|
THE QUINCY QUESTION |
|
|
|
|
A degree is not all that essential for a poet. Poems are the documentation of a poet's powers. However, a commitment to truth is also important, and in lying about his degree, Mr. Troupe made a serious error of judgment. His resignation from any position for which that fictitious degree was a purported qualification or requirement is certainly appropriate. Some people waste their time, whether they are in a college writing program or not. Others make the most of their time wherever they are. However, if one wishes to teach writing and/or poetry, it makes a lot of sense to spend time studying with master teachers and poets, and a degree documenting such time spent is a reasonable requirement of a poet/teacher. Poets practice their art in a social network of fellow poets in and out of academia. There are plenty of mediocre poems written by tenured poets, but this is not evidence of some elite conspiracy of poet/professors. It is simply the norm in any art. Mediocrity also flourishes at poetry readings, in journals and e-zines, and on bookshelves. College writing programs require certain skills, both social and intellectual, from teachers and students. Many colleges offer human and material resources for writers available nowhere else. So attending an undergraduate and/or graduate writing program can be an incredibly exciting and empowering experience, where a writer can find a voice, an audience, and peers. However, in my experience as an undergrad and grad student, none of my best teachers had more than a bachelor degree (and all of those teachers were and are very well known and highly awarded poets). So there is no objective standard with which to judge the efficacy or necessity of MFA programs with regard to the quality of writings they produce--aesthetic concerns are necessarily subjective. The only guage is whether students in those programs feel their time and money was well spent. Most MFA students do not go on to teach or even publish very much writing. That doesn't mean they failed or the programs failed. Part of education is finding out what you are not going to do with your life. I loved going to college and grad school. I can't imagine my life without reading and writing poems. Sometimes the poems get published. Sometimes they are nominated for and even win awards. I certainly benefited from my academic experience, and continue to do so. However, I do not teach in a writing program and likely will never be able to afford to do so. If I could, I definitely would. Since MFA programs are really only a post World War II phenomenon, there's no point bringing up Keats or Dickinson or Whitman or Crane or anyone else who wrote well but did not get an MFA. Poetry predates literacy, but I don't think anyone can seriously argue that reading and writing are irrelevant to becoming a poet of any serious power in 21st Century America. Poets I've heard who claim some kind of position in "oral tradition" in opposition to "academic" poetry are nearly always charlatans, mediocrities, and egotistical showboating demagogues who flatter an audience into self-satisfaction. Everyone participates in oral traditions, whether they are teaching at Columbia or reciting at the Nuyorican. Nostalgic romanticizing of "the street" leads to just as many bad poems as erudite preening and Eliotic allusion. Good poems are relatively few, and great ones very rare, in every sort of poetry, whether that is formal verse, free verse, experimental verse, hip-hop poetry or whatever other genre one studies. Poems are distinguished through the qualities of attention paid to language and experience by imagination. Developing attentive powers takes years of reading, writing, and speaking, as well as contemplation. Poems educate their readers and their writers alike. Written poetry has a distinct advantage of fixed text, that allows extended analysis, confrontation, and argument between poem and reader. Writing programs offer a structure to carry on this activity among peers and masters. This is difficult to reproduce outside of a formal institution, but can be done. Keats is a good example of the relentless student of poetry; his study of Shakespeare and Spenser in particular helped him arrive at his few truly great poems. He had Charles Lamb, Charles Brown, William Hazlitt, now and then Percy Shelley, on one occasion William Wordsworth, with whom he could practice his study in letters and conversation. If you wish to study a poet in development, a thorough reading of his Complete Poems and a good selection of his letters will trace how a sentimental but ambitious young man with few advantages in life transformed himself into a poet of deep feeling and tragic consciousness. He probably worked harder at it than most poets do today, whether or not they are in an MFA program. In the 20th Century, Gregory Corso and Allen Ginsberg both took non-academic paths in their study of poetry, though Ginsberg went so far as to begin graduate studies, and both wrote arguably great and important poems. They also wrote pointlessly indulgent poems, Corso succumbing to lifestyle issues that subverted his imaginative powers, Ginsberg becoming "Allen Ginsberg" rather too quickly and writing sentimental self-parody for most of his creative life. Would a firmer attachment to academia have saved them from such mixed legacies? I doubt it, though it may have altered certain details of their biographies. There is also nothing wrong with institutions of learning seeking to enhance their own institutional prosperity and resources. |
From Wanda Coleman My sympathies go out to Troupe and his family; but, its important to remember that his situation raises deep issues that require serious examination beyond dismissal as simple human failure. There are factors too large to discuss in a letter, so I’ll only touch upon them. Like Troupe, I belong to the last of that 60s Generation to which the phrase "pull yourself up by your own bootstraps" was a Clarion Call. Unable to afford an education, and terrified of being in debt to the Federal Government for a student loan, I toughed it out in workshops, the library, and via chance mentoring--naively thinking my writing skills would one day earn me enough money to buy my sheepskin. It wasn't. But that did not stop me from becoming an award-winning author. But as the years have advanced, a new generation has grown up that neither understands the difficulties of such an accomplishment nor fully appreciates those of us who have survived or overcome the impossible social circumstances of our time, or who call ourselves "self-educated." Ironically, the push for equal education sounded by the civil rights movement, has had the dual effect of muting the efforts of those, like me, who have struggled against horrific odds to gain access to what was once deemed inaccessible to us simply because of our skin color and social circumstance related to that color. There is nothing chillier than to be a "self-educated" writer teaching in an English department full of PhDs (when even the MFAs are finding themselves in the unemployment lines these days). Your right to teach in a college or university, if you are self-taught, may be held suspect and constantly called into question by better-educated peers. It is grounds for the committee to withhold or deny tenure, even as one is honored. It has been my unfortunate experience, that, as a probable token representative of my race and/or gender, that in today’s institutions the self-taught individual is more likely to be treated as an upstart and usurper--even as they are lauded for their achievements. In such a climate, the "self-educated" are often made to feel they don't deserve the accolades no matter how impressive the resume. I have never concealed the fact that I am "a college drop out for economic reasons," as I present my abbreviated CV, which runs over eleven pages in size 10 font, starting with a full page of awards (keep in mind, there is even a hierarchy among awards). We’re living in an economic climate where genius and recognition are steadily determined largely by the academic community (like having a preference for like), and where the job market in the outside world is increasingly divided into the extremes of the white-collar professional and the service worker. I have been made acutely aware of just how much of an exception I’ve become, overqualified to work in one realm, insufficiently rewarded or recognized to be considered significant in the other. Under these heartless constraints, I can thoroughly appreciate anyone’s temptation to lie on their resume, even if I’ve yet to do it myself. |
|
From
Bob Holman College degrees are immaterial to poetry, but Quincy, like so many poets, had to turn to academe to make a living. A drag that a "white lie" deprives California of their first elected PoLau -- especially in light of the Baraka brouhaha. We need to hear poets' voices uncensored! I just hope this helps bring Quincy home to New York sooner. |
|
|
From John Kulm You might be surprised how much passion this topic can evoke. I once said to an audience, "Elitism of education is similar to racism." It created a huge debate. I loved it. The abstract expressionist Barnett Newman said, "Esthetics is for the artist like ornithology is for the birds." That's also true for poets. A poet can have a strong voice and not need to understand the technical and historical development behind those words. Unfortunately the system in place is more likely to reward a Rhodes Scholar than a road scholar. A poet who lives and writes in the real world has little use for a fellowship requiring her to live in some distant place; little use for a scholarship taking him away from the path that life's led him to follow. I feel sick to my stomach when I receive pamphlets in the mail announcing grant winners or lecturing programs - pamphlets filled with bios of poets. The typical bio highlights the poet's education, teaching experience and books the poet has published. My first thought is that these poets have a desperate need to get books published in order to maintain good positions in their educational institutions. My next thought is to take it as evidence that most programs exclude poets without degrees. A system that promotes exclusion also reduces its own relevance. That's why performance poetry and slam poetry have become popular without an affiliation with colleges. And that may be why the most relevant voice in poetry today is probably Eminem. |
|
|
From Philip Corwin MFAs are a big circle jerk. They publish each other and praise each other. Dylan Thomas never had a college degree. Neither did Shakespeare. Good writing should be the sole criterion. |
|
|
From Luther Jett A college degree ought to be of no importance; that it has seemingly become a practical necessity speaks more to the institutions that govern poetry in America than to the art of writing poetry. The great poets of the past who never acquired a college degree are myriad; the works of those who did attain a degree are more likely to be great in spite of that degree than because of it. But this begs the question, in my opinion, as it relates to Mr. Troupe. A college degree is utterly unimportant, however, honesty is crucial for a poet. Mr. Troupe did not resign because he had no degree; he resigned because he was caught in a lie. The task of the poet is to confront and interpret existence honestly -- to “speak truth to power”. That integrity of voice and vision is surely compromised if one cannot speak truthfully about the circumstances of one’s own life. The MFA system, with its emphasis on credentials and connections, encourages this very sort of fraud. However, that does not excuse Mr. Troupe’s actions. |
From George Held A college degree was neither here nor there until the professionalization of poetry with the rise of creative writing programs, notably at Iowa, in the '50s. The pity is that Troupe (and others, no doubt) felt such anxiety about credentials that he invented them; no excuse for his dishonesty, but the system requires credentials. In the past college was out of the question for a poet like Whitman, Dickinson had only 2 years at what became Mt. Holyoke, and Keats hardly had a high-school education. All of these and others (Shakespeare!) we still read learned poetry through reading poetry (see Keats, "On First Looking into Chapman's Homer"), and that's the problem today: students want to write but not read poetry, so they enroll in courses to learn how to do it. They'd be much better off to read, read, read poetry past and present and learn from the poets they read. Poets are born, not made in ! college. But a college education in a variety of subjects can broaden a person and that might help even a poet. Still, who could be broader than Whitman or Dickinson, ardent readers. |
|
From Alison Carb Sussman I think Quincy Troupe shouldn't have resigned. He shouldn't have lied, but he shouldn't have resigned. College doesn't necessarily endow a person with the necessary qualities to be a better teacher. That can be learned on the job. Also, it is a talent some people have. Some people just make great teachers. The question should have been, was Quincy Troupe a good teacher or not? Credentials be damned. |
What a shame that Quincy Troupe resigned! I admire his integrity, but think an explanation, not a resignation was due. How does his not graduating from Grambling in any way alter the fact that he is a great poet? If he was pressured to resign, then I think those people who did the pressuring are on the same foolish par with the governor of New Jersey who wanted Amiri Baraka to resign as poet laureate because of a polemical poem. |
|
I graduated from Northeastern University in Boston, MA. It is an excellent, nationally recognized University. My degree is is liberal arts. While I had sufficient credits for an English major, they did not designate majors on the degree. For the past five years, I have been very involved in the Massachusetts poetry scene. I have been published in The Harvard Review, Midstream, The Aurorean, The Jewish Advocate, Concrete Wolf, and a number of small press journals as well as a significant anthology, City of Poets, Eighteen Boston Poets (Singing Bone Press). I do not have an MFA!!! I believe that a college degree is important for academic appointments because the students at this level are pursuing degrees. An MFA is helpful because that degree has created a newer career direction that most academic institutions expect and/or require for positions. I believe, and am hopeful that that there are certain areas in the poetry world that do not require degrees; however excellence in craftmanship is still strongly recommended. I might add that it is not necessary to have a degree to feature at a venue if your poetry is outstanding. |
From Elizabeth Doran I am a poet without a degree. I did attend Lesley University and have often been tempted to lie and say I have a degree to look better on my resume so I understand the issue. I do not think you need a degree to write well. I do think the most important thing is the work. If your work is great in the long run a degree will not matter. The question is what does one want to do? I am a single mom with a nine year old daughter and chose to work part time in order to be able to write. Therefore, I do not have the time or money to pursue an MFA. I know an MFA would not hurt me and I would be writing if I were in a program. I would first have to finish my degree I have 2 semesters left. I also alas, have not finished paying student loans. I am not against academia all together but there does seem to be a lot of academic snobs. I know for a fact you do not have to have a degree to write beautifully. The truth is many people in this country do not have access to higher education because it is so costly. My goal is to write decent poetry and since I am 46 I probably will not go after an MFA or even complete my degree. |
|
Quincy Troupe gave an excellent performance when I saw him give a "reading"-- he's a performance poet and college rarely focuses on the performative aspect of poetry. His open statement that he regrets falsifying his resume is also admirable --he's taking responsibility for his own less-than-pristine behavior and maturely refusing to cast wild aspersions of blame (it would be nice if East Coast Poet Laureates duly took note ...) Poets have a long tradition of bucking tradition and questioning or railing against established institutions. The academic system is not immune to critique, and why should it be? However, exposure to intellectual resources and debates, books, and vocabulary can certainly help poets, and at colleges, these tools and resources are widely available. In some eras and places, members of the "working class" mocked book learning and formal education, partly out of justified frustration that they lacked equal access to these resources. Now it seems this debate has transmuted into factions of university-affiliated poets and "street" poets. To me, the most honest answer is that college can be a lot of help, but it can be an intimidating atmosphere for poets; that talent is found everywhere--in the university environment and far away from it; and finally, that poetic talent and skills are honed in many different ways and places. As for the MFA system, I would bring up Sinead O'Connor's recent comment about record companies: "They've got us fooled into thinking we [artists] need them, when they really need us" |
|
Material may not be reprinted without prior written permission.