I've been slowly but steadily coming to the conclusion that mga tula as an art form is quickly losing its flavor amongst the iPod generation. And I'm not talking about contemporary poets who don't get read sa pamamagitan ng the masses, because as Gertrude Stein would say, "Those who are creating the modern composition authentically are naturally only of importance when they are dead because sa pamamagitan ng that time the modern composition having become past is classified and the paglalarawan of it is classical. That is the reason why the creator of the new composition in the arts is an outlaw until he is a classic." Or, in other words, a poet only matters after his work has been deemed a classic. This has occurred plenty of times in history. The only real audience for contemporary poets is other poets.

No, I am not worried about the contemporary poets so much as I am worried about the classics.

As a lover of mga tula myself, I signed up for a Modern mga tula class because I thought it would be fun to read some of the classic modernists and discuss them with a group of fellow mga tula enthusiasts. Now, as a young American with mga kaibigan of varying interest, I could already tell that the majority of young America couldn't give a flying monkey about poetry. Most of these folks also couldn't care less for literature in general. English majors and avid readers tend to be different. English majors and avid readers are supposed to enjoy literature in general. English majors and avid readers are, mostly, supposed to read at least some poetry.

I learned from a brief chat with my professor that "Modern Poetry" is rarely offered, because little interest is shown in it. And, granted, this was a summer course, but summers at the unibersidad of Washington tend to be quite busy with a bunch of bustling students trying to pack in a few extra credits to graduate early, or to catch up with their graduating class. Including myself, there were three official students of Modern Poetry, and one auditor, who was a very interesting retiree and poetry-lover.

Speaking to the other two students my age, I quickly learned two things about English majors at the unibersidad of Washington: A) That even if they liked literature, most of the time they did not like and, to some extent, even loathed poetry. And B) That an English major is not required to take any classes in mga tula at all, and can easily obtain a degree without ever having to look at a single poem.

Now, some may recall that even I expressed frustration with the mga tula we read in the the chat, or complained about all the essays I was Pagsulat for the class, but in truth I actually rather quite enjoyed it, for all my complaining. But I quickly learned a new thing, about my generation in general (not just English majors). And that is that even a well-read person who knows exactly who you're talking about when you mention Hemingway, has no idea who you mean when you casually mention Stein in the same sentence, even though Ernest Hemingway and Gertrude Stein were not only contemporaries, but good friends.

To my everyday group of high school graduate friends, I throw out names like "Harper Lee," "J.D. Salinger," "F. Scott Fitzgerald," and even occasionally "Albert Camus," "Joseph Conrad," or "Chinua Achebe," they know who I'm talking about because the novels of these authors were required pagbaba in their high school.

If, to the same group of high school graduate friends, I toss out names like "William Carlos Williams," "Wallace Stevens," "Elizabeth Bishop," or even "T. S. Eliot," "Ezra Pound," or "W. B. Yeats," they tend to stare at me blankly.

Why is this, I ask? Why is it that the great novelists of the nineteenth and twentieth century are recognized sa pamamagitan ng my generation, but not the poets? Why do we feel this vague sense of, "Oh, I should know who he is... Wasn't he black?" when we hear the name "Langston Hughes"? Or, "Dang, 'Gertrude Stein,' she sounds super familiar... Wasn't she a lesbian?"

A matulin paghahanap of Fanpop for the major contributors to the modernist canon revealed that the only mentions of any of these names (Williams, Stevens, Bishop, Eliot, Pound, Yeats, Hughes, and Stein) reveal nothing, or if something, an artikulo in which I alluded and/or quoted one of them.

I published an artikulo centering around Hughes' poem the other araw in hopes to stir up a little discussion on the poem. The poem itself was rather incendiary at the time, and some may consider it to be offensive still, which was exactly what I wanted to discuss. It received six ratings, which I was pleased with, and not a single comment.

So this is my tanong that I am posing to you, writers and poets: Did you recognize any of the names I dropped in this article? If you did, can you name one poem any of them wrote? Can you name two? If you can name three, I may have to get down on one knee and propose. Because even amongst English majors, I've found, mga tula is not necessarily a welcome topic of conversation.

Now, why is this? Is mga tula too dry for our short attention spans these days? It has been argued that artists such as John Lennon, Joni Mitchell and Don McLean were the real poets of their generation, and were paralleled with poets like Allan Ginsberg of the Beat Generation. So if this is the case, does that mean I'm wrong? What if mga tula isn't dying? What if it's just slowly evolving into brand new forms, just like us? What if our mga tula is our music? Song lyrics are madami often quoted sa pamamagitan ng teens than any classical lyric. Regardless of whether or not a poem of the canon is timeless or period-specific, it would seem that most of the iPod's generation's interest is in the world, and subsequently mga tula of music. If these popular lyrics were written, or read, and not sung, would they still be popular?

And if they remained popular, why song lyrics and not other poetry? What makes, for exampled, Jason Mraz's "If it's a broken part, replace it/If it's a broken arm then brace it/If it's a broken puso then face it," any madami interesting than Don McLean's, "The silver thorn on the bloody rose/Lay crushed and broken on the virgin snow" or any madami interesting than Wallace Stevens' "People are not going/To dream of baboons and periwinkles./Only, here and there, an old sailor,/Drunk and asleep in his boots,/Catches tigers/In red weather." (Quotes and artists/poets selected at my discretion. From "Details in the Fabric," "Vincent," and "Disillusionment of Ten O'Clock" respectively).

Hm... It's all very tricky, isn't it? I asked my uncle this tanong earlier, and he suggested that it was because music was madami readily accessible to folks nowadays because it's everywhere you turn. Poetry, not so much.

So what do you guys think? Are you a tagahanga of the classic poets? Are you a tagahanga of poets in general? Do you prefer song lyrics, or written poetry? Or do you think they are apples and oranges? Is mga tula dying, or is it just changing to meet the needs of the rapidly shrinking attention span? If it is changing, is it a good thing? Will people still study the modernists (Eliot, Pound, Stein) in the future, or will their work slowly fade into obscurity?

Talk to me! I would pag-ibig to dialog about this.