Nearly 100 views and nothing, Julie. Seems that poets aren't interested in poetry. Or at least not in
Poetry. Well, as is my wont I'll stick my head over the parapet and say, predictably enough, I think it seems like a bit of a sideshow. Are resignations being demanded from other US journals who also haven't read these people's minds and responded in exactly the right way? What about journals and organisations who haven't issued statements at all, are resignations being demanded from them? OK, I'm being slightly flippant, I realise the writers are all connected to
Poetry in some way. So, I know about 'silence is violence'. I didn't realise 'language that is entirely supportive but insufficiently specific and/or lengthy' was also violence.
Poetry's statement said "there is much work to be done, and we are committed to engaging in this work to eradicate institutional racism" and that the magazine is "committed to making this
a priority" (my italics). Fairly vague, but entirely positive as a starting point, surely. Why not wait a while, at least longer than 48 hours, and see how the magazine might start to make good on this commitment before you begin issuing demands and demanding resignations? Or at least express your disappointment in the statement's platitudes and ask for something more concrete first. Also, in terms of diversity of representation, isn't
Poetry, more than most places, fairly exemplary? I did a quick Google (not an extensive study admittedly) of contributors from a random issue in 2001 and a random issue in 2019. The representation of poets of colour seems to have increased massively in the last two decades. I don't really see a literary journal as having any more obligations to equality than this. The statement also said "We believe in the strength and power of poetry to uplift in times of despair, and to empower and amplify the voices of this time, this moment". This seems entirely appropriate for a poetry journal and, to me, important work in itself. I know the PF is wealthy, but from my understanding that's mainly down to one giant donation from Ruth Lilley in 2003, not from any connection to sinister establishment forces. They can do what they want with their windfall, can't they? It's their money. They're a poetry organisation, not a civil-rights charity or a branch of government. And as I said above, it seems to me that they have been pretty blameless since their cash injection in terms of inclusivity on an artistic front. This seems like another example of exactly the wrong people being targeted because those doing the targeting know that a liberal conscience and the fear of being 'woke-shamed' (I think I just made that up) is more likely to make them capitulate. I can't see what good it will do anyone. I hope every one of these 1800 signaturies have also done something productive recently beyond this easy show of outrage: joined or financially supported a left wing or anti-racism organisation, written to relevant politicians, engaged in real and worthwhile activism beyond the social media echo chamber, even been actively kind to a needy stranger maybe. I hope in all good conscience they can look at the "do more and do better" from their letter and apply it to themselves. I hope they do all these things and also vote for Joe Biden, flawed as he is and distasteful as some of them may find him, otherwise they aren't serious people and don't understand the stakes of the next four years.
It's also telling to me that the people named in the first of the list of demands
Quote:
|
The President must be replaced by someone with a demonstrated commitment to both the world of poetry and the project of creating a world that is just and affirming for people of color, disabled people, trans people, queer people, and immigrants.
|
doesn't include working class people or those from economically disadvantaged circumstances. Of course I share the vision of a just world for the people mentioned, and many will fall into the economically disadvantaged category anyway, but it seems odd to miss out the specific group that good old fashioned socialism was primarily created to help. Particularly given their later statement that they
Quote:
|
dream of a world in which the massive wealth hoarding that underlies the Foundation’s work would be replaced by the redistribution of every cent to those whose labor amassed those funds.
|
Perhaps simply being dirt-poor isn't a fashionable enough disadvantage.
Maybe I'm being needlessly cynical. The letter writers have made their point and the people resigning are hardly going to struggle financially. And maybe new people really will 'do better' somehow. Hope so.
Anyway, I hearby announce my own resignation from GT because I'm no doubt getting a reputation for being the grumpy voice of 'political correctness gone mad'. I'm sure I'm not. I voted for Jeremy Corbyn twice you know!
