by Johannes Goransson on May.27, 2014
Following up on Clemens’ answers to the first question, I asked him: What do you mean by “the old Scandinavian school of bland modernism”? What poets would you say are central to this tradition? What about it did you want to move away from?
Clemens: Well, what we certainly did not like was the kind of modernist poetry that lacks rhythm and is kind of high brow in a very pretentious way. That’s why we also were quite critical towards the poetry of Tomas Tranströmer. It would be wrong to call his poetry bland but a lot of poets that tried to use his aesthetics for sure came up with some really unexciting poetry. We could see and understand Tranströmer’s greatness as a poet but we saw nothing of that in the poetry written by his followers. You must bear in mind that we wanted to capture the urban street life while most Nordic old school modernists were interested in observing nature. There were exceptions of course. Among older poets we liked, for instance Göran Printz-Påhlsson (who has been translated into English by the poet John Mathias). By the way Göran Printz-Påhlsson was an important scholar from the Malmö/Lund-region and as an essayist he had introduced the notion of metapoetical writing to Swedish readers. He also translated John Ashbery into Swedish. As a poet Printz-Påhlsson himself was both learned and witty but had a wide scope when it came to the topics of the text. You could say that he also had a tendency to mix high and low. We were as a matter of fact friends with his son Finn and that’s how we got to know Göran.