Inspiration and dictation in writing poetry

 

There are at least three approaches to writing poetry. There is writing poetry as though it is prose, you know what you are going to write, or you discover what you are writing in the act of writing, and then do the writing; in this the poet is getting down on paper whatever it is he or she wants to write and possibly following a defined form, narrative or lyric, sonnet, ode, ballad, counting syllables, or most probably free verse. There is nothing philosophical or extraordinary in this down-to-earth approach to writing. This is the way most poets write poetry; we could stop here and say that writing poetry is writing and nothing more. But some poets see more to writing than this and there are two other approaches to writing poetry. The approach to writing is involved with the poet’s approach to poetry. 

The first of these two approaches to writing poetry is that the poet needs to be inspired. John Keats writes, in his "Axioms of Poetry", that real poetry comes naturally, "as leaves to a tree”, it is that poetry should be written spontaneously. This is the approach of poets like Allen Ginsberg and it was Ginsberg, after a reading in Montreal in 1969, who told me of following breath when writing; poetry is related to breath, and line breaks should conform to breath; this relates to “inspiration", "in-spiring", breathing in spirit, breathing out the poem, and composing according to breaths as written on the page, as a form of composition, how the poem appears on the page is how it is to be read. As well, to “in-spire" is to, literally, breathe in spirit; this isn't soul that is being referred to but spirit, soul is not spirit; spirit comes to you when you are inspired, it is external to you, it enters you from the outside world. The idea that inspiration is spirit breathed in by the poet doesn't need Ginsberg's concept of composition following breath, each can stand alone. 

Here is Google's "AI Overview" of the word "inspiration":

The word "inspiration" comes from Latin inspirare (to breathe into), combining in- (in) and spirare (to breathe), meaning to "blow into" or "breathe upon". It entered English via Old French around the 1300s, initially meaning divine influence, especially for scripture, linking to the idea of God "breathing life" or words into people. This root connects to "spirit" (breath/soul) and evolved from a divine concept to a more secular idea of creative or emotional motivation.

We live in a society that is secular, so these ideas of a spiritual or divine connection to poetry are alien to most people, including many poets. Matthew Arnold said "the strongest part of our religion today is its unconscious poetry" and "...what passes with us for religion and philosophy will be replaced by poetry"; for some, poetry is their religion, but we don't worship poets, we don’t worship poems, but we do know the valuable insight literature offers readers, insights that were once the message of organized religion and can now be discovered in literature. We want to read poetry that is significant and meaningful--whether spiritually, emotionally, or intellectually--we like poetry and literature that explains or illuminates something about human experience, that helps us to understand life, that affirms life, for this reason T.S. Eliot and W.B. Yeats, and Rilke, are more significant as poets than Ezra Pound and Charles Olson who, for many readers, are obscure and "do not cohere". 

Rimbaud and Jim Morrison

It is also possible to understand writing poetry as "dictation". Inspiration and dictation in writing poetry are closely associated but different; however, in both approaches one never censors what the poem is saying; never censor oneself despite one’s fear of expressing something important, never censor oneself whether for personal or some other reason. We've seen what inspiration means; dictation means listening for the poem then writing it down. Indeed, it may be quibbling, or a minor difference, to differentiate between inspiration and dictation because they are similar, but dictation is not necessarily inspired writing, dictation it is more about listening or being dictated to, it is related to spontaneous writing, riffing on words or a phrase, going where the poem, the words, take you, listening as though the poet is an outsider to what the poem is saying. 

Poetry is one of the few places in our desacralized society where we can talk about inspiration, spirit, soul, the mystery of life, and the divine. This doesn't mean referring to traditional aspects of organized religion, it means understanding some aspect of the human condition. Years ago I read a biography of George Fox, the founder of the Quaker movement; here is the Google AI Overview on George Fox:

George Fox (1624–1691) was the English founder of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers), a movement born from his spiritual experiences emphasizing an "Inner Light" or direct connection with God, rejecting formal clergy and rituals in favor of inner guidance and silent worship, establishing principles like equality, pacifism, and plainness that shaped Quaker beliefs and practices despite persecution.

A Quaker meeting, a religious service, is held in silence until someone feels moved by God to speak, not in "tongues", but in plain English, inspired by the divine, and this is similar to what we do when writing poetry. I spent many years sitting most evenings and writing whatever came to me, with no preconceived ideas as to what to write, but writing without prior thought. For some poets writing poetry requires waiting for the poem to make itself known and this approach may or may not produce real poems. After many years of writing, not just learning the "craft" ("The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne", as Chaucer wrote in "The Parliament of Fowls") opening consciousness to poetry, I wrote a real poem, and then several real poems, and these poems are in my first book The Trees of Unknowing (1978). One of the signs of writing a "real poem" is that one can stand behind this poem for years after writing it, not just for days or a few months; it is the beginning of one's lifetime body of work. Sitting, waiting, and listening for the divine, is a foundational aspect of Quakerism; it is also an approach to writing poetry. Quakers "quaked", trembled, they experienced a physical manifestation of being moved by God, by the Holy Spirit; their lives were illuminated with an inner light. Dictation doesn't mean hearing a voice speaking to you, it is the delay between the act of writing and the words that are given to you; in my experience there is a momentary gap--perhaps a millisecond--between what is "dictated" and what is written down. I think we can all agree on the importance of not censoring what we write if we want to write real poems, not second hand and contrived poems. The message is: follow where the poem takes you and one day you will possibly arrive at a real poem.