An Evening with Billy Collins

Billy Collins was the U.S. poet laureate 2001-2003. He is now the New York State poet laureate, 2004-2006. Tonight he spoke at the Union. And in my mind, going to hear a poet speak is quite the worthless exercise (not only because I work at the Union, either.) True, it is interesting to hear the man who actually wrote the works explain the motivations behind his creations. However, he is famous for writing, not speaking, the last time I checked. He could just as well write his motivations and reflections on the tribulations of writing in a preface. On a deeper level, it is somewhat disturbing/unsettling to see the man or woman responsible for poems, and even more so for novels, short stories, etc. It is like hearing a new song on the radio, then seeing the person singing; they are never quite how you imagined them, and it is never quite the same. I create my own understanding of the work they have created, and would rather keep it, regardless of the actual motivations behind their work. I understand this is slightly childish and quite a bit stupid, but I hold to it anyway. In the end, perhaps the creator is not even fully aware of all the influences behind his/her creation; or they are not willing to share with the world. Hemingway said the Old Man and the Sea was simply a book about a big fish. Do you really think that is true? Or did he think it was so, and only unconsciously was he pushed towards the story he created by other influences? In my mind, we should all come to a story fresh, and only afterwards involve outside knowledge of the author and the context. If you love an author, or are convinced a book is a classic and worth respect, or any other previous bias, how can you objectively regard what you are presented with in the work? Wow, this post makes me sound like an english major or an asshole, or perhaps both. Too bad.