems you were referencing though - would you have a link?
I did read one by Reznikoff about the 2nd WW. It sounded more like an anecdote than a poem. Nice but not beautiful.

Yes - I suppose we could get into agreeing what the correct definition for 'political' is. I wouldn't see a sympathetic poem about a single parent as being political unless the poem was used as a vehicle to attack the particular goverment/system that allows her to be poor.
Poetry exploring the suffering of man is in a different category for me. The anti- war WW1 poetry is beautiful because it focuses on the tragedy for the individual human being - the pain, the suffering of soldiers and relatives. The condemnation of governments may have been implicit, but it wasn't allowed to swamp the poem. If it had, I don't think those poets would have left the legacy they did.

I read a political poem at the last Tudor. Will give another a run out tomorrow at 'ThePoetry Spoke'.

The poem is non ranty.

I look forward to it. I'll do one that takes a poke at all political extremes and all religions... in short anything that is capable of dividing...

The more I've thought about this thread, the more I doubt the sense in trying to decide just what 'poetic' means. You are back to defining what good and bad poetry is and there is just no answer - only opinions.

I have justput up what I would see as a political poem on the blog. Very interested in any comments on this. I did quite a bit of work on selecting the vocabulary, as many words would not have worked for me. I also cut down the number of lines from an original 52 to 14. It is an almost sonnet - or is it? I didn't think of that till it was finished and I saw the length, but its a size and proportion I feel comfortable with. I think poetry is about condensing a lot of verbage into something more succinct. Also I seek out words that carry visual metaphors. I use words that have been bandied about a lot, and try to wake up the original images.

Strrangely, the last poem I blogged was Tax the rich, although that was a year ago. Was that just a rant?

Everything we write is political in some way. Politics affects everyone's lives, even the bits we don't think about. I think the point of any kind of art is to merge the hardness of politics with the compassion of humanity, and make it relevant to the reality of life.

I wrote this during the elections, which I don't think is ranting, just observation http://thinkingchimp.blogspot.com/2010/04/mr-machinery.html

Also, I suppose this is kind of political regarding equality. Again, not a rant. http://thinkingchimp.blogspot.com/2010/03/equal-degradation.html (Warning: contains some rude words)

definitely political Thinking Chimp, in my view.

http://writeoutloud.net/public/blogentry.php?blogentryid=25799

I write a lot of politically based work, here is just my latest!

I believe that brief is best in any political item. A few well-chosen words can be far more effective than anything long-winded - like the best political cartoon (think of stuff by Gerald Scarfe, for instance)...and the satire from W.S.Gilbert in other days was - and is -sharp and funny. Politicians and others who parade in public life don't like it up 'em and stuff that is easily recalled is the best way of putting over an opposing view. Being "preachy" is ultimately self-defeating for that reason alone.

been a while since i wrote political, but it usually ended up been along the lines of 'F**k the government' etc.. perhaps i need a change in tact - lol

I never forgave Edward Heath for the
deception and want of truth about the direction of what is now the EU.
I wrote these lines on his departure
from this life.
"Goodbye, Edward Heath, that nose and those teeth,
The incredible sulk in that incredible bulk;
The basilisk smile barely masking the bile;
We'd none of us kiss you
And England won't miss you!"

That's clever MC - but very, very wicked! :) I didn't realise you had a rebellious streak.

Anyway I'm butting out of this discussion. I find myself in grave danger of agreeing with Steven.

I think the most recent poems on my blog are political - but then what do I know (and I didn't use the word good!)

http://shaythinkingtoomuch.blogspot.com/

Shay

A hero of mine - W.S. Gilbert - was a wonderful lampooner of the
political set. He would surely
have been a regular columnist in
"Private Eye" had he lived today.

Is capitalism really the ogre we are meant to despise? Or is it rather unregulated capitalism that is at fault? It is human nature in the best of us to strive to improve our lot in this life and we each choose our way as best we can. Certainly, there are those born at a disadvantage, whether it be through inadequate parenting or difficult circumstances - or both, but often they are the ones who succeed in life, despite any perceived handicap. Life has never been "fair" or "full of flowers". We just have to make the most of what we have and get on with it. I have no envy of those who make fortunes- they are often great benefactors. What I deplore is resistance to the "trickle down" philosophy that should go with that good fortune.I don't see socialism as the panacea for life's problems. It is all to often used as a nice little earner by the "some pigs are more equal than others" tendency Orwell wrote about. It is a nice idea but human nature won't permit its true reality. Even Christ was reported to have observed that the poor are always with us! Benevolent capitalism...encouraging individual enterprise while accommodating those in need...is the nearest answer in this world. Finally, I have yet to obtain a satisfactory definition of what constitutes "poverty" in a modern industrialised world. It is relevant to its environment and its time. When my mother was a girl, it meant being without shoes, medical aid, sanitation, proper nourishment, and a roof over your head. Now I suspect that it means something else entirely. Has anyone seen a definition of the word in today's world? Finally - a comment on socialism from another age:
"I'll show you a socialist...
one who is willing
To put down his penny
And pick up your shilling".

Roy Harper is being contentious so here goes. Roy you are talking shite.

MC Newberry is confused
and wallowing a century back
and talking a load of shite.
But then he would 'say'
that wouldn't he?
So beaten off the track.

With cogent arguments like that, Tom, we should soon have another 8 million signed up to the party.

;o)

Sticks and stones...
not reassuring to read that Britain has a Labour legacy of benefits(a useful way of buying votes)that sees 13% of homes with no one working >> a higher rate of jobless families than Spain, France, Italy, Germany and the Netherlands. This country prides itself on its entrepreneurs, inventors, merchant venturers and creative skills that find their markets in the world prepared to pay the going rate...not on someone sitting back waiting to be told they have a job someone else has created...or being unwilling to get out there and find it. But why bother with an income of thousands per annum from the pockets of those who do. A "deprived" family today is one without a car, colour TV, mobile phone and annual holiday among other things (official
report). No mention of missing shoes there then! To close...
Politics in general tend to leaveme cold
And I remain suspicious of whatever I've been told,
But one thing I do know is we all must do our bit,
Even if it seems that some of us are shovelling shit.
:-)

Hey Guys, I think this is a little larger than simple party politics. Politicians are merely faces and middlemen for global interests. We are not governed by those we elect, but by those who can afford the price of the policies which benefit them. Wake up and smell the Chateau Petrus - and stop squabbling!

A.E. who's talking 'party' politics? - not me. And as for 'squabbling' - I'm accusing. If you read my 'profile' you'll see where I'm coming from.

I can see where you are coming from Tommy - I just wasn't sure where you were going.

Does this count as political?

http://www.writeoutloud.net/public/blogentry.php?blogentryid=3145

A.E. - you may recall my mention elsewhere of the sight of the
words on an East End church poster to the effect "Those who never
change their minds, never
correct their mistakes". How I wish
politicians of whatever persuasion would think about that and have the
courage to act accordingly.
That's my contribution over with.
Byeee.

In agreement with Isobel there. Have a listen to some of Chris Jam's work, definitely an informer and very entertaining. Personally I just think poetry is another artistic medium which given our current mass saturation means that the potency is only less due to the sheer weight of material out there and the method by which most people pick up on it (youtube etc /viral information sharing). A meme can last a while in this day and age, spreading fast and wide but ultimately falls prey to short attention spans (themselves fuelled/caused by the same abundance). Rest assured though that the material/the information does get out there and has a massive influence IF it strikes a chord with whatever popular vein is running through the consumers of such; I'm not sure that's so different than in Byron and Shelley's time, just on a much much bigger scale. We still have crony-ism and nepotistic cliques and companies promoting/reinforcing ideas in academia and pop culture...it doesn't stop powerful information coming out in whatever form whether artistic or simple reportage.

I've been attending the Roscoe lectures in Liverpool for some years now. They are put on by John Moores University, are themed around citizenship, get heavyweight speakers and large numbers attending. David Alton runs them. This Monday, Alex Salmond was the speaker at the 103rd lecture.

Not surprisingly he spoke on Scottish independence. In his introduction David Alton drew attention to the friendship between William Roscoe (who the lectures commemorate) and Scotland's national poet, Robert Burns. Like most people in the audience I had no idea Roscoe was a poet.

Burns and Roscoe were both of a liberal persuasion and shared a passion for social justice. Burns must surely have influenced his nation's political thinking with poems like 'A Man's a Man for a that'.

Roscoe himself was also influential.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Roscoe

His poem 'The Wrongs of Africa' was a passionate denunciation of the slave trade. It was well known in his day, and all the more remarkable for the fact that Roscoe was from Liverpool, whose prosperity depended on the trade.

http://www.brycchancarey.com/slavery/roscoe1.htm

To be honest I find it almost unreadable now, but it was popular in its day, long preface and all. "Why feels not Man for Man" is still resonant.

Roscoe's moral courage has been recognised in a high profile lecture series being named after him 200 years after he lived, to celebrate his example. Leading politicians regularly speak at the lectures. Which modern poet is similarly influential on political matters? And would they be similarly commemorated in 2212?

If the industrial age had come that
bit sooner, the "need" for the slave
trade would probably never have existed. Elsewhere, men went down mines like animals to dig the wealth
of the earth (quelle horreur!) yet
found themselves able to protest when machines and other things absolved them of the need to do so
and that form of slavery (and in a sense it certainly was) ceased to
exist. That seems a likely subject
for the pen.