Relationships with contemporary art are not easy for many people. Not everyone can understand why a “heap of garbage” is proudly called an art object and costs millions. “My son can draw better!” – a frequent philistine reaction to contemporary painting. Poetry is also an art and in its modern form can cause bewilderment, fear and rejection: why is this set of words called poetry?
Louise Gluck (in her native English this German surname is pronounced as Glick) has been writing free verse all her life. This is the so-called free verse – without rhymes, without meter. Simply put, this is prose written in a column. It’s not that poetry of this kind was alien to our literature – we all memorized Turgenev’s poem in prose about “the great, mighty, truthful and free Russian language” at school. This is ver libre. But still, we are used to the fact that poetry should have rhyme and a certain rhythm. And in general, it should be beautiful, harmonious, melodious – like Pushkin or Yesenin.
In this sense, Gluck’s poetry will inevitably disappoint. Following the norms of English-language poetry, which lost its rhyme back in the 19th century, her poems are a series of emotional statements in an arbitrary order, sometimes quite aphoristic, with a fair amount of hidden references to mythology, philosophy and art history. This is a kind of intellectual game of pearls, throwing cultural codes and passwords, by which a layer of high-browed Americans distinguishes their own from others. The usual audience for such poetry is the university humanities.
At the same time, Gluck’s poetry is deeply traumatic. She describes the disturbing experience of experiencing manic-depressive states. Poems are generally infrequently cheerful and uplifting. If you think about it, only Pushkin and Pasternak created something bright and life-loving in our poetry, usually sadness and melancholy in verses. Modern English-language poetry makes depression a major source of inspiration. Death, illness, loss, the impossibility of love and understanding, boredom and loneliness – these are her main themes. Poets with enviable tenacity are engaged in a kind of autotherapy, saving on visits to a psychoanalyst.
In fairness, it should be noted that the life of a modern poet is indeed not sugar. Often this is a beggarly half-starved life. Poets are of little interest, they are not highly respected, “poet” almost automatically means “loser”. The attitude towards other artists is different – they create something that, at least theoretically, can be sold. What can a poet sell? Books have to be published at their own expense in scanty print runs. A few literary journals barely survive thanks to the subscription of the authors themselves.
However, in the Western world, two attractive paths open up for professional poets. Following the principle of social responsibility, rich universities hold the position of poet-in-resident especially for them. Almost every major American university has its own poet, whose function is to be listed in this position, receive a small salary and, on special occasions, compose something about a city on a hill. The highest achievement on this path is the honorary post of Poet Laureate of the United States with an office at the Library of Congress. For several years, a successful author can receive honors and participate in official state events. Louise Gluck was in this position in 2003-2004.
Another option is poetry awards. Charity is very developed in the United States: there are many foundations, some of them establish nominal literary prizes, so almost every day some kind of prize is awarded to one or another author. The sums are small, but the poet does not need much.
Well, the highest award is the Nobel Prize. Swedish academicians generally like to celebrate poets: of all the awarded writers, about a quarter are poets. The formula for Nobel success is also generally not difficult to determine. The Nobel Committee is far from interested in the writer’s work in the first place – that is why there are so many names among Nobel laureates who, as they say, are not well known. The future laureate must be a public intellectual – the bearer of a clear public position, usually of the left wing. It is necessary that his works be translated into European languages. Integration into the Western academic environment is required: for many years it is necessary to be friends with key specialists in literature, including Swedish ones. To do this, it is important to continuously participate in conferences, forums, congresses and book fairs. It is important to make friends with the Nobel laureates themselves, to publish with the publishers who own the rights to their books. Before applying for the Nobel, it would be nice to get a dozen other international prizes. And age is also important: the winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature is 65+ on average.
Louise Gluck did everything right. She writes as usual. Behaves as usual. And the Swedish academics heard her “unmistakable poetic voice, which with its strict beauty makes individual existence universal” – as stated in the definition of the Nobel Committee.