I've seen more and more celebrities releasing poetry collections. I've also perused several reviews of these collections on YouTube and Goodreads; as usual, honest opinion appears to fall short in some cases. Or, to the opposite effect, consistent slam reviews incorporate minimal positive highlights (or constructive criticisms); in the ones that do, they feel disingenuine. As a result, the process of choosing to purchase the poetry book by said celebrity becomes that much more difficult from my point of view.
Enter the proposed question: should "celebrity poetry" be held to a slightly higher standard?
I just completed reading Lili Reinhart's 'Swimming Lessons.' Though the book certainly wasn't perfect, I felt that the book's overarching message of romanticism of the human condition was represented well within her completed work. Like most people, I had some personal peeves while reading the collection (namely that horrible instapoetry vibe... but that is another discussion on its own). There were many missed opportunities (cliches that could have been remedied with more interest). I've also read parts of Lana Del Rey's 'Violet Bent Backwards Over The Grass.' Similar interests lie here too. Don't even get me started on Rupi Kaur.
It seems that celebrities rely heavily on their massive following to pull them through the publishing grind, but let us be honest here, lousy writing is simply that bad writing. Out of the celebrities mentioned above that I've read, Lana was probably the better one. At least she used poetic devices in her work. Lili did too sometimes, but not as effective.
You would think that having a massive following would require a celebrity to hold themselves to higher standards. Yet it doesn't feel that way from what I've read. Of course, I'm not saying that all the poems in these collections are outright horrible (some more than others). Still, I've certainly felt disappointed, especially with the costs of some of these works. I mean, if I pay $17+ for a book of poems, I expect to see something worth the money.
Poetry will always be an art form that plays off the human condition. There certainly are freedoms of the art form that can be exploited with a great advantage, but there are pitfalls. So what do you all think?
Subjectivity is certainly the nature of the beast. That I have no doubt. I love your expression of poetry as a mode of free expression because it certainly is. Everyone has their own niche. Poetry isn't a right that only professional poets (those who make a living off of poetry or specialize in) have domain over. Exclusivity can be a blunt end to which to poke holes into the manifestation of poetry. My biggest beef in this conversation is how crude (or distasteful) some reviewers on YouTube can be towards these "celeb" poets.
There always seems to be this foreboding shadow above a celebrity persona. That often stems from either partly jealousy, a bad sense of judgment generally, or no real appreciation of the work. For example, take a look at some of Rachel Oats' reviews on poetry. Some of her points are solid arguments given the literature involved, but some of the remarks you can tell come from a strong sense of personal taste. At the end of the day, opinions are opinions, but there is a level of responsibility when you have many viewers, especially as an influencer.
Celebrity poetry is the equivalent to YouTubers in a film.
To say they only wrote poetry books for fame and/or a quick buck is unfair,because everyone has the right to express themselves in a unique way.
Also,higher standard is very subjective.
One reader may find generic poetry(being authentic,true to yourself),amazing poetry.The other,may find Instapoetry,Haiku and Limerick to be higher standard.Very different depending on the poet,writing style,and how they perfect their craft.
Sometimes,I do wonder if these celebrities write poetry because they're using this as an avenue of expression or maintaining any relevance of staus?
If it was an avenue, wouldn't make such a half hearted attempt to write "Deep,Thought Provoking Lines" and call it poetry.Plus,poetry is more than just blank statements on a page.If that was the case,slam poetry might be better then.Its about going to those places none would dare to go,while exploring sides none ever thought would existed.
In today's modern world,it seems everything is poetry,which is why these celebrities write poems that they do.
So,while it makes sense to put them in higher status,doesn’t mean they need to reach towards this higher standard.
It just mean they're not the right representatives for poetry,which is like the modern representation of YouTubers jumping into movies.
Put them in higher standards if one wants,but most are not right representation.
In otherwards,there is such thing as respect for the art form work produces.
And who represent craft,demonstrates in such a way that they become the person one models after.
Which is what humans do,anyway.
A status symbol doesn't mean they master all,they master one and will be remember for one thing.
I do wonder then, if the fault (I wanted to say blame but that didn't feel the right word choice) lies at the publishers feet more than anything? In a way you're right. Why would they turn down the opportunity? Though I'd like to think serious artists would say, that's out of my lane and I don't know the first thing. If you were a famous novelist, and was asked to record an album, would you? The problem may well be that poetry just isn't understood to the degree it should be. They're offered a book deal and think to themselves: "How hard could that be?"
Also I don't disagree at all that celebrity artists have worked their toes off to get where they are. I mean shit, even Gabbie Hanna and Trisha Paytas work hard, as much as I had to admit it, to build and maintain their 'celebrity'.
Rachel makes a good point, whether their work should be held to the same standard as us regular folks, of course it should. I just think there's also that expectation to be astounding. Lana as a songwriter naturally can transfer that over.
I'm not sure I've read many 'celebrity collections'. I'm enjoying Lana's and I've flicked through Lili's. I far prefer Lana's but even that isn't to the 'typical' poetry grade. To clarify: I am 100% aware that, like any art, poetry is subjective so I'm just saying that it's not as...in depth as some of my favourite poets. That isn't to say that the poems aren't good or honest, they're just a bit...bland, I guess.
That being said, I do think there's room for discussion regarding the literature produced by celebrities, specifically youtubers and influencers. I may sound a bit bitter here and I apologise for that but it's definitely something that irks me. We all want to be seen and heard and valued for our art. I would love to have a bestselling novel and poetry collection. Of course I want that. But it's kind of become the norm that anybody with an ounce of popularity is just...handed a book deal on a silver platter. (This opinion applies to novels and autobiographies as well as poetry collections.)
But let's talk about 'real' celebrities (I'm sorry, I don't mean to sound mean but I can't think of another way to explain myself). I think Adam raised a good point regarding holding an actor's writing to the same level that you hold their acting credits. I completely agree but I think we also have to hold the collection (or novel or whatever) to the same standard as collections released by 'regular people' (again, I'm sorry - I don't know how else to describe it). Would these 'celebrity' collections still be published/circulated/bestsellers if I released those poems?
I will say: when Bruce Springsteen released his autobiography, I bought it. If Taylor Swift released a poetry collection, of course I'd buy it.
I don't know. Everyone deserves space to express themselves and create art. But I think there's definitely some cases of 'favouritism' so to speak.
Hope this makes sense! This is, of course, merely my opinion :)
Hmm, this is such a great thread. I think people tend to expect more from "celebrity" poems for a number of reasons.
In my opinion anyway, I think it's because
1) If an artist is successful in one medium, people wrongly assume they must be amazing in all mediums.
2) They likely got a book deal because of their following, rather than having spent years grinding and perfecting, so there's a jealousy aspect involved.
When you combine those two together, I think that's why the expectation. I will always respect a celebrity's book and efforts, if it's clear that they have done just that... put in effort. I found a lot of rawness in Bella Thorne's book, but I feel like there was a huge element of ''taking advantage''. But big potential from her in my opinion. I really enjoyed Violets. And I can see the Reinhart poured her soul into the poems, so again... not my cup of tea but I don't judge her for doing it.
Which brings me nicely onto other ''celebrity'' poetry. People like Gabbie Hanna and Trisha Paytas, they really get my goat. Publishers and influencers/celebrities who take advantage of the current boom to make a quick buck should be locked away somewhere... I don't need to say too much on them, but a quick google search will show you what I mean lol.