The question “Who is entitled to be a poet?” is not just philosophical. It cuts to the core of literary culture, access, class, and voice. In a revealing conversation between Eileen Myles and interviewer Travis Nichols, this question unfolds through reflections on audience, tone, artistic development, and the social structures surrounding poetry. Rather than offering a rigid answer, Myles explores poetry as an open space, one shaped by lived experience, community, and a willingness to speak and listen.
This first part of the conversation provides insight into how poetry begins, who it speaks to, and how it evolves across a writer’s life. It also raises a deeper issue: whether poetry belongs to everyone or remains restricted by class, education, and institutional access.
The Intimate Voice: “Oh Hello. C’mon In.”
One of the most striking observations in the conversation comes from Nichols’ reading of Myles’ earliest work, particularly the opening line of her first book: “Oh hello. C’mon in.” This simple greeting encapsulates a defining feature of Myles’ poetry: intimacy. It feels less like a performance and more like a conversation.
For Myles, this tone is not accidental. It reflects a deliberate attempt to create an opening, a space where the reader feels invited rather than excluded. The casual voice functions as a kind of doorway. When a poem begins in such an accessible way, it reduces the distance between writer and reader, allowing poetry to feel immediate and human.
At the same time, Myles suggests that this invitation carries uncertainty. Opening the door means not fully knowing who will enter or what will happen next. Poetry, in this sense, becomes an unpredictable exchange rather than a controlled statement.
Who Is the Poet Speaking To?
A central question raised in the conversation is deceptively simple: who is the poet talking to? Myles’ answer reveals the complexity behind this idea. Early in her career, she imagines addressing specific figures such as a lover, a teacher, or a workshop audience. These imagined listeners provide a sense of direction and context.
However, this sense of audience evolves over time. Writers may shift between different imagined readers, sometimes consciously and sometimes unconsciously. Myles notes that there are moments when a writer questions why a particular audience has taken shape or why they feel compelled to explain themselves to someone who may not even exist in a literal sense.
More intriguingly, Myles reverses the idea of communication altogether. Writing, she suggests, can feel less like speaking and more like listening. The poem may appear to deliver a message, but the poet is also receiving something through the act of writing. This dual role complicates the relationship between speaker and audience, suggesting that poetry is as much about discovery as it is about expression.
Writing a Life Through Poetry
One of the most formative influences on Myles’ artistic vision comes from encountering a collection of poems by a classical Chinese poet, possibly Li Po or Du Fu. What struck her was not just the quality of the poems but their arrangement across a lifetime. The collection presented a progression: poems written in youth, maturity, and later years, all contained within a single volume.
This experience revealed a powerful possibility. Poetry could serve as a continuous record of a life. Rather than aiming for isolated masterpieces, a poet might create a series of “shavings,” small pieces that collectively form a larger narrative.
For Myles, this realization became a guiding principle. Writing was no longer just about individual poems but about sustaining a lifelong practice. Each poem contributes to an evolving body of work that reflects changing perspectives, experiences, and identities.
The Illusion of Simplicity
Another key theme in the conversation is the deceptive nature of Myles’ style. Nichols observes that many of her poems appear casual and conversational on the surface. However, closer reading reveals a high degree of precision in structure and language.
This balance between simplicity and complexity is central to Myles’ approach. She values a tone that feels natural and approachable, yet she also emphasizes careful construction. The goal is not to simplify ideas but to make them accessible without sacrificing depth.
Myles compares this effect to music. A melody may seem simple, but it evolves through subtle changes and variations. Similarly, a poem can maintain a conversational tone while gradually revealing layers of meaning. This approach allows readers to enter the work بسهولة while rewarding deeper engagement.
Poetry as a Common Portal
For Myles, the conversational tone is more than a stylistic choice. It is a political and social gesture. By creating an accessible entry point, poetry becomes a “common portal,” a space that does not intimidate or exclude.
This idea connects directly to the question of entitlement. If poetry is presented as overly complex or elitist, it risks alienating potential writers and readers. By contrast, a more open and inviting style suggests that anyone can participate.
Myles reflects on her own beginnings, noting that she was drawn to work that felt approachable yet rich. This balance encouraged her to pursue poetry, reinforcing the idea that accessibility can foster creativity rather than diminish it.
Class and Access: Who Gets to Be a Poet?
The conversation takes a critical turn when discussing class. Historically, poetry has often been associated with privilege, education, and financial stability. Nichols recalls hearing that poetry was once considered “for rich kids,” a perception that discouraged many aspiring writers.
Myles acknowledges this reality while also pointing to moments of change. In the 1970s and 1980s, there was a noticeable opening in the literary world. New voices emerged, challenging traditional norms and expanding the definition of what poetry could be.
This shift was not purely aesthetic. It was supported by structural factors, including public funding for the arts and accessible community spaces. These conditions made it possible for individuals from different backgrounds to engage with poetry.
However, Myles also implies that such opportunities are not guaranteed. Changes in funding, education, and cultural priorities can either broaden or restrict access. The question of entitlement remains ongoing, shaped by social and economic forces.
The Role of Community: St. Mark’s Poetry Project
A significant part of Myles’ development as a poet took place at the St. Mark’s Poetry Project. This space provided free workshops and opportunities to engage with established poets such as Alice Notley.
The accessibility of these workshops played a crucial role. Anyone could attend, regardless of formal credentials or financial resources. This openness fostered a sense of community and experimentation, allowing emerging writers to learn, share, and grow together.
Myles describes this environment as both intimate and dynamic. The workshops were small, often consisting of a dozen participants, yet they served as a gateway to a broader literary network. Relationships formed in these spaces had lasting impacts on participants’ careers.
This model contrasts with more formal academic pathways, such as MFA programs, which may involve significant costs and institutional barriers. While such programs can be valuable, Myles’ experience highlights the importance of alternative spaces that prioritize accessibility.
Learning Without Institutions
At the time Myles was developing her voice, formal creative writing programs were less dominant than they are today. While institutions like graduate schools existed, they were not the primary route for many poets.
Instead, learning often took place in informal settings: workshops, readings, and community gatherings. These environments allowed for a different kind of education, one rooted in collaboration rather than hierarchy.
Myles’ experience suggests that poetry does not require institutional validation. While formal training can provide structure and resources, it is not the only path. The existence of multiple pathways is essential for maintaining diversity in the literary world.
The Expanding Room: More Voices, More Competition
An interesting observation in the conversation is the idea that each generation perceives the literary world differently. Looking back, earlier periods often seem smaller and more manageable. In reality, this perception may be shaped by hindsight.
Myles notes that the “room” of poetry is always expanding. As populations grow and more people engage with literature, the number of voices increases. This expansion can be both exciting and challenging. On one hand, it allows for greater diversity and innovation. On the other, it creates competition and raises questions about visibility.
This dynamic reinforces the importance of accessible spaces. As the number of aspiring poets grows, opportunities for participation must also expand. Otherwise, the field risks becoming increasingly exclusive.
Reframing Entitlement
So who is entitled to be a poet? Myles does not offer a definitive answer, but her reflections suggest a clear direction. Entitlement should not be determined by class, education, or institutional affiliation. Instead, it should be rooted in the act of writing itself.
Poetry becomes a practice rather than a status. Anyone who engages with language, listens deeply, and commits to the craft can claim a place within it. However, this ideal depends on broader social conditions. Access to resources, communities, and opportunities plays a significant role in shaping who feels able to participate.
Conclusion: An Open Invitation
Part 1 of this conversation presents poetry as an open door, echoing the welcoming line that begins Myles’ first book. The act of writing is both personal and communal, shaped by relationships, environments, and historical contexts.
Myles’ perspective challenges the notion that poetry belongs to a select few. Instead, it emphasizes openness, accessibility, and ongoing exploration. The question of entitlement remains complex, but one thing is clear: poetry thrives when more voices are invited inside.
As the conversation continues in later parts, this foundation sets the stage for deeper discussions about politics, art, and the evolving role of the poet.
