The modern poet. To proclaim as one is to commit certain social suicide, as poetry seem to be restricted to depressed inadequates who walk around wearing black and listening to Dirt Pram or SlipperyRope or whatever it is they listen to. Tis is a real shame, because as a nation, poetry is our national art form. The French have their paintings, the Belgians have their chocolate and the Americans have their ignorance, but we English (sorry Scotland, Ireland and Wales, I'm sure your sonnets are lovely) can safely say we hold more prestige in the poetry world than any others. Unfortunately, it seems to many that poetry is a dying art. I mean, the are bags of poetry competitions about, but poets don't get the same recognition they would have a century ago.
Or do they?
It depends what you class as a 'poet', but if you follow my view, you can't help but agree that one medium has made poetry more popular than ever, and young people literally worshipping the most renowned. After all what is poetry? It is a verse with a deeper meaning, or sometimes not even that! A good example is The Little Vagabond by William Blake. It means what it says, that churches should be more like pubs, and if you can read some deeply ironic meaning throughout the whole piece, let me know by posting a comment, because I sure as Hell didn't see it.
No, poetry has taken on a new guise for modern times, and there are an extremely select few who don't know of it. You may know it simply as 'music'.
Think about it, if someone were to show you the lyrics to a song you'd never heard (providing it didn't talk about "bros n der hoes"), you could be forgiven for thinking it might be a poem. Don't believe me? Try this 'stanza' on for size:
I have not bummed across America
with only a dollar to spare, one pair
of busted Levi's and a bowie knife.
I have lived with thieves in Manchester.
And now let's look at a modern poem:
I begged you to hear me
there's more than flesh and bones,
Let the dead bury their dead.
They will come out in droves,
But take the spade from my hands, and
fill in the holes you've made.
Not a huge difference really is there? That's because they both have rhythm, both of these examples have enjambement (where a line ends without punctuation) and end-stops (where a line ends abruptly on a full stop), and they both hide a deeper meaning. I'd analyse them for you now, but I'll leave you to do that if you so desire.
It'll never be accepted by the poets society, but when bands like Mumford and Sons can write more meaningful words than William McGonagall, those in charge can do what they like, it's not going to make Mumford run away crying. Bear in mind though, there is a lot of modern music I wouldn't call poetry because they hold no meaning or real soul, and this is true for a lot more of the 'popular' music. Let's be honest though, N-Dubzzy Snoopy Dogg are more popular than Great Lake Swimmers, and Carol Ann Duffy is more popular than Simon Armitage. You can work the maths out for yourself.
*Super special bonus points for anyone who noticed that the example poem stanza and song verse were in fact the wrong way around. I really am a cheeky devil at times, aren't I?
'It Ain't What You Do it's What it Does to You' belongs to Simon Armitage
'Thistle and Weeds' belongs to Mumford and Sons
