Songwriting vs. Poetry: Part II

“Pure Perception” and a Pleasure Hierarchy

My last post ended with a quote from Walter Pater’s The Renaissance, in which he claims that “All art constantly aspires towards the condition of music” (86 – all quotes are from the Oxford World’s Classics edition if you’re interested in further reading). He goes on to discuss how the different types of art do this, and he includes poetry. He suggests that the best poetry is that kind which leaves its subject matter the vaguest, so that the meaning of the poem “reaches us through ways not distinctly traceable by the understanding” (87). He believes “art, then, is thus always striving to be independent of the mere intelligence, to become a matter of pure perception, to get rid of its responsibilities to its subject or material” (88).

I wondered if contemporary poetry could be put to Pater’s test. I realize this is rather a broad generalization, but most poetry I’ve read lately seems much more intent on emphasizing its subject matter than on creating a poem that will “become a matter of pure perception.” Many contemporary poems privilege content over any attempt at creating a form or even working in the poetic tradition, both of which may engage the intellect, but could also lead to the poem’s release from it. Granted, Pater’s philosophy may be out of date, so perhaps it’s not best to assume that poetry should even be attempting this sort of style.

However, I do think Pater reveals an essential feature that’s missing from a lot of contemporary poetry – pleasure. Once the poem escapes itself, it provides pleasure in the experience of pure perception, in a similar way that music does. Of course, if a poem aims for pure perception and a vagueness of subject material, it is likely to frustrate many readers, who may not be able to reach this “state of music” without something of the intellect to guide them. The effort at deciphering the vague poem may actually inhibit any pleasure the reader could derive from it.

Whether or not readers can transcend the material and experience poetry as perception depends on their experience with it, and as I mentioned in my last post, poetry’s long history makes for an intimidating tradition that eliminates much of the pleasure possible in the reading experience if one is unfamiliar with it. Thus, it seems to me, Pater’s philosophy can only work for those seasoned readers of poetry; the everyday reader will not find much pleasure in trying to navigate a vague text in the hope of experiencing pure perception – especially not when music is so much more accessible.

I’ve been giving more thought to the idea of pleasure based on several comments from different readers over the last few weeks. In keeping with my post on “Two Schools of Thought,” I found that two different opinions have emerged about what type of pleasure poetry should give. In the context of the songwriting vs. poetry debate, it seems like pleasure plays an even larger role, especially in distinguishing between “high” and “low” types of music and songwriting.

As one reader wonders, should we categorize Fergie’s “My Hump” as songwriting, or should we only allow more poetic lyrics into this category? Another reader counters by showing how all of poetry’s history is contextual, with many poets like Wordsworth reviled by critics as not “high” enough when they first published. By extension, songwriting suffers from this same problem.

The bottom line question seems to be, what type of pleasure is legitimate? Does pleasure depend on effort, both of the writer (in constructing a poem or a song) and the reader (in deciphering it)? Or should we derive pleasure from instant emotions, whether brought to us via a catchy rhythmic beat and a one-liner chorus, or through a poem that reveals its intentions easily, with no need to get every allusion?

The answer, as Pater pointed out, is entirely subjective. Each listener and each reader will gain pleasure depending on their tastes and experiences, and, for Pater, the ability of art to accommodate all types of viewers/readers/listeners is part of its great fluidity and beauty.

I have to admit, though, that I’m not entirely comfortable with a completely subjective view of music and poetry. Why bother studying literature or music at all if everything can be categorized as art? I still want to argue for the priority of pleasure that comes by effort, even if that’s not a popular view anymore.