POETRY AS INSURGENT ART

Lawrence Ferlinghetti, legendary Beat poet, literary activist, founder of City Lights Bookstore and Publishers, artist, and dear friend of Red Poppy, has just celebrated his 90th birthday. Lawrence represents what Red Poppy is about.

A prominent voice of the wide-open poetry movement that began in the 1950s, Lawrence has written poetry, translation, fiction, theater, art criticism, film narration, and essays. Often concerned with politics and social issues, Ferlinghetti’s poetry countered the literary elite's definition of art and the artist's role in the world.

In 1953, with Peter D. Martin, he founded City Lights Bookstore, the first all-paperbound bookshop in the country, and by 1955 he had launched the City Lights publishing house.

The bookstore has served for half a century as a meeting place for writers, artists, and intellectuals. City Lights Publishers began with the Pocket Poets Series, through which Ferlinghetti aimed to create an international, dissident ferment. His publication of Allen Ginsberg’s Howl & Other Poems in 1956 led to his arrest on obscenity charges, and the trial that followed drew national attention to the San Francisco Renaissance and Beat movement writers. (He was overwhelmingly supported by prestigious literary and academic figures, and was acquitted.) This landmark First Amendment case established a legal precedent for the publication of controversial work with redeeming social importance. (taken from www.citylights.com)

Lawrence has given us permission to quote from his long title poem from his 2007 boook, ¨POETRY AS INSURGENT ART", lyrical literary activism:

**we apòlogize for the crippled formatting of many of the lines, but blogger is not being nice!**

I am singling you through the

flames.

The North Pole is not where it used to be.

Manifest Destiny is no longer mani-fest.

Civilization self-destructs.

Nemesis is knocking at the door.

What are poets for, in such an age?

What is the use of poetry?

The state of the world calls out for

poetry to save it.

If you would be a poet, create works

capable of answering the challenge

of apocalyptic times, even if this

means sounding apocalyptic.

You are Whitman, you are Poe, you

are Mark Twain, you are Emily

Dickinson and Edna St. Vincent

Millay, you are Neruda and Maya-

kovsky and Pasolini, you are an

American or a non-American, you can

conquer the conquerors with words.

If you would be a poet, write living

newspapers. Be a reporter from

outer space, filing dispatches to

some supreme managing editor who

believes in full disclosure and has a

low tolerence for bullshit.

If you would be a poet, experiment

with all manner of poetic, erotic

broken grammers, ecstatic religions,

heathen outpourings speaking in

tongues, bombast public sppech,

automatic scribblings, surrealist sens-

ings, streams of consciousness,

found sounds, rants and raves—to

create your own limbic, your own

underlying voice, your ur voice.

If you call yourself a poet, don´t just

sit there. Poetry is not a sedentary

occupation, not a ¨take your seat¨

practice. Stand up and let them

have it.

...

If you would be a poet, invent a new

way for mortals to inhabit the earth.

If you would be a poet, invent a new

language anyone can understand.

If you would be a poet, speak new

truths that the world can´t deny.

...

Through art, create order out of the

chaos of the living.

Make it new news.

Write beyond time.

Reinvent the idea of truth.

Reinvent the idea of beauty.

...

Question everything and everyone,

including Socrates, who questioned

everything.

...

Be subversive, constantly question-

ing reality and the status quo.

Strive to change the world in such a

way that there´s no further need to

be a dissident.

Hip Hop and Rap your way to liber-

ation.

...

Your poems must be more than

want ads for broken hearts.

...

Words can save you where guns

can´t.

...

Give a voice to the tongueless street.

...

See the rose through world-colored

glasses.

Be an eye among the blind.

...

Be naive, non-cynical, as if you had

just landed on earth, astonished by

what you have fallen upon.

...

Dig folk singers who are the true

singing poets of yesterday and today.

...

Think subjectively, write objectively.

...

Like a field of sunflowers, a poem

should not have to be explained.

...

Haunt bookstores.

...

Cultivate dissidence and critical

thinking. First thought may be worst

thought.

...

Sow your poems with the salt of the

earth.

...

Don´t let them tell you poetry is a

neurosis that some people never out-

grow.

...

Don´t ever believe poetry is irrele-

vant in dark times.

...

Make new wine out of the grapes of

wrath.

...

Be the gadfly of the state and also its

firefly.

For the rest of the poem and much more, purchase the beautiful book at www.citylights.com or your local independent publisher.

Que viva Lawrence Ferlinghetti!

Que viva City Lights!

Happy birthday, dear bard.

In the Spirit of Neruda (translation of Tina's post)

We are living in a time of profound financial crisis, the causes of which are subject to the climate of panic that encourages executives and the like to proceed with massive layoffs, cuts in humanitarian programs, generalized price increases, and reduction of services. The objective is clear: to reorganize any product that allows capitalist gluttony to maintain its machinery and the astronomical salaries of an executive leadership that must receive its annual bonus for work carried out with surgical precision (despite the crisis or precisely because of it?). It doesn't matter if such leadership is the cause of this gigantic mess, which those below, in a feudal reconfiguration, end up not only suffering, but also literally paying. In 2002, the number of vice presidents at the University of Vermont (UVM), where I have been working as a Spanish professor for almost two decades, was 3, and the disposable funds exceeded $100 million. In 6 years, the corporate frenzy led by the President multiplied the number of vice presidents from 3 to 26 and the salaries of the administrative leadership increased, not counting bonuses and benefits, by over $7 million, an increase of 152% (including new positions and salary increases). In contrast, the professors' union has hardly managed to get a raise in progressive increments of 4%, 3%, and 2% in future years, which doesn't change the fact that my salary is very much below the national average and that I have to continue funding conferences and lectures out of my own pocket.

But we are in a crisis, we are told, a multi-million-dollar hole that requires immediate action, such as layoffs (16 instructors were already notified during the "first phase" of action); not renewing contracts (a camouflaged form of sacking); raising enrollment again (it's already risen by 30% since 2002); increasing the number of students (where and by whom will these classes by given?); cutting two sports teams, etc. In my "unit," in the corporate terminology that is used, it has been proposed to unite all the languages (Asian languages, Romance languages, German, Russian, and Arabic) with the linguistics sector and the faculty of sociology (this at a time when Spanish is being recognized as the second language of the U.S., when there is a national debate that questions the foreign nature of Neruda's language and its consequent academic relocation). The one who would use this structure would be a business manager that would be able with the massive rearticulation to save per year...$100,000. That is, half of the salary of many new executives in the administrative leadership. (Incidentally, the consolidation idea seems to have formed part of the President's plan or vision before the crisis; that is to say, many of the resolutions correspond to a personal agenda that takes advantage of the current situation).

Who are they trying to fool? Will this business manager be satisfied with the meager salary of a professor and rotating department head? Or will it be necessary to hire a consulting company to solve the financial equation, as happened with the disaster of the People Soft program? ($18 million of additional unapproved expenditure, aside from the initial cost of $23 million, all for an electronic program that had already been denounced for its faults at the national level; the extra expenditure includes payment to consultants that charged $190-$350 per hour). Obviously, those responsible for this whole disaster, which has brought us to where we are today, have barely been questioned about their terrible management. In times of crisis, when we are told that we have to “tighten the belt,” our dean has received $8,000 as an incentive or bonus (perhaps for having arrived at such a brilliant proposal). In fact, she is one of the least paid in terms of incentives that award the contradictory “productivity” of those above (needless to say, we professors and the like don’t have the option of any bonus, despite the many varied and unpaid tasks that we continue to perform). Since the fiscal year 2006, the quantity of bonuses paid to the leadership independently of their enormous salaries has been almost $1 million ($896,594). How many job positions can be saved with this “extra” money? One single part-time professor, without even minimal benefits, annually earns half of the bonus of a rotating executive. 16 professors have already been fired, while the leadership maintains its positions, rapacity, and excesses, without showing any responsibility for the grave management errors that have brought about this financial catastrophe. Something very similar is happening at the national level, such as the accumulation of multi-million-dollar bonuses on the part of bank executives that received federal assistance so quickly, a situation that has infuriated citizens obligated to suffer restrictions in times “of crisis.” Without a doubt, these examples of profound social and economic inequality barely reveal the tip of the iceberg.

Where can the heart and essence of the university be found? Isn’t it based on universal concepts of knowledge and education? If the university’s essence has become corporate, an enterprise in which students are considered “clients” and the professors “knowledge providers,” we have completely broken the spirit and very notion of this institution, whose approach is defined at UVM as non-profit and is cemented to a large extent in social justice values. Knowledge, empathy, education, investigation—not oligarchy, money, and economic gain—should form the foundation of university values, in tune with the inexhaustible and supportive spirit of the best Pablo Neruda.

En el espíritu de Neruda

Vivimos tiempos de profunda crisis financiera, cuyas causas se supeditan al clima de pánico propicio para que ejecutivos y afines procedan a despidos masivos, recortes en programas humanitarios, subidas generalizadas en precios y reducción de servicios. El objetivo es claro: sanear el producto que permita a la glotonería capitalista mantener su maquinaria y los salarios astronómicos de una cúpula ejecutiva que recibirá su bono anual por el trabajo llevado a cabo con precisión cirujana (por mucha crisis que haya, ¿o precisamente por ella?). No importa si la tal cúpula es la causante de este enredo gigantesco que los de abajo, en una reconfiguración feudal, acaban no sólo por sufrir, sino también por pagar, literalmente. En el año 2002 el número de vicepresidentes en la Universidad de Vermont (UVM), donde trabajo como profesora de español desde hace casi dos décadas, era de tres, y el fondo disponible superaba los 100 millones de dólares. En seis años, el arrebato corporativo liderado por el Señor Presidente multiplicó el número de vicepresidentes de 3 a 26, y los sueldos de la cúpula administrativa se incrementaron, sin contar bonos ni beneficios, por encima de los 7 millones de dólares, una subida del 152% (entre nuevos puestos y subidas salariales). Como contrapartida, el sindicato de profesores ha logrado a duras penas conseguir un aumento salarial en incrementos progresivos de 4%, 3% y 2% en los próximos años, lo cual no impide que mi sueldo esté muy por debajo de la media nacional, y que siga teniendo que financiar conferencias y lecturas de mi propio bolsillo.

Pero estamos en crisis, nos dicen, en un agujero multimillonario que requiere acción inmediata, como la de llevar a cabo despidos (16 instructores ya fueron notificados en la “primera fase” de acción); no renovar contratos (una forma camuflada de despidos); subir, otra vez, las matriculaciones (desde 2002 subieron ya 30%); aumentar el número de estudiantes (¿quiénes y en dónde se impartirán estas clases?); suprimir dos equipos deportivos; etc. En mi “unidad”, en la terminología corporativa que se maneja, se plantea unir todos los idiomas impartidos (lenguas asiáticas, lenguas romances, alemán y ruso, árabe), con el sector de lingüística y la facultad de sociología (esto en un momento de reconocimiento del español como segunda lengua de EEUU, en un debate nacional que cuestiona la condición foránea del idioma de Neruda y su consecuente reubicación académica). Quien manejaría este entramado sería un “Business Manager” que lograría con la rearticulación masiva ahorrar al año… 100.000 dólares. O sea, la mitad del sueldo de muchos de los nuevos ejecutivos en la cúpula administrativa. (Incidentalmente, la idea de consolidación parece que formó parte del plan o visión del Señor Presidente previo a la crisis, es decir, muchas de las resoluciones responden a una agenda personal que aprovecha la actual coyuntura).

¿A quién se pretende engañar? ¿Quedará conforme este “Business Manager” con el sueldo ralo del profesor-jefe del departamento de turno? ¿O habrá que contratar a una compañía de consultoría para solventar la ecuación financiera, como sucedió con el desastre del programa People Soft? (18 millones de dólares de gasto adicional, no aprobado, sobre el coste inicial de 23 millones en un programa electrónico que había sido ya denunciado por sus fallos a nivel nacional; incluido en el gasto extra es el pago a consultores que cobraron entre $190 y $350 la hora). Obvia decir que los responsables de todo este desastre que ha contribuido enormemente a llevarnos a donde estamos apenas han sido cuestionados por su pésima gestión. En tiempos de crisis, donde nos dicen tenemos que “apretarnos el cinturón”, nuestra decana ha recibido 8.000 dólares de incentivo o bono (tal vez por haber llegado a tan brillante propuesta). De hecho, ella es de los menos pagados en incentivos que premian la contradictoria “productividad” de los de arriba (innecesario decir que profesores ni afines tenemos opción a bono alguno, por muchas y variadas que sean las tareas no remuneradas que seguimos ejerciendo). La cantidad en bonos desde el año fiscal 2006 pagados a la cúpula con independencia de sus enormes salarios es de casi 1 millón de dólares ($896.594). ¿Cuántos puestos de trabajo se pueden salvar con ese dinero “extra”? Un sólo profesor a tiempo parcial, sin ni siquiera beneficios mínimos, cobra anualmente el bono medio del ejecutivo de turno. Dieciséis profesores ya han sido despedidos, mientras la cúpula mantiene sus puestos, rapacidad y excesos, y sin responder a responsabilidad alguna ante los graves errores de gestión que han llevado a este punto de catástrofe financiera. Algo muy semejante sucede a nivel nacional, como la acumulación multimillonaria de bonos por parte de los ejecutivos bancarios tan pronto recibieron apoyo federal, situación que ha enfurecido a los ciudadanos obligados a sufrir restricciones en tiempos “de crisis”. Sin duda, estos ejemplos de profunda desigualdad social y económica revelan apenas la punta del iceberg.

¿Dónde se encuentra la clave y entraña de la universidad? ¿No se basa en conceptos universales de conocimiento y educación? Si la esencia universitaria se ha vuelto corporativa, empresa en la que los estudiantes son considerados “clientes” y los profesores “knowledge providers” (proveedores de información), se quiebra completamente el espíritu y noción misma de esa institución, cuyo planteamiento se define en UVM como “non profit”, esto es, sin ánimo de lucro, y en nuestra universidad se cimenta en gran medida en valores de justicia social. Conocimiento, empatía, educación, investigación y no oligarquía, dinero y ganancia económica deberían fundamentar los valores universitarios, en sintonía con el espíritu inagotable y solidario del mejor Pablo Neruda.