About poetry and Literature

A poem doesn't have to be Literature but it helps. In saying this, The Muse is is not taking sides in the debate between strict interpreters of literature and their opponents; The Muse is just floating on the tides of fashion. The fact is, most of the poems that receive public attention and admiration today are literary in nature (that is, Literary with a capital "L"). You only have to look at the average high school or college English curriculum to realize how much emphasis our educational systems places on traditional forms.

About poetry

The view that a poem doesn't count unless it's literary is dying fast. The measure of what constitutes Literature had drifted toward liberalism in the last two-thirds of the twentieth century and is still drifting, especially among poets, academics, critics, and poetry buffs. As poets innovated and sought to embrace new forms of expression, forms that departed from the classic confines of literature began to appear in serious writing. In recent years, many excellent poems (and some great poems) have been written that are difficult to categorize one way or another.

The Muse tends to champion both sides of this debate. A poem is good or it's bad based on its own merits, whether it's Literature or literature. Even street poetry can be worthy. (Take the Beat poets, for example.) Besides, it's next to impossible to precisely define Literature or to objectively decide whether a poem is literature or Literature . (For more on this issue, read on.)

What does it matter, anyway, whether or not you attach a word like Literature to a work of art? A poem is what it is. Such debates are fruitless and unproductive.

about Poetry and literature

Since the "L" word has been raised, it's appropriate to explain what The Muse means by the word literature.

Although Literature is difficult to pin down, this much is clear. Literature consists of writings in which expression and form are characteristic or essential features. This applies to novels, history, biography, and essays, and especially poetry. To be literature, expression and form must be imbued with ideas of permanent and universal interest.

From this perspective, not all poems are literature—for example, some failed experimental works by modern poets, poems written by high school students in hormonal heat, and poems produced by ragamuffins dashing about the streets playing kick ball. But by the same token, poems that seem frivolous or may seem to wander are not always unliterary. Mother Goose is a case in point.

It's not always easy to decide whether a written work's expression and form are characteristic or essential features or whether they are imbued with ideas of permanent and universal interest. Moreover, poetic literary forms vary greatly, especially in this modern age, and it may be impossible to unambiguously identify the underlying armature that gives a poem its structure and meaning.

Many qualified literary critics believe that a poem should be open to interpretation and should make you think; to them, ambiguity is a virtue. If you can't put your finger on a poem's expression or form, or if you can't say with certainty that its ideas are permanent or universal, is the poem any less literary than is another poem in which you can do these things?