[lit-ideas] Re: Poetry and Madness
- From: "Andy Amago" <aamago@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 22:46:42 -0400
One might have talent with words or shapes or numbers, but one learns to be a
poet or artist or musician. If Mozart had been adopted by a shipbuilder and
not had a father who pushed him into music, would he have become who he was?
Berryman was an alcoholic. His father was allegedly killed by his mother, or
something along those lines. In other words, a very poor childhood. He was a
very needy person, hence the alcohol. He killed himself about a year after he
gave up drinking (if I remember correctly). I'm of the opinion that madness is
not necessary for great art. It seems contradictory that one can be mad and
still have the wherewithal to concern one's self with meter and rhyme and
structure and images. I think what most people consider madness is really
emotional pain. Also, how do you explain people like Jane Austin, Alexander
Pope? Madness is unfortunately reserved for politics, and not always so
controlled ... Even there, we need to define madness. Sociopat
hs such as Stalin was, are not mad. They're usually charming in fact. People
who are truly mad by definition don't function at a high level. Not so smart
and not thought through and stubborn is arguably a combination that may
resemble madness; it's also not a bad definition of ideologue.
----- Original Message -----
From: Lawrence Helm
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: 9/20/2006 8:47:59 PM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Poetry and Madness
So the trick for the poet, it seems to me, is to cultivate the madness in such
a way as to wring decent poetry out of it without letting it gain possession.
Lawrence
Other related posts:
