Das Problem

haben auch andere: Zwei Leserbriefe zu einem Artikel im Guardian:

If you could only give poetry more space

… few people in Britain now read poetry of any kind and, of those, the majority are locked into the sounds, rhymes, rhythms and tastes of their schooldays.

As a published poet, I don’t blame them for this, since they are rarely offered any information or encouragement to help them discover and enjoy contemporary poetry. The Guardian and Observer, for example, give us many interesting and informed articles and reviews on contemporary art, architecture, dance, films, music, novels, opera, plays, pop – but very rarely anything about poetry. Even when the subject does appear, it’s generally for some token or incidental reason.

… Since newspapers are the main source of information and education on the arts, why do they ignore poetry? The usual reply is because it’s too difficult and obscure, or that it doesn’t rhyme, but this is only said because poetry has found new and varied forms of expression, subjects, voices and sensibilities. The real problem is that people have not been popularly exposed or educated to these changes. Poems on the Underground is, perhaps, the exception, but it’s sad that poetry can only be openly displayed and encouraged when it is underground. Brian Hughes Lausanne, Switzerland, Guardian 31.3.01

Der zweite Brief geht der Frage nach, warum ein Gedicht wie „If“ von Kipling, der heute in England allgemein als Chauvinist und Rassist gilt, von Pinochet-Opfern in Chile geliebt wird. „Perhaps a case of the poem being greater than the poet.“