Essay

Ghost hunting with the Dead Poets Society of America

Is dying the best thing that ever happened to poetry?

by Kathleen Rooney
Ghost hunting with the Dead Poets Society of America
Allen Ginsberg's grave. Photo: Walter Skold

Walter Skold is a former journalist and middle-school computer teacher from Freeport, Maine. He is also the founder of the Dead Poets Society. This is not the 1989 Peter Weir film starring Robin Williams—though that cult classic is a reference point for the DPSA—but the organization whose mission is “digging up the graves of Dead Poets.” (“Duh,” their Facebook page clarifies, “this is meant in a journalistic/metaphoric sense.”)

What the society’s mission means is that its members are “a community of like-minded people who . . . enjoy the history, culture, & poetry associated with the lives and deaths of poets, their gravesites, and their poetry related to death,” and who are committed to “documenting and resurrecting the dead poets of America” by visiting and archiving as many poets’ graves across the country as they can.

On their website you can find everything from a pretty straightforward video of Haki Madhubuti paying tribute to Gwendolyn Brooks where she is buried in Chicago to the somewhat stranger image of a Barbie doll at the Wisconsin grave of Lorine Niedecker. The latter is an example of Skold’s tombstone art, which he describes as “a photographic combination of the techniques of Cristo and Jeanne-Claude, traditional African burial customs, literary criticism, collage, and performance art.”

Last year, Skold executed a three-month road trip to the graves of 150 poets in 23 states, paying homage to such favorites as Phillis Wheatley, Walt Whitman, and Allen Ginsberg, as well as to such lesser-knowns as Agnes Repplier, Lydia Huntley Sigourney, and the Reverend Michael Wigglesworth. The excursion totaled 15,000 miles, and Skold claims to have set a literary land speed record of 1.66 gpd, or graves per day. This year, in addition to a 22-city tour that kicked off on April 23—Shakespeare’s birthday—Skold is adding a crusade to create a National Dead Poets Remembrance Day, to be celebrated each October 7—Edgar Allan Poe’s death day.

Skold’s dedication and efficiency in locating poets’ graves is exceptional; I know from experience that this kind of scavenger hunt is not as easy as it might appear. Back in my final semester of graduate school, I and as many friends as would fit piled into a Subaru and drove from Boston to Hartford, Connecticut, one snowy weekend in February. We were going in search of Wallace Stevens. We were aware that the man had been dead for almost 50 years. But we wanted to see what he had seen on his weekday walk to and from the Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company, to visit the house where he resided from 1932 to 1955, and most of all to find his grave.

Wallace Stevens, King of Ghosts.

We walked the walk, we stared at the house (which you cannot go inside, because people still live there), we breathed the air and imagined that maybe the same particles had circulated through the lungs of Stevens. Then, not really knowing how to get there, we headed to the graveyard. Or, rather, to a graveyard. First we went to the wrong place: Beth Israel Cemetery. Beautiful, to be sure, and also historic, but, as the understandably suspicious caretaker explained, Stevens was not Jewish. In the early winter sunset, directed by the caretaker, we made our way to the right one: Cedar Hill Cemetery. We did not have a map, and no one was there to guide us. The snow was piled so high that only the top few inches of the headstones protruded. We had neglected to have a mind of winter. Locating Stevens’s remains seemed hopeless. As we dug among the drifts, the darkness became complete. We had been cold a long time, and more snow started to fall among the skeletal trees. The six of us soon found ourselves surrounded by hungry deer with no fear of us, their skinny bodies lit by the headlights we’d left on, the better to read the stones. In the yellow glare their eyes looked backless and unreal, and we started to freak out a little, like maybe the deer were revenants, like the place was filling up with ghosts and we shouldn’t be there, plus it was freezing and we needed to pee and we were almost out of gas and we were meeting people for dinner. We abandoned our mission.  

As the Dead Poets Society of America’s meticulously mapped 2010 tour indicates, Skold would not have been deterred by a little bit of snow and some creepy ghost deer. But who cares where a bunch of forgotten poets are buried? Why do I want to see these tombstones, and why does it make me—and the many people, including the nine state poets laureate to date who have participated in the DPSA’s activities—so pleased that the DPSA exists and is doing this? That Skold is, as he puts it, rescuing these poets from being “doubly dead,” for “not only did they die physically, but they suffered a second death when their works were consigned to literary oblivion.”

Skold’s fixation on dead poets seems fitting. Poets are sort of always already dead, consigned to literary oblivion even as they are living. All poets are dead poets, writing posthumously. Poetry is a dead art.

All poetry is written in opposition to, and therefore about, death. Poetry’s application of meter, rhyme, imagery, and memorable language is intended to make it endure in people’s heads. Its purpose is often memorial, or directly argumentative against the unjustness of everyone’s eventually having to die: “Rage, rage against the dying of the light,” says Dylan Thomas, yelling at death. Poetry and death go together like peanut butter and jelly. Like “two souls but a single thought,” if you want to get Keatsian about it. Like hope and dread, if you want to get Yeatsian about it. Stones and spoons, if you want to be Sextonian. The Poetry Foundation archive alone contains 928 poems about “Death.” Compare that to 65 about “Birth and Birthdays,” 38 about “Infancy,” and 449 about “Youth and Childhood.” Relatedly, there are 445 about “Sorrow and Grieving”—most of the sorrow and grief in response to death—and 310 about “Growing Old,” a process that leads inexorably to being deceased. Even though a poem can contain any subject, one of poets’ favorite things to put in the container has historically been, and continues to be, death. This preoccupation of arguing against death means that poetry is permanently associated with death. No one writes more poetry in high school than the goth kids.

All of this seems tied to the sense—which has existed probably as long as America has—that poetry as an art is either dying or dead. In 1928, Edmund Wilson asked, “Is Verse a Dying Technique?” (Answer: “Yes.”) In 1988, Joseph Epstein asked, “Who Killed Poetry?” In 1993, Vernon Shetley published After the Death of Poetry. A widespread consensus says that poetry is dead dead dead. A widespread consensus adds that this is sad news. Never mind that more people are reading, writing, and publishing poetry than probably ever before. True or not, I say dying is the best thing that ever happened to poetry. For if poetry is dead—has basically been dead this whole time—then poetry must be a ghost: unkillable and eternal and therefore more powerful than the living.

Perhaps this is why Skold and his DPSA have been so successful: they are tapping into a collective obsession with dead poets. Dead poets are always the most beloved. Live ones? Not so much. Love of a dead poet is an unimpeachable love. Dead, a poet is infinite and immortal, while the bounds around the poetry are clear and finite. Dead poets typically won’t humiliate you for liking them, won’t betray your affection by overproducing second-rate work, or espousing unsavory political beliefs, or publishing something cheap and clever in the New Yorker. You can feel confident in the security of a dead poet’s artistic excellence. And because poetry is regarded by virtually everyone as dead—as irrelevant from the moment of its inception—nobody can disparage your preoccupation with a dead poet any more than they can your preoccupation with stamp collecting. The stakes just seem so low.

Also? Because poetry is so linked to death, there is just something inappropriate about a live poet—something morbid and precious and silly. For example, poets are just the sort of people who might make fools of themselves getting chased by ghost deer while on an abortive search for the grave of Wallace Stevens. They have a whiff of uncomfy impracticality about them. Much more awkward to have a poet in your living room and be introduced, “So-and-so is a poet,” than to love a dead poet, free of all—bodily, earthly, economic—concerns. “So-and-so was a poet”—that’s better. It’s the difference between a filet mignon and a slaughterhouse: you like the product, but don’t necessarily want to see where it comes from. In fact, seeing where it comes from can actively impede your enjoyment. If one of the purposes of poetry is to escape from the anxiety of our own embodiment, then being reminded that it’s written by live people is kind of gross.

The impulse of the like-minded individuals who comprise the Dead Poets Society of America to collect dead poets’ graves and poems might be analogous to that of beachcombers: gathered seashells are lovely, but only after the mollusks that resided inside are gone.

Even if we hadn’t gotten lost, I’m not sure what exactly my friends and I were trying to find in Hartford. Epitaph as poetic form? Hunting poets’ graves as a form of ancestor worship? I don’t know if Skold and his fellow DPSAers feel, when they find these various poets’ graves, that they have found whatever it is that they are really looking for.

In “Man Carrying Thing,” Stevens writes of “[a] horror of thoughts that suddenly are real,” and how “[w]e must endure our thoughts all night, until / The bright obvious stands motionless in cold.” Maybe that is the object of the search, and the bright obvious is death. A death that poets want to see and master. Not to fear it, but to transcend it. To find (Stevens again) “Not Ideas About the Thing, but the Thing Itself.”

Commonly, ghosts are believed to be made of some subtle and misty material. That’s sort of a common belief concerning poetry, too: hard to grasp, otherworldly. That’s not intended as a criticism. According to the Wikipedia entry for "Ghost,"anthropologists speculate that this belief about the composition of ghosts arises “from early beliefs that ghosts were the person within the person . . . most noticeable in ancient cultures as a person’s breath, which upon exhaling in colder climates appears visibly as a white mist.”

The person within the person. The life within the life. Some other realm mysterious with possibility. Poetry is dead. Long live poetry.

Originally Published: April 29, 2010

COMMENTS (10)

On April 29, 2010 at 1:43pm Bre wrote:
I completely agree with the idea of loving dead poets more. And the whole idea about ghosts makes loving dead poets even more irresistable.

On April 29, 2010 at 4:31pm Michele Brenton aka banana the poet wrote:

Morbid - NO Precious - NO Silly - okay I'll give you that one. Otherwise - feel a bit peeved at this article. I *will* be dead one day for a long long time, but for now my work and I are very much alive, current, full of vibrancy, comedy, humour. An awful lot of people don't seem to be embarrassed at my presence in the slightest. Must be getting something very wrong somewhere. Ho hum...

On April 30, 2010 at 8:37am Sarah E Nix wrote:
Poetry is not dead if it is still being written
or read. And I think it will always be
written, if not read.

On April 30, 2010 at 2:17pm Kimberly Southwick wrote:
I love the end of this. I mean, the whole
thing is good, but the end is perfect.
Makes sense, though. The end / a death =
conclusions...

However, one point of contention must be
noted: though goth kids write the most
poetry in high school, let us remember
that it is not always the best poetry.

Fantastic article.

On May 3, 2010 at 2:14am Christopher Phelps wrote:
I really enjoyed this, Kathy.

I'm very much taken with the central idea that a dead poetry means let's get on with its afterlife. The pressure being off for good deeds (or bad), we can think and feel and write what we want.

I think this has potential for a longer essay. Maybe along Dorothea Lasky's lines, but instead of "Poetry Is Not a Project," it could be titled, "Poetry is Not A Life (or Alive)"?

On May 3, 2010 at 3:10pm Rand Mackenzie wrote:

The article comes off as more of a "Groupie" endeavor. I do not believe many of the "dead poets" would want to be on that circuit...but that rather their words would still resonate or motivate after they are gone. For the poets of his time and today Phil Ochs wrote: "Before the days of television and mass media, the folksinger was often a traveling newspaper spreading tales through music. There is an urgent need for Americans to look deeply into themselves and their actions, and musical poetry is perhaps the most effective mirror available. Every newspaper headline is a potential song." Phil did visit his own grave site though: PHIL OCHS (AMERICAN) BORN: EL PASO, TEXAS, 1940 DIED: CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, 1968[68] Rehearsals for Retirement Not knowing a poet during "times as ugly as these" would be a protest against beauty.

On May 14, 2010 at 2:52pm Jackie Byers wrote:
I think hunting for poets' tombstones must always be done on dark, stormy nights. But maybe flashlights and a ziplock baggie with munchies would make the task pleasanter. I wonder which state has the most dead poets in residence.
Anybody know?

On May 16, 2010 at 7:14am Chris wrote:
Although I cannot dispute whether more people are writing poetry than ever before, I wonder whether the overwhelming majority has even less use for poetry than ever before. We've all heard that. What this article makes me wonder, though, is whether that larger indifference is due to the fact that, as a culture, we no longer believe in mortality. There are no more fatal accidents. It has to be someone's fault, as in a lawsuit. Death, like Leona Helmsley's tax bill, is something that's supposed to happen only to other people. The death of poetry, then, is merely a consequence of the death of death. Right?

On December 15, 2010 at 12:45pm Kaleb Contreras wrote:
this is the best story ever.

On January 23, 2011 at 1:42pm j. Patrick bennett wrote:
Well done. What you say seems to ring
true in my experience; the poet has a
knack for endings. For honing the edges to
sharp, for leaving the blade buried in soil.
We expose ourselves to poetry, we crawl
up through it, and, in the case of Wallace
Stevens, as we struggle for breath, we are
cut. Very sharp article. Thank you.

POST A COMMENT

Poetryfoundation.org 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.

Related

Audio Article Events
 Kathleen  Rooney

Biography

Kathleen Rooney is a founding editor of Rose Metal Press. She is the author of the essay collection For You, For You I Am Trilling These Songs (Counterpoint, 2010) and the poetry collection, Robinson Alone (Gold Wake Press, 2012). With Elisa Gabbert, she co-wrote That Tiny Insane Voluptuousness (Otoliths, 2008).

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.