Donoghue Says Poets Should Avoid Having Any Political Commitments

"Of course we're always waiting for a new revelation," remarked Denis Donoghue, professor of English at Trinity College, Dublin, at a colloquium on "Modern Poetry Today" Tuesday night. In the absence of such a vision, he and his two fellow panelists discussed their topic informally without reaching any substantial agreement.

Much discussion ranged about the topic of whether poetry should be an art form or a social commentary. Donoghue noted that poets are notoriously inept when tackling politics. He cited T.S. Eliot's politics, which were "grotesque."

While doing backwork for the Conservative Party, Eliot declared that "the purity of the English language was dependent on the success of the Conservative Party," Donoghue added.

Although Allen Tate, the later Yeats, and Donoghue "reject the notion that the poet should have anything to do with politics," a Swedish poet in the audience reminded the panelists that "in Russia political reference must be vague; therefore the writers have this responsibility" of social comment.

That is why poets such as Yevtushenko "have such mass audiences," explained Lars Beckstrom, a member of the International Seminar.

"Responsible to Language"

The crucial issue, Donoghue asserted, is to whom or to what is the poet responsible? Allen Tate's answer, he said, is that the poet "is responsible to his language."

Panelist Constantine Trypanis, of Oxford, asked if any country represented by members of the audience still produced long narrative poems. "Long poems are a thing of the past," a man from Ceylon answered. He added that, although ten years ago Ceylonese poetry was more patriotic, now it is a mixture of religious and love themes.

"Ceylon," he concluded obliquely, "is the most erotically underdeveloped country in the world."

"You are standing in the most erotically underdeveloped country right now, sir," retorted American novelist and critic Jack Ludwig. The audience applauded.