Are you a middleman? Middlewoman? Politically correct “Middleperson”? Are you concerned about what such “middle-people” think? Here’s why I ask.
In his1969 book The Truth of Poetry, Michael Hamburger makes this point: “The vast body of critical and biographical literature about Baudelaire points to another development that is very much part of the situation of poets later than he; I mean the disproportion between the demand for poetry itself and the demand for literature about poetry. Very few, if any, serious poets since Baudelaire have been able to make a living out of their work; but thousands of people, including poets themselves, have made a living by writing or talking about poetry”( 2) [Bear with me a moment longer, because here’s the conclusion] “This anomaly--paralleled in many ways, as it is, by economic developments conducive to a proliferation of middle-men in all trades and industries—has not only produced conscious or unconscious reactions apparent in the political commitments of several outstanding modern poets, but has also affected the very substrate of their work.” *
Say what? It’s simple. We have more middlemen than we have doers. Take the annual State of the Union Address every President gives to Congress. The President speaks, and then afterward a host of others chime in about what he said, interpreting his words for the rest of us as though we were incapable of listening, understanding, and reacting. Or take a football game. Do you really need a commentator to tell you that So-n-So just threw a pass to a teammate? Or that a long run for a touchdown was a long run for a touchdown? Do you really need the incessant chatter of interpreters?
There was a brief experiment by one of the networks years ago. The televised game had no commentators. There were football players playing the game and a crowd making noise in the background. No comments. None. Zilch. The viewer was on his own, his eyes and ears his only guide to what was happening. I saw that game. At first it was a bit unnerving. I had grown accustomed to the voices of “expert” analysts telling me what I had been watching, explaining to me what I already knew. I had become used to the voices of middlemen.
And that’s what our society largely is. As Hamburger argues, more people—like professors of literature—have made a living off commenting about the works of others than the writers themselves, poets, that is. Of course, famous novelists can make a fortune, but consider the status of poets relegated to giving readings in small groups gathered in the back room of some library on a Tuesday night. Consider the limited sales of poetry books. Yet, there are critics galore who have made their living talking and writing about those few successful poets.
And on the nightly prime-time pundit shows? Well, it’s the same. People interpret others’ words and actions for the audience. It’s as though we are always watching a show like The Voice or America’s Got Talent, all of us constantly awaiting the opinion and judgment of others, the “middlemen” who interpret life for us.
And so, in a society of few doers but more interpreters, do we find that the doers eventually do as the interpreters influence? In short, do those who begin as creative voices end up as self-parodies and as puppets manipulated by those who analyze them? Are all doers awaiting the accolades of winning some “academy award”? Is everyone who becomes well known for a special talent eventually going to succumb to the analyses of “experts” who make their living off that talent?
Make an assessment here: How bound are you to the voices of middlemen? How dependent are you on the analyses of others? Watch the game with the volume turned off. Make your own analysis. Draw your own conclusions. Do your own judging. For your own sake, stop listening to middlemen.
*Hamburger. Michael. 1969. The Truth of Poetry: Tensions in Modern Poetry from Baudelaire to the 1960s. New York. A Harvest Book/Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.
In his1969 book The Truth of Poetry, Michael Hamburger makes this point: “The vast body of critical and biographical literature about Baudelaire points to another development that is very much part of the situation of poets later than he; I mean the disproportion between the demand for poetry itself and the demand for literature about poetry. Very few, if any, serious poets since Baudelaire have been able to make a living out of their work; but thousands of people, including poets themselves, have made a living by writing or talking about poetry”( 2) [Bear with me a moment longer, because here’s the conclusion] “This anomaly--paralleled in many ways, as it is, by economic developments conducive to a proliferation of middle-men in all trades and industries—has not only produced conscious or unconscious reactions apparent in the political commitments of several outstanding modern poets, but has also affected the very substrate of their work.” *
Say what? It’s simple. We have more middlemen than we have doers. Take the annual State of the Union Address every President gives to Congress. The President speaks, and then afterward a host of others chime in about what he said, interpreting his words for the rest of us as though we were incapable of listening, understanding, and reacting. Or take a football game. Do you really need a commentator to tell you that So-n-So just threw a pass to a teammate? Or that a long run for a touchdown was a long run for a touchdown? Do you really need the incessant chatter of interpreters?
There was a brief experiment by one of the networks years ago. The televised game had no commentators. There were football players playing the game and a crowd making noise in the background. No comments. None. Zilch. The viewer was on his own, his eyes and ears his only guide to what was happening. I saw that game. At first it was a bit unnerving. I had grown accustomed to the voices of “expert” analysts telling me what I had been watching, explaining to me what I already knew. I had become used to the voices of middlemen.
And that’s what our society largely is. As Hamburger argues, more people—like professors of literature—have made a living off commenting about the works of others than the writers themselves, poets, that is. Of course, famous novelists can make a fortune, but consider the status of poets relegated to giving readings in small groups gathered in the back room of some library on a Tuesday night. Consider the limited sales of poetry books. Yet, there are critics galore who have made their living talking and writing about those few successful poets.
And on the nightly prime-time pundit shows? Well, it’s the same. People interpret others’ words and actions for the audience. It’s as though we are always watching a show like The Voice or America’s Got Talent, all of us constantly awaiting the opinion and judgment of others, the “middlemen” who interpret life for us.
And so, in a society of few doers but more interpreters, do we find that the doers eventually do as the interpreters influence? In short, do those who begin as creative voices end up as self-parodies and as puppets manipulated by those who analyze them? Are all doers awaiting the accolades of winning some “academy award”? Is everyone who becomes well known for a special talent eventually going to succumb to the analyses of “experts” who make their living off that talent?
Make an assessment here: How bound are you to the voices of middlemen? How dependent are you on the analyses of others? Watch the game with the volume turned off. Make your own analysis. Draw your own conclusions. Do your own judging. For your own sake, stop listening to middlemen.
*Hamburger. Michael. 1969. The Truth of Poetry: Tensions in Modern Poetry from Baudelaire to the 1960s. New York. A Harvest Book/Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.
RSS Feed