What Is Poetry?
By
Garth Wehrfritz-Hanson (Lo Gos)

Introduction

A while ago, I read an essay written by a retired university English professor on this very subject. I was rather offended by the essay, since, in my humble view, it epitomized the worst-case scenario of academic snobbery, combined with a hostile intolerance.

I know you likely think that sounds a tad too critical or judgmental, but hear me out as I unpack that for you. This chap read and studied poetry with two--for me--very problematic hermeneutic principles. He insisted that a poem had to be entertaining--i.e., pleasant to read, otherwise he would lose interest and refuse to read the entire poem. Secondly, he contended that he was offended by any poet or poem that endeavoured to convince readers of moral-ethical or spiritual values.

I.

Both of these hermeneutic/exegetical principles are dead wrong. Why? First of all, since when were classic poems like the Iliad or the Odyssey entertaining or pleasant to read? For most of us, we wade through them with a considerable effort. Yet, that does not mean we should neglect them or relegate them into the dustbins of poetic history. Quite the contrary--it is my premise that they are valuable classics precisely because they do require a lot of effort on our part. Wading through such works is an exercise in the virtues of endurance and tolerance. Virtues that stand us in good stead for the wide array of vicissitudes in life.

Good poetry may indeed offend our personal tastes or interests. Rather than write off such poetry as worthless, it is incumbent on us to examine more deeply our values, principles and methods of interpretation. Offensive poetry--the long run often proves to be good for us--may raise issues for us that open the door of dialogue, rather than keep us content with a smug attitude of hostile intolerance. It may help us examine more closely why we find such poetry offensive. We might do well to ask ourselves: "Is there something within us that needs a change of heart or mind, attitudinal or practical?" The offense is doing its work precisely by surfacing such questions, issues or challenges to our consciousness. I am left wondering whether the learned professor was ever open to deeply examining why he insisted on poetry that is entertaining and pleasant to read. I always thought that one of the purposes of a university education was to examine carefully why we believe and behave as we do, and to reflect deeply on the implications of those beliefs and behaviours for others and ourselves. After reading the learned professor's essay, I'm not too sure that he is open to such dialogue or examination.

II.

In the second place, I am deeply disappointed in--and I wonder how many students over the years were too!--this chap's attitude towards poets and poems written for the purpose of convincing readers of moral-ethical and spiritual values. First of all, I ask, what good are moral-ethical and spiritual values if we keep them to ourselves? They very much are an integral part of collective humankind. I agree with the Jewish-Christian teaching that every human being has deep within them the God-given ability to distinguish right from wrong, good from evil. Without such moral-ethical and spiritual values, I ask, where does the learned professor find meaning in his life?

At the heart and core of Western civilization is the Judaeo-Christian canon of literature. Within this canon, is the Psalter, in my view, containing some of the most beautiful, insightful poetry ever written by humankind. In the words of the psalmists--I'm using the plural, since I believe the Psalter was composed by several authors--no rock of human experience or wisdom is left unturned. The Psalter is full-to-overflowing with poems that communicate every human emotion and thought under the sun. That's exactly why this poetry is so compelling and appealing to us. The psalmists deliberately set out to communicate, with much rigor, moral-ethical and spiritual values.

Why is that the case? Well, human beings are created in the image of God; thus innately designed to be in relationship with God, as well as reflect the reality of God's image to the world. The poetry of the Psalter celebrates this reality and laments the fact that we do not always live up to this reality. Therefore, the didactic and kerygmatic genres of the Psalter are integral to our journey in life. For the learned professor to deny this or be offended by it seems to mean to me that he is actually not open to the underlying reality that we are created in God's image--therefore, we yearn for moral-ethical and spiritual values, which reflect the essence of who we are in our relationships with God, others and the world.

I wonder why the learned professor and others of his ilk are so offended by such poets and poems. I wonder again if they have ever deeply examined why they find this so offensive. How open to dialogue are they? How much are they able to actually learn from others if they dismiss poetry written from the point-of-view of moral-ethical and spiritual values?

III.

Now that I have spent considerable time refuting someone else's definitions of what poetry is, it's time to focus on my own definition. Before I do that, however, I want to offer you the reader a common--perhaps so common that we tend to forget it--observation about definitions, with which most, if not all of you are familiar. Most--if not all--definitions are biased and have their limitations. It is not unusual for definitions to be rather narrow and confining, elitist or oppressive--that is why they are in constant need of revision, to meet the needs of people at given times in history and fit in with the contemporary milieu of society. In light of this presupposition on my part, there are at least three hermeneutic principles which I apply while writing or reading poetry.

First, I am an existentialist, following one of the founders of existentialism, Soren Kierkegaard, who said: "subjectivity is truth." Life in the daily round is our teacher. The unconscious nature of our being--our soul/spirit--brings to consciousness all of our daily, real life encounters. Poetry endeavours to integrate and process all of this to give our lives meaning and purpose.

Second, I employ the hermeneutic principle of what is known as "reader-response criticism" when I write and read poetry. Reader-response criticism, after a fashion at least, demythologizes the hermeneutic principle of "objectivity." In stark contrast to objective reality, reader-response criticism insists on being honest and upfront about writing and reading literature with all of who we are--i.e., our gender, racial or ethnic background, class, along with our personal fears, prejudices, hopes, dreams, etcetera. All of these factors influence how, why and for whom we read and write poetry.

Third, I employ the hermeneutic principle that every poem has a meaning that escalates throughout the transmission process and history of the poem. Or, to put it more clearly, the meanings of a poem are always "in process" and expanding. The original meanings and intentions of the poet may or may not necessarily be the same as the meanings other readers in diverse contexts over time ascribe and/or add to the original intentions and meanings of the poem. In the history of a poem, there is never only one "correct" meaning of the poem. All of us read meanings-plural "into" a poem. Instead of one or two-dimensional reality, this hermeneutic principle adds a multidimensional reality to poems.

IV.

After having articulated my point-of-view and reservations concerning definitions of poetry, let us look at a couple of classic dictionary definitions. For our purposes, these definitions are helpful as dialogue stimulators, with the premise that poetry and its meanings are always "becoming," always "in process," rather than being fixed, static and absolute.

First, a thesaurus definition:
Poetry: verse, poems, meter, rhyme, song, poesy, poetics, versification, numbers, stanzas, balladry.1

Second, an early 1990s dictionary definition:
Poetry: A type of discourse which achieves its effects by rhythm, sound patterns and imagery. Most characteristically, the poetic form evokes emotions or sensations, but it may also serve to convey loftiness of tone, or to lend force to ideas.2

Third, a contemporary online dictionary definition:
Poetry: 1. The art or work of a poet. 2. a. Poems regarded as forming a division of literature. b. The poetic works of a given author, group, nation, or kind. 3. A piece of literature written in meter; verse. 4. Prose that resembles a poem in some respect, as in form or sound. 5. The essence or characteristic quality of a poem. 6. The quality of a poem, as possessed by an object, act, or experience: the poetry of the dance movements.3

Now we could quibble about each of these definitions until the cows came home, but that is not the point or scope of this essay. I don't know if you're like me, but the language employed in all three of these definitions of poetry seems to me to be too static, technical and mechanical. Don't get me wrong, it is fine to be aware of; to practice--gifted and disciplined--even to master the nuts-and-bolts or science, if you wish to call it that, of what makes poetry poetry. However, if one is so preoccupied with the nuts-and-bolts, one may well be paralyzed in the spontaneous, multidimensional-creative nature of poetry.

The creative process is often difficult to describe in rational, academic language. It is frequently what some refer to as the mystical, the supra rational or supernatural, the ecstatic or visionary. One thing that many agree on is that this aspect of poetry often involves processing what C.G. Jung called our collective unconscious, and what faith traditions call our soul/spirit, which surfaces to our consciousness from time-to-time. Some writers and holy personages report an experience of being totally overwhelmed, enlightened, and awestruck by God or a Revelation or a Truth that, at first, defies description, and later is articulated at least in part, but not completely. Here, off the top, at least five biblical narratives come to mind: Moses on Sinai, Elijah reportedly ascending heavenwards in a chariot of fire, the annunciation of Jesus' birth to Mary, Paul on the road to Damascus, and Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration. So holy other was Moses' experience that he had to remove his sandals and bow down out of deep respect and obedience to God. When one reads the beautiful poetry of the Magnificat, one is filled with a sense of holy awe and joy at what God has done and promises to do in the future. Paul, the deep thinker, seems unable to completely process or articulate his extraordinary experiences. He was likely reflecting much later on them when he states, in humble reverence, that: now--in this life--we see in a mirror dimly, then--in heaven--we shall see face to face.

Conclusion

In my humble view, poetry is life and life is poetry. It is able to articulate the multidimensional meanings of human existence in a wide variety of genres--whether it be iambic pentameter, sonnets, ballads, or contemporary freeverse and beyond; whether we employ the figurative language of image, symbol, allusion, allegory and more--to evoke every real-life emotion, thought, and spoken or sung word. It is the deep communion of human beings with each other, the world, and God.

I rather like the Greek words poietes (maker, composer), and poiein (to make, to compose); for me, they both allude to God the Greatest Poet, who made/composed/created us in the image of God. Thus, one might conclude, that as beings created in God's image, we are fulfilling the very essence of our being as co-creator poets. That is why every human being is a poet and life is poetry. So my dear readers, keep reading, writing/creating beautiful poetry.
(This essay is copyrighted by the Rev. Garth Wehrfritz-Hanson, November 27, 2000. For permission to publish or use, please e-mail the author at: wehrhanca@yahoo.ca).