| Author | Message | ||
| bob rojas
Member Username: bob_rojas Post Number: 52 Registered: 06-2008 |
I’m new round heres, so I don’t know if this has been exhausted already, but I’m interested in the topic anyhow. (sorry if it has been. if so, ignore the post I guess) I’ve been reading up on contemporary poetry a lot lately in an effort to leave my songwriter way of thinking for a more poetic one, but I’ve found a lot about the craft of the matter that I can’t bring myself to practice. anyway, as a reader I want a poem to communicate to me and I want the poem’s craft to be (superficially) invisible. I understand that forced rhythm, rhyme and abstractions are the main road-block for communication, and make the craft very visible. I've learned a lot about cleaning up my stuff in these areas, but I also think that most of the stuff I’ve read lately fails to communicate, too, for different reasons. minimalism to the point where the logic or conversational-ness (?) of a statement is lost is most frustrating. I’ve read a few poems that are so bare that they required me filling in their gaps in order to understand them (that could be considered abstract language, if you want it to). I also cringe at overly obscure imagery, unnecessary big words for the sake of it, and, (if you mind) limp-wristedness, angst, what have you, but these are more a matter of opinion and don’t necessarily take away from the communication of the matter. I’m not trying to pick anything apart, but I am interested to know what you guys believe a poem’s function is and how the craft should suit that function. | ||
| Zefuyn
Intermediate Member Username: zefuyn Post Number: 806 Registered: 12-2006 |
Hi Bob, I won't answer this in the detail it probably deserves but quite simply, poems that team up with my imagination are those that most excite me. Most often due to my own willingness to participate and less about the authors own intent, but the writer does have to give me room to breath with it, and provide the triggers. Whatever the intended function is of a poem, mostly it's the language that triggers me, sometimes the story / message; but always how I interact with it. No doubt about it - poetic technique is always best if it is employed in a subtle way, even if it is in rhyme, or like the current challenge, by repetition. A bit like art, I find it hard to say 'that is not a poem' 'I see no function of a poem' because every poem performs for its author, and we are gifted by seeing it, more so if it is done without artifice or screens. As a reader, I like to read work that is challenging, experimental or just plain good. One thing I strongly believe is that there shouldn't be a requirement to 'get' the poem, for it to be perfectly comprehensive, because life just isn’t that neat, and our imaginations can own what we read and take it somewhere personal and ‘gettable’ to us. Geez I hope my answers were not abstract, as that would be pretty darn ironic. Great question, if I haven’t helped at least I’ve enjoyed exploring the answer. (: Melanie The circle is the purpose of the line – Mark Insingel | ||
| LJ Cohen
Moderator Username: ljc Post Number: 10108 Registered: 07-2002 |
Bob--I think this is one of the most important conversations we can have about poetry.I can tell you my own biases, but they are only that: one reader's/writer's preferences. I believe that poetry (all art, actually) is a collaboration between artist and audience. When I read a poem, I experience something akin to mutual inductance (a term from physics: a change in the current of one coil affects the current and voltage in the second coil). The images, language, and comparisons the poet employs resonate with my own experience to form a sensory and emotional impression. I believe the very best poetry employs technique invisibly to convey that emotion. But technique is crucial. Without careful attention to craft, the poem has no supporting structure. It's a balancing act. When craft takes center stage, then the poem becomes an exercise in ego--'look at me, I'm so clever'--and loses the emotional resonance. There is another balance the poet needs to maintain and you allude to that in your comment. The poet needs to give the reader enough context so the reader has the basis for a personal connection. Too little and the poem is an abstract--a word version of a Rorschach test. Too much and the poem becomes trivialized with details so personal the reader is shut out. Poetry is a large tent (that's a 'gary b'ism) and what fits the bill for perfect poetry in my eyes may fail completely in some one else's. Find the poems and poets you connect with and study their work. Look for the hidden work of craft and try to emulate that process in your own work. I have found it useful as a learning tool to try to craft a poem that follows the structure of another poet's work. (I use this as a lesson only, not something i would post for public critique or commentary). Then I can incorporate some of those techniques into my own voice and writing. It's also good to know what you don't like and why and you've done a nice job analyzing that, again from your comments. Keep reading and keep writing, Bob. Thanks for opening the discussion. best, ljc Once in a Blue Muse Blog LJCohen | ||
| stacey dye
Intermediate Member Username: belladonna Post Number: 706 Registered: 11-2007 |
Bob...I'm glad you opened this discussion as it has been a huge help to me (as a novice) as well. Thanks for beginning the exploration. Stace | ||
| ~M~
Board Administrator Username: mjm Post Number: 31437 Registered: 11-1998 |
Dearest bob -- interesting topic. Thanks for introducing it. Yes, we've discussed many different aspects of poetry. You'll find many of those discussions in our Library forum, if you're so inclined: NATUROPATHY It seems to me from reading your questions that you might be under the impression that poetry is just one thing, is only of one variety. It is not. There are many different types and classifications. There are narrative poems, there are lyric poems, there are surreal poems, there are experimental forms, there are traditional forms like sonnets and villanelles, and the list goes on and on. It sounds as though you prefer some kind of story line and plot to your poems, or poems that follow in a logical, more conversational progression. That would be narratives. Those are the kinds of poems that you would probably relate to most and are the ones that you should seek out and write yourself. Poetry is very broad category and encompasses many different styles, formats, forms, and voices. The more you read, the more you will find a style and type that fits your particular tastes. Best, M | ||
| bob rojas
Member Username: bob_rojas Post Number: 56 Registered: 06-2008 |
fab answers, thanks. cohen, i agree. you said it better, though. | ||
| Gary Blankenship
Moderator Username: garydawg Post Number: 25583 Registered: 07-2001 |
There is no one function - the poem may be meant to make you laugh, cry, anger, fear, desire, lust, imagine, think, and a list of 1000 more. Form, craft, should complement the function in some way - but that leaves the poet with an almost inexhaustible number of choices. Mostly thought the craft should not interfere with the poem's function. Gothic say for a nursery rhyme. Of course, in a master's hands, almost any function might be crafted in almost any way. Not that there are all that many masters. Good luck. Smiles. Gary Celebrate Walt with Gary: http://www.poetrykit.org/pkl/tw10/tw4conte.htm | ||
| Fred Longworth
Senior Member Username: sandiegopoet Post Number: 4467 Registered: 05-2006 |
Bob, If you read the so-called "first rank" literary journals, you will find that a great many of them include poems that are nearly incomprehensible. The English language is bent and pushed to the limit. Allusions are obscure and esoteric. Rhythm is often disregarded in favor of cleverness. Concision is deployed to the point of anorexia. Perhaps more aggravating, the poet is as much as saying: I'm soooooo damn smart. If you don't "get" the poem, it's because you're a moron! Remember: if it makes any sense on the first read, it is by definition "simplistic." And remember: accsssibility = pandering Fred | ||
| bob rojas
Member Username: bob_rojas Post Number: 60 Registered: 06-2008 |
fred, i guess i should stick to songs then  i can't bring myself to write nonsense. though i do it anyway, unintentionally. maybe there's still hope! | ||
| Fred Longworth
Senior Member Username: sandiegopoet Post Number: 4477 Registered: 05-2006 |
Bob, every poem should be an IQ test, filled with conundrums, puzzles and teasers. The challenge is to "unlock" the poem. The old way of addressing a poem -- i.e. "reading" it -- that's passe. Fred | ||
| ~M~
Board Administrator Username: mjm Post Number: 31447 Registered: 11-1998 |
Lawdy, people. Do you like every flavor that Ben and Jerry's makes? If you don't like the Pumpkin Cheesecake, don't eat it. Nobody's forcing you to lick the obscure, the esoteric, the anorexic, the incomprehensible. They are only made available for those who like them. There's a whole case of other flavors to choose from. Look! There's Chunky Monkey! Love, M | ||
| Fred Longworth
Senior Member Username: sandiegopoet Post Number: 4479 Registered: 05-2006 |
My favorite is Thelonius Monkey. I discovered it when I went to the ice cream salon and asked the clerk: "Do you have any blue ice cream." "No," she replied, "but a couple of miles down the street at Birdland Flavors they have Thelonious Monkey." "Is it 'Kind of Blue' or really blue?" I asked. "Really blue." "Cool." I left. As I walked to my car, a cold rain peppered by clothes. Fred | ||
| ~M~
Board Administrator Username: mjm Post Number: 31462 Registered: 11-1998 |
I put pepper on my clothes once. But it just made me sneeze myself blue. Love, M-lonious Thunkey | ||
| bob rojas
Member Username: bob_rojas Post Number: 61 Registered: 06-2008 |
M, i'm not really "in" on what the market is, and i know you are, but i'm pretty sure the style in question dominates most of it. but of course, i'm the one asking questions, so maybe i shouldn't assume so much. | ||
| ~M~
Board Administrator Username: mjm Post Number: 31463 Registered: 11-1998 |
It all depends on what journals you read, bob, and the editorial leanings of the staff. If they like the obscure, the esoteric, the anorexic, the incomprehensible, then that's what they'll put in their mag. But luckily, there's not just one game in town. Even if a mag has a tremendous reputation and is well-respected, if YOU don't like what's in it, don't read it and don't submit to it. There are literally thousands of journals out there, on the net and in print. Surely, there will be a few that will appeal. That's your market, bob. Ignore the rest. I think people put too much stock in trying to get in to journals they believe (or other people believe) are "it," it being THE most highly-regarded, THE most well-respected, THE most top-o-the-line. But if you don't like the work that's in it, why read it or pursue it? Because it's going to lead to fame and fortune? Now, there's a good one. *grin* I don't think there's a poet, living or dead, who could support himself solely on the proceeds of his work. Hell, I'd rather concentrate my efforts on finding journals I respect, that feature the work of poets I love and relate to, and pursue them. Are they the biggest names in the journal business? Does it really matter so long as you enjoy them? Everyone can find a niche, bob. And not every poet needs to pursue The Paris Review. Particularly if you don't really like what's in it. Finally getting to join an exclusive club if you don't like its members turns out to be a pretty hollow victory in the end. Your work will be sitting next to a bunch of snobs it doesn't like. What fun is that? *smile* Love, M | ||
| bob rojas
Member Username: bob_rojas Post Number: 63 Registered: 06-2008 |
fab answer, M. if there comes a day where i feel crafty enough to get published, i'll have to find these journals. (Message edited by bob_rojas on September 23, 2008) | ||
| Lazarus
Senior Member Username: lazarus Post Number: 4056 Registered: 10-2005 |
I thought this was going to be an abstract discussion, and it turned out to be a discussion about abstractness! I think it's a little crazy to think that there is a market for every kind of poem. Poems are enigmatic, they take on a life of their own. Sure you can look back at a field of poems in a particular time and say there was a trend to do this or that, just like in visual art. But the publications are all looking for the same thing, they want to find what people like them would read and find interesting. Just because a mag gets in a rut sometimes and publishes a string of pieces that seem similar doesn't mean they won't get an itch, a hankering, for something different. My point being, yes, you should send to mags that publish what you like, but it doesn't have to be what you write like. If you like what you've read there, at least you won't be embarrassed when you send your friends and family the link! On the question in general about abstractions in poetry- It's all abstract! A poem is a little world unto itself. You set things in motion and watch how they interact. When the final outcome is something you think others might like, you pass it around and see if your hunch is right. -Laz | ||
| Fred Longworth
Senior Member Username: sandiegopoet Post Number: 4492 Registered: 05-2006 |
There are two levels of abstraction in a poem. First, there is the simple fact that poem is a virtual space, populated by virtual characters, human and nonhuman, that engage in virtual behavior. There's no way around it -- as Laz indicates above -- "A poem is a little world unto itself." Second, there is abstraction of the kind where the poem goes on and on about "truth" or "love" or "justice," where, after a time, the mind's eye atrophies. Many poets, especially beginning poets come up with doggerel like -- The truth of life is found in love, not justice. I frankly get more out of the cliched statement: "I'm a lover, not a fighter." At least I can visualize a lover and a fighter. I am reminded of the politician who says with a flourish, "I am for good and against evil." Fred | ||
| Lazarus
Senior Member Username: lazarus Post Number: 4068 Registered: 10-2005 |
Fred- I think we can agree that the second kind of abstraction you mention is when a poet confuses the making of an abstract statement with poetry. We all know that dog don't hunt, or if it does it only catches scrawny rabbits not worth the time in the pot! Now poems, understood as an abstraction of life, is the same whether you are talking about prose or strict format. But there is a third level of abstraction in poetry that can be understood as a trend toward removing the normal connections between words and objects or ideas to such a degree as to make them practically new entities. IMHO this can be overdone, but in my opinion it is a matter of taste, as was mentioned before, and I feel it can safely understood to be lying the far end of the scale upon which we all conceive our creations. -Laz | ||
| Will Eastland
Intermediate Member Username: dwillo Post Number: 629 Registered: 07-2006 |
I think Laz's third type is what bob started this discussion about. Abstract in a sense similar to an abstract painting in which the lines do not create the shapes we are used to seeing inside the frame. I want either less corruption, or more chance to participate in it. ~Ashleigh Brilliant |
