I said I was done, but now that the inauguration has happened (and now that we’re comparing poetry readings to church sermons) I have to ask:
Elizabeth Alexander v. Rev. Joseph E. Lowery?
“…Say it plain, that many have died for this day. Sing the names of the dead who brought us here, who laid the train tracks, raised the bridges, picked the cotton and the lettuce, built brick by brick the glittering edifices they would then keep clean and work inside of…”
v.
“…when black will not be asked to get back, when brown can stick around, when yellow will be mellow, when the red man can get ahead man…”
Who won?
January 20, 2009
Praise song for the day
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
I vote for the Rev. Joseph E. Lowery. He was funny, but still making a point. It was a nice light moment.
Lowery won going away. He had all kinds of wonderful rhetorical rhythms built into his benediction--Alexander's delivery was in that terrible poetry monotone...reminiscent of the church of poetry readings mentioned below.
penis.
fanny.
bum.
I thought Alexander did a fine job, though she played it a bit safe. But who wouldn't?
But Lowery tore it up. Rhyme! Serving the english auditory arts since the 8th Century.
Lowery.
Lowery won, but he did have the advantage of using a proven text.
But, shit, ain't there a bigger issue here? Like: Poetry is for the ear, man / The eye can't hear, man.
Goddammit, don't these lameass poets realize an occasion like this calls for some highass diction?
I agree. I was so angry at Elizabeth Alexander. She had the opportunity to inspire a poem for our nation, and it was pathetic. The way she read it was even worse. I mean, jeepers. Maybe she was freaked out or whatever, but if that was the case, step down and let somebody else do it.
Alexander's poem was flat and safe, not unlike a teenage girl's dedication to a very pleasant and lovely subject to be published in a local community paper. BOY did I wish Maya Angelou (who reportedly turned it down -- loyalty to Clinton I suppose) was the one to do it. Where was the poetic expression of passion and grasp of this historic moment?
It should be noted that Lowery relied upon Big Bill Broonzy to close (which is great - those lines you cite above are from Broonzy's "Black Borwn and White") and James Weldon Johnson's "Lift Every Voice and Sing" to open (also a fine, fine choice) while Alexander made her own way.
I'm not sure pitting these two texts against one another is useful.
The news article has Lowery saying "when black will not be asked to *give* back" while the blog has him quoted as "when black will not be asked to *get* back."
Not sure who is right, but there's definitely a difference between the quotes.
I liked Elizabeth Alexander's poem, by the way. It may not have been formally or linguistically innovative, but it did the job. It helped highlight an inspiting event, one that many people (including myself) never thought I'd live to see.
And yes, I'm aware that I misspelled *inspiring* in my last post.
Alexander's poem was pathetic, anal-retentive, lifeless...etc!
Rebel Girl, what do you mean by "useful"? It's useful in terms of promoting blog discussion, but I'm curious about what you think it's not useful for. Also, thanks for pointing out the Broonzy connection. There's a really interesting discussion of Broonzy's song, as well as of the rhyme's history in black oral culture here, if anybody's interested: http://www.broonzy.com/
And Anon, the blog has the quotation right. It's "get back" not "give back."
Post a Comment