While I find her work to be several inches short of profound and wouldn't recommend her to a friend, I wonder if there's something to be learned from Rupi Kaur and maybe, by extension, the whole movement she represents.
This guy is the best,” she says, noticing an edition of Kafka’s complete stories; she’s referring to Peter Mendelsund, the book’s designer. “The dream is to have him design my next book.” His work, she points out, translates well across media — to different sizes, to posters, to digital.
While reading this paragraph (from Molly Fischer's article on Rupi Kaur after the release of her first book) makes me cringe every time, I wonder if perhaps wanting a pretty book cover is something that *we* the (sometimes snobbish) literary community should particularly frown at (even though it's freaking Kafka for crying out loud). Maybe the (sometimes unbearable) simplicity of her style and the generous amount of attention bestowed on how best her poem would look in an Instagram post is some new artistic sensibility that *heavily intellectual* circles cannot (or will not) comprehend.
Something prevents me from seeing anything particularly profound in her work (whether that something exists or doesn't seems like both a philosophical question and a deeply personal one) yet, her 'Instagram-ness', and the attention to detail in terms of design and aesthetics, I like.
Although I feel that a lot of her appeal is due to the fact that she *exists* as a pop-star of the literary type, 'making moves and changing the game', I wonder if perhaps our apprehensiveness to her work should be interrogated. Why does her poetry (?) – (which has even been described as 'vapid' by angry critics) make us so uncomfortable? Why is she minimalist like tumblr and not minimalist like Ezra Pound? What's the difference? Is there some meta- reference that we're just not getting here? Who are we to dismiss the connection she has with her millions of readers, if it truly made them feel something?
Source: reddit post