At
the West Chester University Poetry Conference in Pennsylvania, walking
the pathway between the university’s bland, modern landmarks,
poet-turned-politician Dana Gioia looks disarmingly boyish with his
tousled hair and Oxford-style shirt. His hands are stuffed in his
trouser pockets as he listens attentively to Tim Murphy, a venture
capitalist and farmer-poet from North Dakota.
Murphy is one of Gioia’s protégés. Several years ago,
Gioia told the redheaded poet where to send his poems and which ones to
publish. Now they discuss the troubled economics of publishing in
general. Gioia says he fought “ferociously” to get to this conference,
in the remote, nondescript suburbs of Philadelphia, amid a punishing
schedule of appointments.
Except for the slightly increased gravel in Gioia’s
deep voice, there is little in this moment to announce that he became
chairman of the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) a few months
earlier, on January 29. The gravel is due to vocal strain-the speeches
and interviews he gives even during bouts of laryngitis.
Eventually, the tensions of the job become evident, at
least to those of us who know him. For one, he tells me there are to be
no interviews. This from a man who, in addition to being a widely
honored writer and poet, was one of the best on-tap literary resources
for journalists in California.
A more obvious change comes later, at the conference
podium in Sykes Auditorium. When Professor Michael Peich, who founded
the conference with Gioia a decade ago, starts to talk about the future
of the conference and its financial needs, Gioia begins to fidget
uncomfortably. When poet and journalist Johanna Keller begins an
impromptu, on-the-spot fundraising session, Gioia excuses himself from
the panel and waits at the back of the room, by the exit.
An utter necessity, he explains, given the “enormous
number of federal regulations” that now govern his professional life.
“The appearance of propriety is as necessary as propriety itself,” he
tells the crowd.
The NEA chair has had an odd and varied image in the
past. Some of its occupants have been visible defenders of the arts
under fire-actress Jane Alexander comes to mind-while others have been
low-key Washington bureaucrats whose names don’t elicit a blink of
recognition. Gioia has already cornered the spotlight without the usual
kerfuffle to provoke it.
That wasn’t always the case. Before his appointment,
Gioia was best known for his 1991 Atlantic Monthly article, “Can Poetry
Matter?” a broadside against the poetry establishment. The article
created one of the biggest firestorms in the magazine’s history. Gioia
accused American poetry of becoming the property of a small, inbred,
self-perpetuating clique of academics: “Though supported by a loyal
coterie, poetry has lost the confidence that it speaks to and for the
general culture,” he wrote. Gioia has also drawn fire for his part in
the new formalism movement and, by extension, the West Chester
conference, which focuses on renewing traditional craftsmanship in
poetry, principally through metrical forms. Critics charge that the
conference, and its founders, are “traditionalist” or “elitists.” Gioia
himself insists that he is not “against” free verse-he estimates half
of his poetic oeuvre is not metrical-but rather that he’s against
ignorance of form.
Gioia’s contrarian streak no doubt made him an
attractive candidate to the White House. So did the fact that he’s a
Republican-a rarity in the arts community-with a background in business
(he was vice president of General Foods before turning to poetry
full-time.) Plus, he’s a born consensus builder, a moderate who has a
way of being able to get along with just about everyone. I’ve never
known anyone to actually dislike him, though some have taken violent
exception to some of his ex cathedra pronouncements. Some critics have
even called Gioia highhanded-perhaps a reaction to his rather blunt
style.
Roughly speaking, this is Gioia’s third professional
incarnation: after taking an MBA at Stanford in 1977, he joined General
Foods in White Plains, New York. In 1984, Esquire chose Gioia for its
first register of “men and women under forty who are changing the
nation,” citing his articles and poetry. He quit the world of business
rather abruptly to become a full-time poet on January 1, 1992. “To my
surprise, by the early nineties, I discovered I was internationally
famous. I had never let myself consider the option of quitting,” he
says. Since then, he has lived the life of a full-time man of
letters-without the pipe-and-slippers kind of leisure the term usually
conjures in the mind-at his idyllic hilltop home amid the vineyards of
Sonoma.
Gioia describes himself as “one-hundred-percent
non-Anglo.” His father was a Sicilian cabdriver; his mother, Mexican
and Native American, was a telephone operator. He was born on Christmas
Eve, 1950, in Hawthorne, California-a tough, blue-collar community
where the Beach Boys were born, where pulp films were made, where
Mattel factories spewed out toys. He went to a Marianist boys’ high
school, where he received “a sectarian but nonetheless broadening and
oddly international education,” he says. That’s one way to put it.
Seven students out of two hundred went to college.
Gioia has always been upfront about his roots: “I think
that being proud of your religion, your culture, and your ethnicity is
the beginning of revival for Catholic artistic culture. As an
individual, I refuse to be ashamed of my faith, my culture, or my
family background.”
Gioia was the first member of his family to leave the
barrios of Los Angeles for college. “I had twelve years of Catholic
education before I traded down to Stanford and Harvard,” he told a
conference on “American Catholics in the Public Square,” sponsored by
Commonweal and the Faith and Reason Institute in June 2000. He received
his Stanford BA, then went on to Harvard, where he studied with poet
Elizabeth Bishop and classical scholar and translator Robert
Fitzgerald.
At Harvard he began to notice he was writing poems “to
be interpreted rather than simply being experienced. They weren’t
training me to be a poet but rather a literary theoretician,” Gioia
told the Hartford Courant. “I was learning to master a code that was
understood by about seventeen hundred people in North America. Well, if
you had twelve years of Catholic theology, this stuff was easy.” He
headed for the world of business, following in the footsteps of Wallace
Stevens, an insurance executive, and T. S. Eliot, a banker and
publisher.
Significantly, his book of essays, Can Poetry Matter?,
includes three pieces on Eliot and Stevens. Is there an echo of Gioia’s
own temperament in the following passage? “Eliot refused to put his
craft above his values. He rejected the idealistic egotism that George
Bernard Shaw once characterized by saying, ‘The true artist will let
his wife starve, his children go barefoot, his mother drudge for his
living at seventy, sooner than work at anything but his art.’
Eliot-like his contemporary Wallace Stevens-was determined to live a
responsible life. Neither would abandon his middle-class morality for
art....No Americans ever wrote greater poems.”
Heading the NEA sounds sexier than it is-it promises
influence, but is mired in its own history and bureaucracy. Diminished
financial influence is part of the picture. The NEA’s budget has
dwindled substantially since the mid-1990s, when conservatives in
Congress tried to shut the agency down. With bipartisan support, it’s
slowly climbing back.
A leadership vacuum is also part of the troubled
picture: Gioia assumed the office after it had been vacant nearly a
year (the previous chairman of the agency, Michael P. Hammond, died in
January 2002 after just a week in the post). During that time, Deputy
Chairman Eileen Mason spearheaded a drive to streamline the NEA’s
administration and to save money. Critics, in Congress and throughout
the arts world, worried that the changes would treat some artistic
disciplines as stepchildren.
In this context, Gioia’s goals to invigorate the NEA
are immediate and practical. His first major move was to launch what
has been called the largest theatrical tour of Shakespeare in American
history, with professional companies visiting more than a hundred small
and midsize cities in all fifty states.
Gioia wants to broaden the public discourse beyond the
narrow range of topics and genres offered by the mass media, and make a
voice for the “high arts.” “How can we create the culture that we want
to live in-a culture that recognizes intellectual and artistic
accomplishment one one-hundredth as much as an accomplishment in
sports?” he inquires. “I’m not asking for equality, I’m asking for the
humblest minority position. The average American teenager can name two
hundred NBA players, but probably not a single living poet or painter.”
Initially, Gioia resisted his NEA appointment...at
least mildly: “I had turned down the opportunity to even be interviewed
for it, and refused to let my name go in nomination for some time,” he
says. “I did hope that the president would find someone else.”
The reasons for his resistance were many. When asked
how the chairmanship has affected his poetry, Gioia is rueful: “The
main way it affects my poetry is by stopping it entirely. I haven’t
written a single line of verse since coming to Washington in November
[2002]. Poetry is a mysterious and involuntarily art. You can force it,
but not with good results....I have no doubt that I will always be able
to write a bad poem. I must be humble before the possibility that I,
like many other poets, might lose touch with whatever gift I have that
gives my work some quality.”
The sacrifice is substantial for a man who used to
publish poetry in the New Yorker and the Hudson Review, a man whose few
volumes of poetry have received accolades. In 1991, The Gods of Winter
was one of the few American volumes ever chosen as the main selection
of England’s Poetry Book Society. In 1992, Can Poetry Matter? was a
finalist in the National Book Critics Circle Awards; Interrogations at
Noon received the American Book Award in 2002.
Gioia and I met some years ago, when I called him out
of the blue at his Santa Rosa home. Not everyone warms to the cold
call-they are one of the occupational hazards of the journalist-but my
efforts were rewarded with a long conversation and, several days later,
a press kit with an 8x10 glossy photo. He was the first poet, the only
poet, to send me a press kit. And our conversation was the first of
many.
Looking back, it was one of the luckier phone calls of
my life. Gioia is a born networker, a power broker, the perfect
“source.” He gave me a contact at the Los Angeles Times Book Review and
the Washington Post Book World; I now write for both. When my Joseph
Brodsky: Conversations was published by the University Press of
Mississippi, Gioia phoned me at home, at 9:30 p.m., to offer his
congratulations and praise. It was our first conversation since his NEA
nomination; his schedule had already become hellish, and I was amazed
he’d even had a chance to glance at the book. By that time, he had
forgotten that the idea to publish such a book, and where to publish
it, had been his.
I am not the only one for whom Gioia has been a sort of
lucky charm. “Dana has figured in every major step in my emergence as a
poet,” says Tim Murphy, the poet from North Dakota, “and thanks to his
personal intercession with Lord knows how many editors, I have seen
blessed few rejection slips.” Before 1998, Murphy was completely
unknown; since then, he has published four substantial books.
Still, some find interaction with Gioia more of a
scourge than a blessing. He likes a good fight, and has been known to
ruffle a few feathers. His pugilistic side was on full display back in
1999 when he traded four days of high-spirited jeers with critic James
Wood on Slate. He sized up the overnight success story of the
octogenarian poet Virginia Hamilton Adair with casual zingers: “Unlike
Donne or Herbert, Eliot or Auden, she has no coherent theology
whatsoever-not even an intelligible skepticism like Dickinson’s,” he
wrote, noting that’s why her poetry lacked the tension of, say, George
Herbert’s. “She changes her cosmology to suit the mood. God exists or
maybe he doesn’t. God is male or female or somewhere in between.
Lutheran hymns are wonderful, but then so is Zen, the Eucharist, church
picnics, Christ’s miracles, and the now inevitable angels. Having
arraigned her on spiritual befuddlement, however, I must confide that
her views resemble those of many Californian Protestants. Adair is a
prophet of New Age piety. The purpose of religion is to make you feel
good. Why shouldn’t beets and broccoli have souls, as she suggests, if
that helps you face the day with a smile?”
Similarly, while interviewing Gioia for Philadelphia
magazine about the West Chester conference, I was amazed at the
alacrity with which Gioia leapt into the fray when I quoted free-verse
poet Ira Sadoff. Gioia’s counterattack came with lightning speed: “It
doesn’t surprise me that an older poet like Sadoff is less interested
in form than younger poets, who seem to be quite excited by it. He
doesn’t realize that he is on the far side of a new generation gap. Is
rap an extension of formal academic poetry of the 1950s because it uses
rhyme and meter? It’s a silly argument.”
Most famously, his Atlantic article attacked what he
saw as the cabalistic world of American poetry. Gioia charged that
professional standards have replaced artistic ones and poetry criticism
has been replaced by collegial encomiums. Typical of the essay’s
passages: “Most editors run poems and poetry reviews the way a
prosperous Montana rancher might keep a few buffalo around-not to eat
the endangered creatures but to display them for tradition’s sake.” Or
this one: “Like priests in a town of agnostics, [poets] still command a
certain residual prestige. But as individual artists they are almost
invisible.”
The mail and phone calls continued for months. Articles
attacking and defending the piece were published in the Times Literary
Supplement, New Criterion, USA Today, and the Washington Post, among
others. “When the hate mail arrived, typed on letterheads of various
university writing programs, no one was surprised,” Gioia wrote in a
1992 rebuttal published in Britain’s Poetry Review. “What did surprise
both the Atlantic editors and me, however, was the enormously positive
reaction the article created.”
Among the negative reactions were those of Pulitzer
Prize-winning poet Anthony Hecht, in the Washington Post: “This article
is clearly intended to be militantly provocative, to excite strong
feelings, and to sell itself to the editors of the Atlantic Monthly,
who undoubtedly like things that prove controversial. But it’s garbage.
To talk about how ‘the integrity of the art has been betrayed’-it’s
dumb.”
“Dana Gioia’s full of shit,” the poet Donald Hall once
told me with cheerful annoyance. “It’s always copy to say that
contemporary poetry isn’t very good, and nobody is reading it. At any
point in history, most of what is published is no good. The
journalists, the people who write the articles, attribute their own
declining interest in poetry to the population as a whole.”
Typically and significantly, Gioia is on good terms
with both poets. He still defies his critics, though he maintains that
the poetry scene has changed since he penned his article-partly because
the article had an effect, he says. “Only the amnesiac can claim poetry
was never popular in America. From the days of Bryant and Emerson, it
played an important role in American intellectual life-until recently,”
Gioia has written. “To rationalize away poetry’s current isolation by
pretending it had always been ignored revealed a depressing brand of
intellectual complacency.”
My own friendship with Gioia began with unhurried
telephone conversations, which led to occasional visits to his Santa
Rosa citadel, whose clean, white structures (the library/office is
separate from his house) seem to be a Western version of a rural New
England church. Now it takes several months to schedule a thirty-minute
phone interview from his Washington office, which gets whittled down to
twenty in the days before the appointment.
Gioia warms to the topic at hand. He speaks about how
the chasm between art and religion in contemporary culture has
impoverished both. “Art is one of the ways we can call people back into
the church.” He says that the arts have always been congenial to the
Catholic worldview, because Catholicism is a faith which believes that
transcendent truths are incarnated. “The sacraments are models of this.
They are outward signs that symbolize an inward turn of grace. The
Catholic, literally from birth, when he or she is baptized, is raised
in a culture that understands symbols and signs. And it also trains you
in understanding the relationship between the visible and the
invisible. Consequently, allegory finds its greatest realization in
Catholic artists like Dante.”
At the June 2000 Pew conference, Gioia spoke of the
Catholic aesthetic. “The U.S. church has never quite known what to do
with the human hunger for beauty,” he said, “but I would maintain that
the arts have always been a vital part of the Catholic identity and
that Beethoven and Mozart, Michelangelo and El Greco, Dante and Saint
John of the Cross, Bernanos and Mauriac, the anonymous architects of
Chartres and Notre Dame, have awakened more souls to the divine than
all the papal encyclicals.”
So how do we go about fostering a Catholic intellectual
community? At the conference, Gioia suggested that Jewish intellectuals
provide a model. Catholics need to focus on what unites them, “not only
by religious belief, but also by cultural, artistic, and intellectual
identity.”
“We need a big tent,” he explains, but “it will only
happen if the Catholic artists and intellectuals allow it to happen. I
think American culture, in the broadest sense, is very open-minded and
understanding. But American intellectual culture remains unconsciously
anti-Catholic. Catholic artists and intellectuals soon realize that
they will be dismissed or condescended to if they exhibit their faith
or cultural background.”
Gioia doesn’t believe in a single answer. He speculates
that “one of the ways to foster a healthier view of Catholic arts is by
creating opportunities, commissions-by having magazines like
Commonweal. Commonweal has an extremely important place in American
intellectual life because it represents one of the doorways between
religious and secular culture.”
Our interview was to last twenty minutes. In typical
Gioia loaves-and-fishes fashion, it miraculously expands to nearly
forty. Near the end, I hear in the background the restless rumble of
secretaries, assistants, communications staff, and others as they
prepare to hustle Gioia to his next appointment. Gioia wants to
continue the conversation, but within moments, he is off the phone,
headed toward the familiar interior of a Washington taxi. end |