In Search of The Anarchist Poet: A Study On Lawrence Ferlinghetti’s A Coney Island of The Mind
Yükleniyor...
Dosyalar
Tarih
2022
Yazarlar
Dergi Başlığı
Dergi ISSN
Cilt Başlığı
Yayıncı
Erişim Hakkı
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Özet
In the cynical totalitarian-capitalist world** where the gaze is absorbed by the encoded signs of mass media, people have been trapped in the cycle of endless consumption. They are therefore easily conditioned, docile bodies in the hyperreal space of the Postmodern world whose simulacras atrophy their critical and creative faculties. They have begun to lose their interpretive-predictive skills since there is no room for anarchy. Ironically enough, even artists have little or no hesitation in rushing into such a predetermined course upon which languor and somnolence descend. In his work, An Artist’s Diatribe, Lawrence Ferlinghetti (1919-2021), an American poet, painter, and anarchist, criticizes this situation with an example of the conversion of artists (with few exceptions) into academics enjoying the comforts of their offices, which are disconnected from real life. He blames them for taking the easy road which eventually destroys the artist’s insurgent soul. He further adds that this road makes them too docile to grasp the overall interpretation of the contemporary world. Ferlinghetti embarks on a quest for anarchist poetry to revive the insurgent souls of the artists. It is not wrong to claim that the poet-anarchist is Ferlinghetti’s “ur voice” which bridges the gap between the poet and the street. Ferlinghetti constantly risks his position as a poet by experimenting with various components of the poem such as language, style, and organization in order to find out his “ur voice”. This reminds us of Nietzschean ropedancer walking on a thin line between light and darkness. It is where his originality lies. In this context, the poet-anarchist is what Ferlinghetti calls the fourth-person singular. This article aims to trace Ferlinghetti’s sense of the anarchist poet through his fourth- person singular theory in his best-selling book of poetry, A Coney Island of the Mind (1958). In the cynical totalitarian-capitalist world where the gaze is absorbed by the encoded signs of mass media, people have been trapped in the cycle of endless consumption. They are therefore easily conditioned, docile bodies in the hyperreal space of the Postmodern world whose simulacras atrophy their critical and creative faculties. They have begun to lose their interpretive-predictive skills since there is no room for anarchy. This age is what Matthew Arnold would call an epoch of concentration with the difference that people’s deviation from the sphere of intellectuality is induced not by their fervent political engagements but by the submission of their will to totalitarian-capitalist systems which obstruct any anarchic space of mind where people can foster free-flowing ideas. Ironically enough, even artists have little or no hesitation in rushing into such a predetermined course upon which languor and somnolence descend. In his work, An Artist’s Diatribe, Lawrence Ferlinghetti (1919-2021), an American poet, painter, and anarchist, criticizes this situation with an example of the conversion of artists (with few exceptions) into academics enjoying the comforts of their offices, which are disconnected from real life. He blames them for taking the easy road which eventually destroys the artist’s insurgent soul. He further adds that this road makes them too docile to grasp the overall interpretation of the contemporary world. Ferlinghetti can be called a clown: a sad, serious and comic soul in the circus since his prophetic cries regarding the suffering humanity in the capitalist world have long been ignored. However, his witty language, fused with his ironical tone on the serious issues, makes Ferlinghetti a unique poet. His poetic genius seems to have been dimmed by the popularity of some famous Beat poets. he deserves more recognition by academic circles. Although his work, A Coney Island of the Mind, was his most widely-read collection among his works, it was critically underrated. This collection is noteworthy in that it incorporates the phases of Ferlinghetti’s poetic evolution. Ferlinghetti embarks on a quest for anarchist poetry to revive the insurgent souls of the artists. This article aims to trace Ferlinghetti’s sense of the anarchist poet through his fourth-person singular theory in his best-selling book of poetry, A Coney Island of the Mind (1958). There are three main phases in his poetic quest: the poet-painter, the poet- activist and the poet-anarchist. In various poems in this collection, one may realize that each poetic voice has a different reaction to the bloody gears of capitalism. While the poet-painter portrays the sufferings of humanity in the capitalist world, the poet-activist calls the academic poets to action since they have long been lulled into sleep by the opium of capitalism. The poet-anarchist, however, is Ferlinghetti’s “ur voice” that bridges the gap between the poet and the street. Ferlinghetti constantly risks his position as a poet by experimenting with various components of the poem such as language, style, and organization in order to find out his “ur voice”. This reminds us of Nietzchean ropedancer walking on a thin line between light and darkness. It is where his originality lies. The poet-anarchist is what Ferlinghetti calls the fourth-person singular. To gain more insight into Ferlinghetti as the poet-anarchist, this article will examine Ferlinghetti’s fourth-person singular which he mentions intermittently in his various works. This concept is theorized, however, by Deleuze. In his influential article, “The Eyes of the Fourth-Person Singular”, Bradley claims that Deleuze’s fourth-person singular is non-person and non-subjective (2015, p.190). It is an impersonal voice in a nomadic space that leads to the demise of the “sedentary” self (Ferlinghetti, 1976, p.5). It makes way for the rhizomic, mobile, fluid, and chaotic network that opens up to endless possibilities. As Deleuze argues, “there is no longer a form, but only relations of velocity between infinitesimal particles
Açıklama
Anahtar Kelimeler
Kaynak
Turkish Studies - Language and Literature
WoS Q Değeri
Scopus Q Değeri
Cilt
17
Sayı
4
