Belay that! Do somethin' else! Really.

Posting because I just visited Gillian Clarke's web site. Gillian is even more GCSE'd than I am, and hence has a very full section designed to help out students. On her poem "Last Rites", a student asks "Is the story true?" Her reply is "Yes. If a poem uses the poet’s own voice, and tells a story from his or her own viewpoint, it is true. The point of view, the personal voice, the place names, the reference to an inquest, the precise description, all tell you it is fact. Sometimes a poet takes the viewpoint of a character, not his or her self. Then the poet uses imagination."

Those who know my obsession on this point will not be surprised to hear that this assertion horrifies me. Dear prospective studentses who may be preparing to land up in the country's Eng Lit departments, please be aware that this is a personal view, and one which I suspect many poets do not share. In the first place, what exactly is "the poet's own voice"? If she means the "I" voice, I can assure you that I write many downright lies in just that voice. Even if I did by chance use some experience of my own, I would certainly change and embroider it; I do not become less of an inventor in the "I" voice, nor save my "imagination" for when I am pretending to be someone else. As for place names and precise description, those are what we all use to add verisimilitude to an otherwise bald and unconvincing narrative, and again they do not necessarily indicate that It All Happened - they indicate that the poet is a good liar, as he or she should be; it belongs to our trade. I know I've said this a tedious number of times, but if even poets are putting out advice like this, it clearly needs saying again: THE NARRATOR IS NOT THE AUTHOR.