Meaning: This quote by Antonin Artaud, a French dramatist, suggests a radical approach to the appreciation of written poetry. Artaud's statement challenges the traditional view of poetry as timeless and immutable, proposing instead that it should be read once and then destroyed to make way for new voices and expressions. This perspective raises thought-provoking questions about the nature of art, the role of the artist, and the value of creativity.

Artaud's assertion that written poetry should be destroyed after being read once is a striking departure from the conventional reverence for literary works. It challenges the notion of art as a permanent and unchanging entity, proposing instead a more transient and ephemeral view of creative expression. By advocating for the destruction of poetry after a single reading, Artaud emphasizes the importance of novelty and innovation in art, suggesting that clinging to the past inhibits the emergence of new artistic voices.

This perspective aligns with Artaud's broader artistic philosophy, which was characterized by a rejection of established conventions and a desire to break free from traditional artistic constraints. As a leading figure in the avant-garde movement, Artaud sought to disrupt existing artistic norms and challenge the status quo. His belief in the transitory nature of poetry reflects his commitment to pushing boundaries and redefining the relationship between artist and audience.

At the heart of Artaud's provocative statement is the idea that art should not be viewed as a static artifact but as a dynamic force that evolves and gives way to new forms of expression. By advocating for the destruction of written poetry, Artaud encourages a continual process of renewal and regeneration in the artistic landscape. This perspective invites us to consider the cyclical nature of creativity, where the old must make way for the new in order to allow for the unfettered exploration of fresh ideas and perspectives.

Artaud's call for the destruction of written poetry also raises important questions about the value of artistic creation and the role of the artist in society. By proposing that poetry should be discarded after a single reading, Artaud challenges the notion of artistic permanence and invites us to reconsider the purpose of creative output. Rather than placing emphasis on the preservation of literary works for posterity, Artaud's perspective prioritizes the act of creation itself, suggesting that the true value of art lies in its ability to provoke thought, inspire emotion, and incite change in the present moment.

In addition to its philosophical implications, Artaud's statement carries practical implications for the way we engage with poetry and literature. While it may be unrealistic or even controversial to advocate for the literal destruction of written poetry, Artaud's words encourage us to approach artistic works with a sense of impermanence and fluidity. This perspective invites us to embrace the ever-changing nature of art and to remain open to the possibility of new voices and ideas emerging to challenge and enrich our understanding of the world.

In conclusion, Antonin Artaud's assertion that written poetry is worth reading once and then should be destroyed challenges traditional views of art and invites us to reconsider the nature of creativity, the role of the artist, and the value of artistic expression. By advocating for the transient and ephemeral nature of poetry, Artaud prompts us to embrace the continual evolution of artistic forms and to remain open to the emergence of new voices and perspectives. While his provocative statement may seem radical, it encourages us to engage with art in a way that is dynamic, fluid, and ever-evolving.