Poets are not moral examples to society

I was pulled in by this glaring silver book of a faceless man covered with "seeing the light" (and published by City Lights Books). it's by experimental californian filmmaker James Broughton who died some years ago, and produced his first film in 1946. some of his words:

"'Try, as if you were one of the first men, to say what you see and experience and love and lose,' wrote Rilke to his questioning young poet. Only thus will you discover what Emerson called your own peculiar 'angle to the universe'. True poets are as anarchic as Jesus and Lao-Tzu. They particularly love revolutions, for revolutions are symbols of freedom from the majorenemies of art: cops, critics, and collective inertia. Every artist is in revolt. Because he is revolted by the passion for ignorance, greed and laziness in his fellow men. He knows a livelierrealm where they might dwell, if only they could see the Light. So he tries to show them the Light. And they can't see it. They don'twant to see it. They say, 'I don't see anything in it.' So he tries again. He lights another lamp, he makes another revolution. But let us keep clear what kind of revolution we are talking about. Poets are not moral examples to society. Their value is in being obstreperous, outlandish and obscene. Their business is to ignite a revolution of insight in the soul".