Hillary Clinton’s Poetry Challenge

The candidate grapples with the "art of making possible."

by Alexander Provan

Getty Images, Inc.

In early January, Hillary Clinton dismissed the oratorical sensibilities of Barack Obama, her competitor for the Democratic Party’s nomination, admonishing him in the words of Mario Cuomo: “You campaign in poetry, but you govern in prose.” A month later, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. warned the electorate that Republicans “aren’t going to respond to poetry or lofty language.”

The Clinton camp’s regular attacks on Obama’s “poetry” are surprising, mostly because it has been so long since poetry played a role in a presidential campaign. But, in the course of the last six months, Obama has wielded his significant gifts as a poetic speaker—if not a poet—to win over a majority of Democratic voters. Clinton was forced to respond, taking the position that even the most skilled rhetorician will, in the end, have no effect in Washington, however inspiring he may be to voters.

Yet poetry seems to be edging out prose on the campaign trail, with Obama’s calls for hope and unity filling stadiums, and Clinton’s dry policy speeches drawing yawns. Granted, compared to her husband, “the man from Hope,” whose favorite authors include Seamus Heaney and Marcus Aurelius, Hillary (“the woman from Park Ridge—it’s a suburb of Chicago”) is no bookworm. Normally, that would not be to her detriment. The American presidency has had an uneasy relationship with literature for at least the last century. But this season, despite Hillary’s assertion that poetry and governance make for poor bedfellows, she has been compelled to emulate Obama’s tone. Recently, she received the help of longtime Clinton ally Maya Angelou. On January 20, with Super Tuesday looming, the 79-year-old poet and author of I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings offered a paean entitled “State Package for Hillary Clinton.”

Angelou heralded the arrival of the Clinton era 15 years ago with a poem entitled “On the Pulse of Morning.” Hoping also to herald the resumption of that era, she recently delivered for Hillary Clinton a succession of blandishments largely in prose form, but beginning with the stanza:
You may write me down in history
With your bitter, twisted lies,
You may tread me in the very dirt
But still, like dust, I’ll rise.

After recounting the wrongs done to Clinton and enumerating some of her considerable qualities and credentials (she has “been there and done that”), Angelou solemnly declares, “She means to rise.” Then, she offers an unlikely exhortation, considering the subject of her praise:
Rise, Hillary.


Angelou’s poem emphasizes Hillary’s transformative experiences and achievements—the legacy of the women’s liberation movement—and reconciles them with the official portrait of Hillary as seasoned, pragmatic politician. It is an attempt to locate the poetry in her, and amplify it.

When people criticize Clinton for failing to inspire, what they often mean is that she has no poetry about her. Her “story”—privileged upbringing, successful law career, singular focus on political ascendance—does not recommend itself to poetry. More important, her career seems to be characterized by a process of depersonalization, apparently to make her less vulnerable to the omnipresent attackers cited by Angelou. Those in search of the “real” Hillary—a figure that recedes farther into the distance with each day of Hillary-the-candidate—are bound to be frustrated, as her biographers have been.

Yet, while Clinton seems at times incapable of poeticizing herself or her message, she has strived to overcome the perception that there is no self there; shortly before the New Hampshire primary, she succeeded in doing so thanks to a few tears, after which she proclaimed, “I found my own voice.”

Regardless of the content or literary value of Angelou’s poem, the uses and abuses of poetry in the campaign are proof that the Democratic electorate does, to some degree, judge a candidate in relation to his or her poetic sensibilities and ability to communicate artfully. That is the legacy of John F. Kennedy, and Obama has emerged as his heir apparent, however their diction differs. For all of Hillary’s jabs at Obama’s lack of experience, many Democrats would rather have a president who fits the JFK mold of an “existential hero” (per Norman Mailer) than one who is a student par excellence of the intricacies of governance.

* * *

In 1987, Gary Hart, a connoisseur of literature who ran two unsuccessful campaigns for the Democratic nomination, asked a New York Times reporter, “Why is it that somebody like me is thought the oddball?” after being ridiculed for his obscure tastes. “I think I’m the healthy one. I think you ought to be asking all those other guys who have done nothing but hold public office and have no other sides to their personalities [why] they don’t write novels and why they don’t read Kierkegaard.”

Although Obama hasn't written any novels, he has written two memoirs: The Audacity of Hope traffics in many of the platitudes of the political-biography-as-platform genre, but the earlier Dreams from My Father is an emotionally articulate and, at times, highly poetic bildungsroman. As an undergraduate, he even tried his hand at poetry, publishing two poems in the Occidental College literary magazine. The first, called “Pop,” is an evocation of his grandfather, who “takes another shot, neat, / Points out the same amber / Stain on his shorts that I’ve got on mine, and / Makes me smell his smell.”

Though he has since abandoned verse, the combination of vernacular poetry and liberal-arts catchphrases has proved a winning political formula. Obama’s tendency to speak abstractly, emphasizing a certain tone above any specific platform, is consistent with his emphasis on what President Bush has derided as “the vision thing,” whereas Clinton’s artless style conforms to her understanding of politics as a process of hard work and incremental change. As such, Obama slogans like “We are the change we seek” have earned him occasional derision from the Clinton camp. Although both leaders would like to claim the mantle of Roosevelt and the New Deal, FDR saw the presidency the way Obama does, as being “more than an engineering job, efficient or inefficient. It is predominantly a place of moral leadership. All our great presidents were leaders of thought at times when certain historic ideas in the life of the nation had to be clarified.”

Clinton claimed to have found her voice during her New Hampshire triumph, but she has so far failed to find a rallying call. After Obama’s decisive victory in Wisconsin, Clinton stopped trying to beat him at his own game and renewed her attacks on his oratory, asserting that “while words matter, the best words in the world aren’t enough, unless you match them with action.”

In looking for her own poetics, Clinton would have done well to revisit her graduation from Wellesley in 1969, when her speechifying tendencies were in full bloom. Addressing the graduating class after a conservative U.S. senator who had chastised students for protesting the college’s administration, she read a poem by a classmate, Nancy Scheibner, that insisted students “be free” in order to “practice with all the skill of our being / The art of making possible.”

* * *

While Hillary has spent much of the last 40 years sanitizing any predisposition toward self-expression, her husband never cared to quash his own poetic tendencies, which have hurt him (and her) as much as they have helped over the years. Like the early presidents, Bill Clinton looked to poetry for a vision of the nation, and of himself as its steward. On the way to his inauguration in 1993, Clinton stopped at Thomas Jefferson’s ancestral home in Monticello, Virginia, where the first Democrat, and perhaps our most intellectual president, cobbled together a vision of the inchoate republic’s principles and characters from the poems he read. At the time of the founding fathers, poetry provided the raw material for imagining the nation. A creature of the Enlightenment, Jefferson looked to the classics to better understand a nation still in formation. As well as writing extensively on British verse, he read Homer in the original Greek and often quoted from Theocritus and Virgil, who spoke to the pastoral ideal Jefferson hoped to cultivate in America and later articulated in Notes on the State of Virginia. (It was Jefferson who suggested that “E Pluribus Unum,” attributed to one of Virgil’s salad recipes, become the nation’s motto.) Clinton came to bask in Jefferson’s authoritatively American voice, which he claimed to be the framework for “the populism of this campaign.”

Bill Clinton has advertised his affinities for T.S. Eliot and William Butler Yeats and claimed a deep attachment to Ralph Waldo Emerson’s patriotic “Concord Hymn.” But it was Walt Whitman who articulated Clinton’s all-encompassing (and all-penetrating) democratic spirit, exuberant will to expand beyond one’s borders, and all-too-catholic sense of empathy. (He famously gave Leaves of Grass to Monica Lewinsky.) And it was, in effect, Clinton’s poetic proclivities, broadcast to the world during the Lewinsky scandal, that humiliated Hillary—his inability to reconcile poetry and public life.

Poets are allowed idealism and a degree of distance from mundane concerns. In her political career, Hillary Clinton has never allowed herself to be anything but defensive and practical. Obama, on the other hand, represents the middle ground between poet and politician; his idealism is essential to his political acumen. Until equivocating in the face of Obama’s surge, Clinton seemed intent on turning herself into the antithesis of the blustery populist who rolled into the White House in 1993.

It is not as if Clinton has no love for poetry. Though her literary appetites do not parallel those of her husband, Hillary shares his enthusiasm for T.S. Eliot’s Four Quartets. For her Wellesley senior thesis on radical organizer Saul Alinsky, she turned to “East Coker” for an oddly inauspicious epigraph. “And so each venture / Is a new beginning, a raid on the inarticulate,” Eliot postulates:
In the general mess of imprecision of feeling,
Undisciplined squads of emotion. And what there is to conquer
By strength and submission, has already been discovered
Once or twice, or several times, by men whom one cannot hope
To emulate—but there is no competition—
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
For us, there is only the trying. The rest is not our business.

The cyclical nature of the metaphysical struggle in Eliot's poem becomes, in this context, an evaluation of Alinsky's methods; Clinton approved of his aims but wondered if his radicalism, his unwillingness to be conciliatory, hampered his efforts. But it can also be read as a reflection on Clinton's own intellectual journey from kind-hearted but sheltered Goldwater Girl to worldly Wellesley graduate with existential dilemmas on the mind—a story that ends, as we all know, with a hard-fought ascension to the highest tiers of national power. It is the early stages of this journey, as Angelou reminds us, that now seem worth reviving for Clinton, as Obama's challenge compels her to reconcile herself to poetry and populism. It is these "undisciplined squads of emotion" that must be recovered, the "mess" of feeling that must be accessed, the "trying" that must be transcended—if it is not already too late.

[Correction: The article as originally posted mistakenly referred to Maya Angelou as the only poet since Frost to read at a presidential inauguration. James Dickey read at Jimmy Carter's Inaugural Gala in 1977 and Miller Williams read at Bill Clinton's second inauguration in 1997.]
Originally Published: February 27, 2008


On February 28, 2008 at 8:30am Laura wrote:
great article!

On February 28, 2008 at 11:56am Aram Boyajian wrote:
The Article, Hillary Clinton's Poetry Challenge. does not mention that there are millions of white men in America whowould vote for a black man rathr than a white woman--or any woman-- and illions of so-called Christians who wouldn't vote for a woman--any woman--because they believe that only a man is worthy of being the head of a family or a nation.

But to specifics. Obama mandates health insurance for children because he wasnts every child to be covered. Hillary wants children and adults covered --and the only way to do that is to mandate health insurance. So the "poetry" of OPbama will leave out moe than 12 million Americans. Perhaps when those 12 million uninsured Americans are waiting in the Emergency Ward to see a doctor, they will pick up a book of Obama speeches and be instantly cured by the poetry of his speaches.

On February 28, 2008 at 2:04pm Tanya Allen wrote:
Good article, but when Provan writes that Angelou is "the only poet besides Robert Frost to have graced a U.S. president’s inauguration," he's forgetting about Miller Williams.

Williams read "Of History and Hope" at Bill Clinton's second inauguration in 1997. The Library of Congress has an audio recording of the poem here:

On February 28, 2008 at 3:05pm LAINE COTE' wrote:
Sticks 'N Stones----

Sticks 'n stones might break our bones

but words will really hurt us.

We are what we speak!

Either we are controlled by words (our's

or other's)----

Or we take control by meaning

what we speak:

And speaking what we mean---

[Neither a strong point of the politician.]

The moment a poet becomes a politician

there is an "agenda" that strangles

the poem . . .

But the moment a politician becomes a poet there is a hope that can enliven a nation!

And free us from the shackles of rhetoric . . .

On February 28, 2008 at 3:49pm Jim Lyle wrote:
There is, I think, a difference between trying to communicate politics using poetic tools, and understanding and applying politics with a poetic sensativity. It is like the difference that exists between the Architect and the Carpenter. I have seen carpentry that was strong but ugly. I have seen Archtecture which was pretty but was not functional. And, not often, thankfully, some which was both. Isn't it much like the commander who leads by charisma and example rather than the by demand. I think Obama can lead where Hilliary would force..

On February 28, 2008 at 4:40pm Gregg wrote:
Senator Hillary Clinton should use her Senate seat to make the end of the Iraq war the "art of the possible." Instead she uses the "art of politics" to try to have that issue both ways. Likewise she currently wants to be against NAFTA, yet clearly helped pass NAFTA with her husband.

For 10 antiwar poems ranging from 2003-2007, check out:

On February 28, 2008 at 4:48pm Arlene Weiner wrote:
I stopped reading this at "Her “story?—

privileged upbringing, successful law

career, singular focus on political

ascendance—does not recommend itself

to poetry." You could tell the same

selective story about Sylvia Plath: "Her

story: pale blonde beauty, elite women's

college, towering ambition, early

recognition of her brilliance, doesn't

recommend itself to poetry." But oh,

yeah, her husband left her and she

committed suicide, that's vulnerability,

that's femininity, that's poetry!

On February 28, 2008 at 7:11pm Majid Naficy wrote:
You victimize the victim. If Bill cheated on his wife it was because of his poetical free spirit?! ... I voted for Obama but I like Hillary as well. She has become more personal in recent month.

On February 28, 2008 at 10:22pm Becky Roberts wrote:
Didn't Maya Angelou endorse Obama?

On February 28, 2008 at 11:27pm John Simonds wrote:
Interesting piece, but on a small factual

quibble, I recall that James Dickey read

from his poetry at the 1977 inaugural of

his fellow Georgian, President Jimmy

Carter. Thanks, John Simonds.

On March 3, 2008 at 8:19am Barbara Ellingham wrote:
You missed the point in her quote! She accuses Mr. Obama of campaigning in poetry, meaning that is the ideal that he and she wants to bring to America. That is the way it should be - poetry for all! However, Mr. Obama governs in prose, the opposite of what he is campaigning in! Mr. Obama reminds me of President Reagan who made us all feel good by being a cheerleader for the United States, but whose Presidency left us with huge economic debt. Mr. Obama also reminds me of President Carter who had great ideas but couldn't work with Washington. Hillary can work with Washington and has plans that make sense. If you really want change, put Hillary in the Presidency! Have you read their books and looked at their records? Mr. Obama would make a good Vice-President. He could learn from Hillary and then continue their work after her 8 years! Then with his 8 years our country could really recover!

On March 5, 2008 at 4:10pm Mary Smith wrote:
You did miss the point. Please read Senator Clinton's speech to the International Conference on Women at Beijing.

I am surprised to find The Poetry Foundation Journal sounding like the MSNBC so-called "pundits," biased, uninformed, and arrogant.

On March 5, 2008 at 5:39pm Gil Dekel wrote:
Have you noticed that it is politicians that quote poets, not poets quoting politicians... This means that poetry is a much ‘wiser’ tool than politics for bringing peace and joy to this planet…

Gil Dekel

On March 7, 2008 at 1:40pm Tony Kenyon wrote:
Here is one you might enjoy

I stood in the shadows and a fire burnt within

I could no longer stand and await

I had to soar with the Eagles above

I had to cast my dreams to see

I thought that all should come together

That no one stands alone

We are the ones who can shine

As we set our sails to dance on the wind

We need to live in freedom

We need to unchain the heart

So that the Spirit deep within

Can soar strong and Proud

We have to sing out with a voice

We have to walk tall once again

Take away those chains that bind

And let the Song of Freedom be heard again

(Tony Kenyon 2008)

Written for Hillary Clinton

On March 15, 2008 at 1:27pm NZX wrote:

On March 27, 2008 at 10:23am Nadine Gallo wrote:
Hillary would do well to catch up on her

poetry reading. She seems caught up in

the mundane and responds to

opportunities with boring reactions. The

entire Clinton campaign is uninspiring.

It's a disaster.

On March 27, 2008 at 10:53pm leo bradley wrote:
Is any of this serious? If so... well,

Jeremiah Wright! Now there's a great Democrat with definite poetic cadences! ...which obviously rubbed off on his mentee, Barak.


On March 30, 2008 at 7:32am mat wrote:
Poetic writing but is it true? I don't think

of Obama as a poet; I think of him as a

rhetorician-- a stunning rhetorician. This

is what we should expect of politicians.

That they be moral leaders-- and that

their prose inspire the populace. It really

has nothing to do with poetry-- it has to

do with vision. Clinton lacks on all

counts. Should she read more poetry?

Too late.

On April 4, 2008 at 5:59am Michael Benton wrote:
I've waited to be inspired during this election. On the democratic side we are down to a simple choice, an empty suit or one who complains about it cut. Alas my inspiration did come, but only in the negative.

Inches from the Shore

I wondered what today would be

as I awoke and found the floor.

Oh, would we find the bigger view,

or drown just inches from the shore?

Easy it is to miss the mark

while insisting the mark’s the goal.

And how they love to beat the drum

then proclaim things beyond control.

The bait and switch, or shuck and jive

each leading to the same result.

The sad thing is we know the lies

but give in to the word-smith's cult.

So in the end no view is changed

by politicians we have kept.

It’s not with them the blame does sit

'tis pure bull-crap that WE accept.

The art of nothing has to change

before we can repair this land.

Noise over substance - take no more

on this point we must take our stand.

In give and take the answer lies,

that requires a bigger soul

an open mind to new ideas

that sees our nation as a whole.

So demand the best from your pick

the days after you cast your vote

Next time around you'll make them pay

with a heave-hoe - cast from the boat.

And maybe then the others will see

it is us that they can't ignore

to then accept a bigger view

or drown just inches from the shore.

(MH Benton 2008)

Note: The original uses a bit stronger language than "bull-crap" It is a self-edit in respect of the sensibilities of some readers.

On April 6, 2008 at 9:16am Rolando Rosario wrote:
Power Of the Pallet

Sitting on top of a hill

Miles away from the world

As the last explosion

Conquers a nation.

Walking down from my hill

To the ruins left of the world

I feel sorrow and dissatisfaction.

Walking back to my hill

I spot a little girl

Who’s lost limbs has left her dying.

With no legs and no arms

I tell her to stay calm…

The next president will know how to save you.

Vote clinton 2008

On April 11, 2008 at 7:46am KELLI2L wrote:
IMO - no amount of poetry would make Obama win my vote, for his history is too colored and would impose a burden to our future.

On April 12, 2008 at 7:37pm Cogito Ergo Doleo wrote:
Poetry = Prayer. The former melts your bones; the latter reconstructs them; thus, it remains impossible to confuse the rhetoric of poetry with the poetry of rhetoric. Remember "East Coker" reaching its endswell for the first time; and, then, try to imagine a politician absorbing *that* shock.


On April 17, 2011 at 11:17am wrote:
Article.. Bang-up :)

POST A COMMENT welcomes comments that foster dialogue and cultivate an open community on the site. Comments on articles must be approved by the site moderators before they appear on the site. By submitting a comment, you give the Poetry Foundation the right to publish it. Please note: We require comments to include a name and e-mail address. Read more about our privacy policy.


Poems by Abraham Lincoln


Alexander Provan is a writer living in Brooklyn. He is also an editor at Triple Canopy, Stop Smiling, and Bidoun.

Continue reading this biography

Originally appeared in Poetry magazine.

This poem has learning resources.

This poem is good for children.

This poem has related video.

This poem has related audio.