Why Do People Hate Rupi Kaur?

Jun 22

The question at the tip of the tongue of every modern literary critic and readers alike, is whether 21st century poetry is actually any good? Is there space in the canon for 21st century works? Or is everything being produced now just an imitation, or badly adapted version, of what's come before? We can see that traditional print, and literature more generally, has taken a bit of a backseat. So, modern poetry is becoming more expansive and much of it tries to overcome this change in the market, using social media and online platforms to push the work as opposed to the traditional physical format of the past. We see these social media poets, like Rupi Kaur, emerge in the poetic space as a result of this market shift. Though with this change in production also comes many changes in the poetry itself, the forms, styles and techniques used by contemporary poets is distorting what we typically deem poetry. With all these new changes can it still be as good as the poetry of the past?

The Rise of Modern Poetry

With the rise of modern poetry comes the loss of a lot of the predetermined foundations of poetry. We ditch the constraints of structure and form, often using free verse; or an adapted version of a prescribed verse form, like an irregular sonnet. The free verse form has long been controversial, namely by Robert Frost, him claiming that ‘writing free verse is like playing tennis with the net down’; seeing it as a glorification of freedom over structure. But the abstract has certainly taken over modern poetry, often using this “confusing” style to depict the individual experience of being a human in an ever changing, contemporary world.

Free verse is, however, rooted in much less contemporary works than that of the 21st century. The much more “classical” 19th century Walt Whitman being labeled the “father of free verse.” He pioneered a unique type of free verse that combined spontaneous, prosaic rhythms with incantatory repetition that he found within the Old Testament; and he used this verse as a means of depicting the unique identity of the American self. Further evidencing that all things modern stem in more classical traditions.

Must we like all modern poetry? Definitely not. Equally, we need not love every "classical" author (Tennyson can certainly take a hike). Sure, modern poetry seems to be less valued in critical and literary spaces where there is a large preference for the classics - namely the romantics (think your Byron's, Keats’ and Shelley’s) - when looking at and studying poetry. Likely due to literary snobbery and an over-romanticisation of the classical. But ultimately, it is all down to individual likes and dislikes as a reader and consumer of poetry. I may not enjoy Rupi Kaur’s anthologies, but I have friends who have all her collections.

It also begs the question of accessibility. Modern poets, like Kaur, aim to target a wider range of readers, not just those who necessarily read a lot of poetry, let alone classical poetry. She does this by making easily digestible poetry, often only a few lines long, constructed with simple language and posted widely across social media platforms like Instagram. Hate on it if you want, but the overwhelming amount of likes, reposts and shares, show how many people read and enjoy this type of poetry. I definitely have my own personal critiques on poetry in the social media space, but can appreciate how it is maintaining the general public’s love for poetry in the modern age. And if authors like Kaur are making poetry accessible to the masses, and encouraging a love for literature in literature’s dying age, then we should encourage this, no?

How to write Modern Poetry

If you write in your own style then it's too modern and thus meaningless, just a string of words and sentences. But if you copy the classics you are an imitator. So where does the critique stop? Answer is that it never does. The drive to always be creating something “original” can actually stifle our creativity; these attempts to consciously distance ourselves too far from current or past poetry can in turn cause us to lose our voice. You end up losing the part of yourself that is in your poems in the hopes of instead making something that others will like.

As someone who writes poetry, maybe I have a bias when I say that there is space for all poetry in the literary space. I have the belief that if art and our views on it cannot evolve then how can we? Art after all functions as a reflection of society, individuality, politics, prejudices, and all other elements that make us human. Though I won't deny that imposter syndrome in the poetry space is very real. Doing an English degree at Oxford has both cultivated my poetic abilities and also increased my feelings surrounding my poetic inadequacies. When you are reading amazing poetry day in and day out, it's hard to believe that your work has much merit in comparison to the greats you are reading - classical poetry has its designated space in the literary canon for a reason. But with the rise of social media and the demands of modern society more generally, the poetic genre has to adapt to survive. It's very likely that the works of Keats would not go viral on Instagram…

So, I would encourage you to read classical poetry, appreciate it, but also to not discount poetry being published by poets today. Moreover, do not let either type of poetry dictate how you choose to write your own poetry, as I believe there is space for all art. Your personal voice and style is what will make your poetry valuable.

You can read some of my poetry and other articles here:

https://cherwell.org/author/kiaya-phillips/

https://cherwell.org/2024/03/04/tangerine/

https://theoxfordblue.co.uk/the-blueprint-issue-no-14-winter-23/

https://theoxfordblue.co.uk/author/kiaya/

Check out Kiaya’s new blog, which you can follow at: https://substack.com/@kiayaphillips?utm_source=profile-page