Charles Bernstein (New York, 1940) is one of the main names of the North American school of Poets of Language and one of the most sagacious critics of the United States. Also of the most controversial. He studied at Hardvard. He is also an essayist. Author of 16 books, debtor of Emily Dickinson and Gertrude Steinn and founder of the magazine 'L = A = N = G = U = A = G = E', among other adventures, is one of the main voices of English poetry , away from any canon and owner of a seductive intellectual and literary rebellion.

Years ago, you wrote: "That annoying need to always move towards / a new place, in different circumstances: / and yet it does not seem that we have changed." Has your vision of poetry changed? I wrote that 40 years ago, in one of my first books. A young person projecting into a future. And yet, now I feel the same. Things change and I have changed, but as a poet I have resisted progress. Perhaps my vision of poetry has not changed, although I am always struggling with new situations and writing poems that face them. My poetry is about change and has embodied change: it is 'characteristically not characteristic'. I don't have a single style, but multiple styles, even contradictory, even in a single book. What can poetry bring to society? Nothing. Perhaps that is its main value: it offers nothing and accepts nothing in response. Poetry offers a space where language is not at the service of a pre-existing story, character, message or meaning, but at the center of everything, with its sounds, metaphors, rhythms and double senses. Language is used for the many pleasures it provides. I find the meaning of a poem in the process of writing it, as the reader finds it when reading it: a meaning that does not exist independently of the aesthetic experience. William Carlos Williams wrote: "No one / will think that this / has a great importance for the nation." Poetry has a subversive power that has always been tried to control. Plato has triumphed: poetry has been expelled from our republics, mainly by the own poets, who feel the need to express themselves and moralize rather than listen and reflect. I don't want a new world order, but constantly changing world orders. You have a very critical worldview, but expressed with great irony. What is the relationship between criticism and humor? These concepts seem opposite, but for me they go hand in hand. My poems are full of comic elements. This is just what made Plato distrust poetry: the image of the poet as a joker. Plato quotes Socrates, who says that "life, if not examined, is not worth it." I say that life is not worth it if it is not ironic. The problem of believing that there is only one truth is that this is always used by those who claim their truth. Trump, with his attack on science and the press, with his great lie repeated over and over again, is pernicious and weakens democracy trying to consolidate wealth in the hands of a few. Demagogues like Trump claim that their lies are the truth. The kind of poetry I seek is not to proclaim a single truth (neither does science). My poems enjoy metaphor, exaggeration and paradox. Is being misunderstood part of the game or is there really no misinterpretation? I am aware of the problem posed by the zero degree of irony. I am a teacher of humor that seems serious, which also means that I am a teacher of nothing, or blunder. That's why I get so misunderstood. There is a very limited tolerance towards poetry that behaves in an "abnormal" way, but it raises issues that are important for democracy. The poems are made to be misunderstood. That doesn't hurt them! Poetry is a space where multiple interpretations fit, and sometimes a "wrong" interpretation can provide valuable ideas, if one is able to dialogue and understand the causes of lack of understanding. A poem never has a single correct interpretation. What do you think of the possibility of machines writing poems? When I read most of the poems - not all - that promote conformist poetry, I am struck by the predictability of their language. The way many poets choose to articulate their subjectivity, their pain, their joy, their particular life experience, has been almost roboticized by their craft and their desire to be understandable. The "human touch" of the poems, many times, gives the feeling of being something mechanical. But computers will never replace poets, because they won't accept being mistreated so much. In 2004, Arnold Schwarzenegger, then governor of California, said those who opposed Republicans were "effeminate." You wrote "The ballad of the effeminate man," where he says: "Effeminate men are not afraid / of uncertainty." Is there any possibility of governing the world with those values ​​traditionally considered feminine? Yes. In spite of everything, we move towards there. We have not arrived yet, but we are on our way. Every gesture of resistance to the macho and racist culture is the materialization of another world, a world in which we reside for a moment, although we must return to the "real" world or oscillate between them. We place ourselves, as Thoreau wrote, "beyond ourselves in a healthy sense."

According to the criteria of The Trust Project

Know more

  • culture
  • U.S
  • poetry
  • Donald Trump

Interview From janitor and pizza maker to Hollywood emperor: the incredible rise of Bob Iger, Disney's boss

The Paper SphereValentine Penrose, the pagan goddess

The Paper SphereErnesto Cardinal: "The revolution is another way to create a world for God"