If we go back to the subject of my topics so far it circle around the fact that poetry has grown into a fringe part of art expression. I wanted to discuss how we can make poetry more interesting outside the group we are.
Today I want to bring up the subject of provocation or being controversial in art and more specifically in politics.
First — a provocation is often something felt by the reader, it could be anger or sorrow but most importantly it should evoke strong emotions.
Second — a provocation can be of many kinds. It could be in the form you decide to present your art of poetry. The art of poetry has often developed by provoking your audience in how it’s done. If your poem breaks established norms it can always be provocative.
Third — a provocation can also provoke in choice of subject. It can break the norms on what is accepted in what you describe both in terms of subject and views it expresses.
But no matter what, the ability to be provocative depends on who you are addressing. If your audience all are nodding in approval you are never truly provocative.
I have a few rules for this.
Don’t be provocative just to shock, it has to be based on what you truly believe. There has to be a purpose beyond to be bad.
Your provocation has to be subtle enough to shock but never alienate your audience.
Provocation without a sense of humor often fails.
Today I would like you to focus on provocations on the subject of politics.
What do you think about this? Do you admire any poetic provocateur? Why?
Are there any topics that provokes you?
What type of provocation do you use (or would like to use) the most?
Or do you think that a poet should avoid provocations… if so how could that be done?