Several months ago an idea surfaced on social media proposing
that the Poetry Foundation use some of its vast wealth to fund a
low-cost health-insurance program for poets in need.
The
idea has stuck with us. On several occasions, in several locales, people
we respect responded to the idea with unalloyed, unforced enthusiasm: "What a great
idea." "I'd support that." "That would be a worthwhile and creative use of
funds." We believe that many older poets -- poets from the grand generation born in the 1920s and 30s -- are in financial need, sometimes dire, and deserve generous support. Their well-being should be a high priority. But it is also part and parcel of the larger humane desire to create a true sense of community, and not just the lip-service that this word customarily gets -- even at times from the very institutions charged with forging the good works that community requires.
Speaking only for ourselves, we also feel that younger poets -- going from one adjunct position to another, underpaid at each, exploited, working in situations of maximum uncertainty, spending countless hours angling for their next nomadic appointment -- also deserve something better than the parsimonious treatment that breeds discontent and competitive envy.
In total agreement. Amber Tamblyn shouldn't have to take to the Poetry Foundation website to raise money for Diane Di Prima's medical expenses. Yes, coverage for older poets, and younger poets who teach or no. With hundreds of millions of dollars at their disposal, it's surprising the Poetry Foundation hasn't already started such a program.
Posted by: Michael_Schiavo | October 07, 2013 at 11:02 AM