Poetry of Peace - Monique

What constitutes peace poetry, is it similar to anti war poetry? The two separate entities do overlap in many ways however there are major differences. Anti-war poetry does go against the concept of war and the upheaval that it brings like peace poetry. Although anti-war poetry often just grazes the issue, and does not tend to offer a solution for a lasting peace. Peace poetry draws from many themes in anti-war poetry however it goes a few steps forward, it often focuses on Utopian ideals, and offers resolve to growing global instability and strife.

In his article Poems for Peace Philip Metres states that peace poetry can be divided into three different sections, sorrows, resistances, and alternative visions. Anti-war poetry does deal with sorrows and resistances but rarely ever gives alternative visions. Metres details how the American society is marred by the image of war. He states that the American society perpetuates the culture of war and is in a constant state of preparation for war or “pure war”. So how then can poets pass this cultural stranglehold, does peace have to be imagined or understood in order for poems and society to achieve this grand gesture? In Metres article Denise Levertov denounces this by stating that peace is not palpable to our minds eye, that peace is not just an interim between wars but a positive condition of society. This mirrors the words of Miriam Rukeyser where she states that peace is not just a lack of war but also the positivity of a society.

What then should the discourse community be composed of? Philip Metres article introduced a collection of poets and authors. He revels on the idea of a shelve which grew into a bookstore filled with peace poetry. He imagines the local community should be the active audience, students and teachers. In Metres article he states that Rukeyser protests with action, she creates poetry and “never protests without making something.” Through Metres article I find that he does not only focus on one author or idea he uses a collection of works and ideas in order to make his point and enable the reader to understand the message. Therefore peace poetry is a genre where the audience and poets actively build on each others ideas and goals in order to lead the world into a better more positive future.

Peace Poetry: What does it mean? How does it relate to war poetry? - Jim

Muriel Rukeyser stated in her book, The Life of Poetry, that peace should mean more than the lack of war; it should be something fierce and positive. Rukeyser believed that peace, in contemporary definitions, wasn’t ideal, and that people should push for a better future. Poets are responsible for the task of spreading ideas to people, providing them with their perspectives through their poetry. Since poetry has the potential to have a great effect on society, it should be used as a medium to spread ideas about peace and prosperity thereby changing the way people view the word “peace.”

Peace poetry does exactly this. It delivers messages of idealism and utopianism, and seeks to present just and peaceful societies within its context. However, the scope of peace poetry is wide, and seems too idealistic to be able to relate directly to its readers. Since it is the poets’ job to present their perspectives so that other people can relate to them, in order for peace poetry to be effective it must envision something attainable and realistic. In the article, “Poems for Peace,” Philip Metres speaks of peace in American society as meaning a “preparation of war.” Unfortunately, that is true to some extent. People generally view “peace” as meaning merely a lack of violence. This can be seen in the war poem, “2,000 Pounds,” where in the aftermath of a tragic event, the only peace was that of dying souls and people whispering to their beloveds. In the midst of such tragedy and violence, it is reasonable to think that most people would consider peace to simply mean a lack of war.

Denise Levertov, an anti-war poet, argued in her article, “Poetry and Peace: Some Broader Dimensions,” that the definition of peace as something positive instead of just an interim between wars was something which was almost unperceivable in modern society. By saying this she is acknowledging that the definition of peace does not hold up to Rukeyser’s dreams. However, Levertov proposed that peace poetry at this point should not jump into visions of prosperity and advancement, since that would be far too outlandish for society to fully grasp. Instead, peace poets should focus on writing about the preparation for peace, thereby easing society into the belief that peace should mean something more than a lack of war.

Peace poems have the potential to advocate peace even in the midst of war. Muriel Rukeyser’s “Poem,” William Stafford’s “Peace Walk,” and Denise Levertov’s “Making Peace” all talk about seeking to better oneself even in the midst of violence and turmoil. These peace poems reference words and phrases like “love,” “reach beyond ourselves,” and “energy field more intense than war” to convey the feeling that the poets believed that they could overcome the obstacles of conflict through peace and end up in a more positive situation.

The difference between peace poetry and war poetry is that peace poetry isn’t as indirect about its goals like war poetry is. Peace poetry isn’t afraid to mention the presence of conflict, and then depicts peace through images of happiness and progress. War poetry wants to affect the reader through imagery and emotions in order to convey the idea of anti-war. Peace poetry seeks to tell the reader that peace should mean something positive, and has the potential to overcome war.

Combating War with Peace: A look into how poetry is used to present the themes of War and Peace - Miles

Many people clearly identify “War Poetry” when they read it. Peace poetry however is different. The topic of peace, although practically very rare in our world, is very popular among writers. Poetry has had many usages over its thousand-plus year existence, but many would agree that it has always been an art from that allows its writers therapy and the ability of self expression. Much of what poetry is, is soft and peaceful, yet there are some large collections of more harsh and raw poetry. Luckily however because poetry is such a fluent and light art form, we can read about things like war and death in a manner that is more feasible then graphic art, photography, overwhelming music, ballads, or explicit diary entries and confessionals. Poets convey both war and peace in different ways but overall both themes are very popular. Many people argue over the discrepancy between “peace poetry” and “peaceful poetry.” I see “peace poetry” as being a response to war. I experience it as something that is created to present a very real argument against the cruelties of war. On the other hand I see “peaceful poetry” as something that makes no reference to war, a style that is soft and lighthearted.

Concerning war, most of what I have read in past years has had a modern war theme, mainly talking about Vietnam, The World Wars, and The Cold War. Some of my learning included reading, “The Things They Carried,” By Tim O’Brien, “Apocalypse Now,” Directed by Francis Ford Coppola, and Joseph Conrad’s Novel, “The Heart of Darkness.” Each one of these sources provided a raw look into the life of war. Each one of these examples presents a different strategy to go about presenting war. “The Things They Carried,” uses a journal/testimonial type way of depicting lives of soldiers. O’Brien examines the actual things the soldiers carried in a way that describes their situation. In “The Heart of Darkness,” Conrad takes symbolic and introspective themes and creates a vividly deep story that appeals quite heavily to one’s emotions. Apocalypse now is a movie created using the themes in Conrad’s Heart of Darkness. Coppala uses the book to formulate an equally powerful movie that quite graphically depicts war and insanity. These methods display war in a very raw way, and are easily in the category of “War Poetry.” War poetry engages its readers in a way that no other poetry can. It really pulls people to think with their emotions and feel every line, every gunshot.

Some of the poetry that we’re reading now is somewhat different then what I’ve experienced before, it is apart of a fairly new genre for me: “Peace Poetry.” It approaches describing war in a different way. “2000 lbs” by Brian Turner introduces new perspectives on war; he shows the view from the terrorists and innocent bystanders. This strategy really expands the perspective of war; it approaches it in a quite peaceful way. Unlike the usual soldiers perspective, it presents the views of civilians largely affected by war. His style opens our minds to new ideas and concepts in a way that isn’t overwhelming to our senses, and mainly peaceful to our short-term emotions. We also read “Monday Morning” by DJ Renegade. He does a really nice job at exemplifying how unnecessary death is. He dives into the real product of death and how irrelevant it is to the final outcome. This is a really powerful point. With war as such an everyday aspect of our lives in the 21st century, we often forget to think about these things. These two examples represent what I would call “Peace Poetry.” These poets describe war in a sense that promotes not only peace, but a look at war from a much different and more critical perspective then usually portrayed by “War Poetry.”

Poetry of Peace - Kiera

When discussing peace and anti-war poetry, I find that the themes, focus, and goals of these types of poetry are very different. What the authors are trying to portray in each of these poems varies because they both do not relate to war. Peace poetry does not necessary deal or express emotions about war and battle because there are many aspects relating to serenity and non-violence. Peace exists in other aspects of life besides conflicts between countries or people; it is a total separate type of idea that does not always have to be categorized with war. Many audiences often correlate peace with war because leaders strive for no confrontation or conflict, then citizens follow their lead, they forget that peace can be settled in their states, communities and even homes. The end result is what peace poetry focuses on in context. Authors create stories or describe acts depicting advancement, so that the resolution shows effectiveness. Poems about peace advocate something more in depth than resolving conflict between two hostile groups; ideas are established through feelings of hopefulness and imagination.

On the other hand, anti-war poetry content is still about ceasing worldwide confrontation. The resistance between people is addressed in anti-war poems because authors want the audience to react in specific ways. When the author writes his or her poem in a violent tone, they can expect that the reader will get worked up and then possibly act in an aggressive manner. The readers think they are getting involved for the benefit of their country or community, yet their actions could still be somewhat forceful. In “Poems for Peace,” Philip Metres talks about how specifically the United States has come to “unwittingly [glorify] and [perpetuate] a culture of war.” The other side of poetry, peace poetry, should be revealed because it expresses other ways of “dealing with conflict, oppression, and injustice and how it may advance our thinking into what a future without war might look like” (Metres). Fighting is what anti-war poetry is against, however it is not always written in a peaceful tone; peace is something much more fragile and it written with harmony not discord.

As a part of a community, our class, it is pretty evident that peace is more conclusive to a group of people. In order for us to enter into a discourse community, we set ourselves up to ‘argue’ amongst one another because we all have different viewpoints. Except we are not arguing to prove one another wrong, we share our perspectives to build off of one another’s ideas. We talk about our disagreements by bringing up evidence from a text or poem, and giving our opinions of the context. The class in interested in progress, we share ideas to get different outlooks on what we are studying. Peace is very goal oriented, and that is what we want to achieve as a community, and we have come to realize that various ideas results in progress, leading us to a final conclusion.

The Fighting about War Poetry - Neal

Poetry, much like its literary counterpart prose, is a section of literature that is wide-reaching, encompassing a cornucopia of different subcategories and subgenres which can be generally classified under an umbrella term, “poetry”. But one of the most confusing and debated categories of poetry is war poetry. Ranging from the obvious to the near-incomprehensible, war poems can relate to virtually anything about war: being in war, on the front lines, in combat, being active in support of or opposition to war, the aftermath of war, the death correlated to war, the effects on the home front, etc. Essentially anything conflict-related can be and often is classified under the war genre of poetry. Nearly anything could be a war poem, as generally as it seems to be categorized. This has made many readers of war poetry either confused or skeptical, or as was with my case, both. Why, many ask, why is war poetry such a large and looming category, why does it have so many qualities that allow poems of ranging diversities fall under its title? I was one of those very skeptics who questioned this definition and sub-categorization, and after contemplation and dialogue, this is my conclusion to the enigma of war poetry.

Obviously enough, “war poetry” suggests that the poems classified as such are about war. The problem then lies in what war involves, for war poetry is a vast concept and one would expect some correlation, perhaps. Indeed, this is the case with war and its subgenre of poetry. War incorporates many things, ranging from abstract and intangible ideas such as victory or defeat and freedom or oppression to very tangible, and often sensory concepts such as pain, fatigue, and death. So it then becomes reasonable to assume that poems encompassing such concepts could arguably be categorized as poems of war.

Furthermore, if one considers the term “war” by itself, and if one detaches from the term any connotations to the word and then breaks it down to its most integral and basic core, it becomes evident that “war” could be about pretty much any conflict in existence, tangible or intangible, exterior or interior. The “wars” on terror, racism, sexism, poverty, and domestic abuse are all examples of this view on what war really is. It is fairly unreasonable to consider having armed soldiers attempting to fight intangible ideas, and while it is more possible it is also more ridiculous to consider having such soldiers battle the physical advocates of those concepts such as terrorists, members of the KKK, bigots, rich people, and abusers in a “conventional war”. So one of two things have happened: either the term “war” is essentially misused nine times out of ten when it is used at all, or the term “war” no longer only means prolonged physical detrimental conflict.

Going off of this more modernized and broader definition of “war”, it hence becomes more reasonable to categorize poems dealing with such concepts as terror, racism, etc., as “war poetry”. Using the definition of “war” that I have given, the war on terror is just as much a war as the Iraq War or the Persian Gulf War, and the “war on poverty” throughout the 1950s, ‘60s, and ‘70s was no less a war than the Korean and Vietnamese wars. Even in a sense, possibly a facetious one but one nonetheless, there is a “war” of language, denotation, and connotation, and I’ve presented that idea in this blog post. In conclusion to all of this, I would say that “war”, in correlation to “war poetry”, is a vast and vague term and it is suitable for its subgenre of poetry to follow along the same path. As they say, all is fair in love and war, so why not?

War Poetry - Chelsea

Though poetry can be perceived as a form of art that brings beauty and happiness to our world, James Logenbach has said about war poetry that “no poem stands apart in happy oblivion.” War poetry is an interesting category of poetry that is defined as poetry that deals specifically with war. However, a common question that might arise in response to this definition is how do we define war? Though one could argue that war can be defined by the numerous conflicts observed from day to day, such as the warring emotions that can exist in an individual, or the warring ideas of separate institutions, the war that war poetry deals with is most typically the violent conflict of combat between two opposing sides.

However, war poetry itself does not have to dwell on the specificities of this definition and only comment on battle at the front lines or a specific war. War poetry deals with war in a more complex way than simply observing what can be seen (that is typically what we have the History Channel for). War poetry commonly deals with the emotion that is aroused as a response to the war itself. Whether it speaks directly about a specific war or battle, about the action of the war, or the aftermath of the war, or the impact of the war, war poetry does exactly what it sounds like it does-- speaks about warfare.

In class, we were exposed to various examples of war poetry that all had distinct characteristics responsible for qualifying them as “war poems.” Turner’s “Here, Bullet,” is a personal response to the act of getting shot in combat. The speakers speaks directly to the bullet as it careens through his body and takes his life. The poem can be interpreted as a zoomed-in view of war as a physical conflict that occurs within the human body between the bullet, and the flesh and bones of the human.

“Sunday Morning,” by Steven Wallace is also a war poem, but in a much more indirect manner. At first, it may not be obvious that the poem is talking about war, but through some allusions and metaphors that are more complex and obscure than the content of “Here, Bullet,” we could see that in fact, Wallace’s poem was a war poem because it was reacting to World War I. Wallace’s approach to the war he dealt with was to comment on the nature of life and death and the afterlife as an emotional response to the impact of the war. He questions what comes after death, and says that death and life are a part of the circle of life, and there is beauty in death.

DJ Renegade responds directly to Steven Wallace’s statement of “death [being] the mother of beauty” in his poem “Monday Morning.” DJ Renegade’s poem speaks about violence and death, and responds to Wallace’s war poem, but “Monday Morning” is a war poem because it comments on differing attitudes towards the idea of unnatural death, which is a consequence of war. The speaker in “Monday Morning” questions Wallace’s belief that there can be beauty in death because he (the speaker of “Monday Morning”) has seen the death of a loved one firsthand. Though the death he has experienced was not necessarily death due to war (although it very well could have been a product of a gang war), it was a death not caused by natural causes, life taken away from an individual by another individual, and in “Monday Morning,” the speaker claims it is the attitude that there can be beauty extracted from the act of murder that brought about the atomic warfare of Vietnam.

Classifying a genre of poetry as “war poetry” may seem like a very specific corner of poetry, however, as demonstrated by the poems we read in class, there are still many different ways in which a poem can be considered a war poem because there are many different ways individuals choose to deal with war. Because war can be such a complex notion to understand, war poetry lends itself to the emotional responses of individuals who are coping with the impact of war, whether the poems aim to resolve a conflict, or just express and release an emotion.

War Poetry - Morgan

One of the things that is harder to figure out than I thought it would be is to figure out what is a war poem and what is not. War poems are not as straight forward about soldiers on the front lines of battle as I imagined they would be. But after reading more war poetry I have started to understand true war poetry. It is not always about a straightforward description of a battle or even a reflection of a battle by a soldier but it can be about anything that was written in a time of war even if the war is not mentioned.

The poem 2000 lbs. is definitely a war poem. It is a war poem because of the emotion and the descriptions of the people in the poem during the “event” described in this poem. The beginning of the poem is all about the emotions and feelings that different people from different situations are feeling during a rough time in their lives. One person is remembering “summer 1974,” he is remembering the girl he loves and regretting how fast time goes past and previous decisions he has made. The next couple of people in this poem start to describe an explosion as the even that has taken place.

The skeptical reader after the first couple of sections of the poem wonders how these descriptions, memories, and feelings have anything to do with a war and war poetry. These feelings and stories have nothing to do with a war that we know of. As the poem progresses the reader gains a better understanding of what is going on but still wonders how all these compounded stories have anything to do with one another, how do they tie together. It is not until they are all put together, rather than looked at separately, and the time that the poem was written is taken to account that the war starts to stick out.

2000 lbs. is written during the Iraq war and is a description of a suicide bombing told from the perspectives of Iraqis, American soldiers, and the bomber himself. This poem was written during a time of war and the war and the event in particular was the inspiration of this poem. Knowing this even the skeptical reader then realizes that when they read about an old woman cradling her grandson, whispering, rocking him on her knees it is not only a description of a moment shared by a woman and her grandson but it plays a part in the bigger picture. The reader realizes that the war that the poem is talking about is directly affecting these people who are involved in this event. All of the people are, from the ones remembering the good times to the bomber himself. A war poem is anything written during a time of war, this poem more than some mentions the war tat is occurring but there is also still room for a little skepticism. After re-reading this poem and the discussions in class I am no longer a skeptical reader and believe that this is a war poem