Subject: Shane Neilson's essay "Political Poetry and the Canadian Tradition"

Dear Editors, The Danforth Review


I enjoy Shane Neilson's writing. Generally the literary persona is assertive without being arrogant, the arguments are reasonable, and the prose is both lucid and graceful. This is so unusual and meritorious that it should not pass without comment and congratulation.

In "Political Poetry and the Canadian Tradition", an essay apparently occasioned by Remembrance Day, Shane Neilson's major thesis, that the "ultimate mode of political poetry is war poetry", is misleading, whether or not it is true. Some quite wonderful and powerful political poetry has been written in Canada about subjects other than war.

I have argued elsewhere ["Metaphors, Analogies, and Things that Go Bump in the Night" (La Parole Métèque 17/18, Hiver-Printemps 1991)] that the metaphors we employ enframe how we understand "reality" and thus how we think about it, and that the language we use to describe a situation can create, increase, or minimize our perception of conflict. Elsewhere I have contended also that physiology is not a criterion of feminism and that feminism is necessarily inclusive. The metaphor that gives us a war between the sexes escalates a difficult social, political, and cultural situation to one that, like most wars, is gruesome and unwinnable. But unless we at least pay lip service to that metaphor, we cannot, according to Shane Neilson's contention, include in truly worthwhile "political poetry" much of the political poetry written by women. This would be a great loss; some of the finest political poetry written in Canada is political poetry written by women, and not all of it is about sexual politics either.

Off the top of my head and without even looking at my bookshelves, I recommend to Shane Neilson Anne Marriott's _The Wind Our Enemy_, Rona Murray's _Ootischenie_, some of Dorothy Livesay's poems, and some of my own. [See, for example, "Tell Me How The World Has Changed", "Silencing", "The Length of Days", and "The Liberation" at www3.sympatico.ca/sharon.nelson.] I am not here suggesting "inclusion" or "inclusiveness" on the basis of sex or gender but on the basis of the quality of writing and its political nature. Perhaps Shane Neilson will see, if he peruses some of this material, that the subject of excellent political poetry need not be war and that the language and form of political poetry may be as delicate and diverse as poetry that addresses any subject.

Reading what I've written here, I see that several of the works I mention and that first come to mind address extreme situations, and perhaps that is the way to generalize Mr. Neilson's category and to make it more useful. It is often more important to understand whether an idea is useful, and if it is useful, how and to whom, than it is to be able to demonstrate its truth or falsity. In this instance, broadening the scope of the investigation so that we may understand and define the category of political poetry and appreciate what exists in its Canadian manifestations/traditions/canons would be more useful than limiting the area of investigation and closing off discussion. I hope that Shane Neilson will undertake such investigation, broaden his view of political poetry, and share the results.

Yours truly,
Sharon H. Nelson