| Author | Message | ||
| brenda morisse
Senior Member Username: moritric Post Number: 2810 Registered: 04-2007 |
Sometimes I sprinkle cliches into my poems. They are flavorful and have a grounding effect. So, what's your opinion? | ||
| W.F. Roby
Intermediate Member Username: wfroby Post Number: 548 Registered: 03-2008 |
A prof once explained it like this -- "Cliches are poetry's equivalent of a brick over the head. A solid image will kill with a feather touch." In my opinion, most cliches and instances of bad language in poetry are due to the lazy use of modifiers. Brenda, when you say they are "flavorful" -- defend that. For example: if a poet writes about "dark shadows", how is that "flavorful"? The poet could easily use a fresher modifier. Describe, for instance, "red shadows" or "thin shadows," anything at all but "dark shadows." You can also fix a cliché, and strengthen your poem, by evoking a cliche without evoking it. How do you do that? Subversion, subversion, subversion. Start as usual -- change those modifiers. Select modifiers that sound close to the original you intended, but mean something else. For example, "Rome wasn't built in a day" can easily become "Days weren't built in Rome". You get the idea, though this is a weak example. In the era of post-Modernism, there are those who have taken this particular method and run with it -- inverting puns, cliches, etc. You want to talk about "flavorful"? One way in which a poem can overcome cliche and increase the scope of its meaning is to layer the expected with the unexpected. As for a cliche's "grounding" effect -- I don't think I understand what you mean. A cliché is a trope in literature that was at one time based in reality or thought to be real, but through excessive repetition has lost all power. It is at once overly-familiar, lifeless, and shallow. Are any of us here at Wild truly powerful enough writers to speak about Grand Concepts like birth, or death -- to speak about them directly, that is, without using the tools granted us by poetry? These tools being imagery, wordplay, meter, etc. There are times and places where cliches are necessary -- not in poems, but in life. Sometimes a few familiar words is all we can manage to say. At a funeral, for instance, all I can ever choke out is something like "I'm sorry for your loss." In real life, what isn't said can speak volumes. Clichés in poems are lazy. They are lazy stereotypes that are naught but stand-ins for feeling, and you are a good enough poet to evoke feeling rather than shove it in your poem. | ||
| Fred Longworth
Senior Member Username: sandiegopoet Post Number: 5159 Registered: 05-2006 |
Brenda, like a spice added to an entree by a competent chef, if it's there because it was intended, and the quantity of the spice is carefully controlled, then the dish can be expected to delight the palate. It simply becomes another element in a properly prepared meal. This can be compared to the use of four-letter words. The occasional, well-placed, four-letter expletive adds color and vehemence to writing. If they are used willy-nilly, the writer or speaker comes off as vulgar. * * * * * Many beginning poets (which you are certainly not one of) often use cliches copiously, and without what I call "aesthetic diligence." Thus, the principle of appropriate proportion is largely ignored in their writing. Sadly, many of these beginners ignore aesthetic diligence and pay little heed to appropriate proportion. Instead, they are enamored with wrong-headed criteria for what constitutes the creative process. These include such discredited guidelines as -- (1) The most important thing is to get your feelings onto paper. (2) Do not read other poets, especially poets who are alive and writing right now. This will corrupt (or contaminate) the purity of your creativity. (3) The first words are the best words. Revision is silly; it sullies the original inspiration. Kim Addonizio has an excellent rebuttal to the first-words-best-words paradigm in the latest issue of Poets & Writers. * * * * * Sorry for the "mountain out of molehill" answer! Fred From Bambi: "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all." From me: "Even consciousness, a pastiche of recycled cans." | ||
| ~M~
Board Administrator Username: mjm Post Number: 32646 Registered: 11-1998 |
For me, it depends on how cliche is used. As Roby noted, unusual variations on cliche are often welcome. In other words, I often find it quite entertaining when a poet plays with a well-known cliche, altering it and adding wit, humor, cleverness, or a new insight. Unintentional use of cliche is just sad and uninteresting. It signals one of two things to me: 1) the writer is a beginning author and has to depend on cliched imagery and language because they have not yet developed the necessary skills to create their own unique voice and manner of expression, or 2) the writer is not well read and has no idea the imagery, language, and ideas they are using are cliche, or they are just plain lazy and don't want to exert the effort it takes to use language/images/ideas in new ways. I can forgive the first, but I find it harder to justify the second. If you are going to write, professionally or for publication, you must educate yourself and move beyond cliche. And if you use cliche, which is valid in some cases, you must do so in the manner I indicated in the first paragraph of my answer in order to hold the attention of the reader and entertain him. Not many beyond the age of 8 or so are interested in reading the equivalent of "Roses are red, violets are blue . . ." Anyway, those are my thoughts. Thanks for posting this interesting question, borrachita. Merry Christmas! Love, M | ||
| Hephaestes
Intermediate Member Username: hephaestes Post Number: 820 Registered: 12-2006 |
Brenda, Cliché already indicates a tired phrasing. The word derives from French: clicher, to stereotype. This French infinitive sounds similar to the drop of the matrix into molten metal when making a stereotype plate. You may mean you like to use idioms in your poems. An idiom is a more general term for common saying. A soft salting of idioms (colloquial phrasings) can give your poem a regional feel. Careful usage also makes for a natural-language poem. Honestly I've seen everything work. Poems are such organic matter, there are no rules, only suggestions. That said, W.F.'s (W.F., forgive me) suggestion is an important one: cull the words you place on the canvas the way you'd glean the perfect colors. Sometimes not the brightest colors, but always those most appropriate to the tenor of your painting. All the best, Heph | ||
| LJ Cohen
Moderator Username: ljc Post Number: 10607 Registered: 07-2002 |
Re 'first thought, best thought', when I do writing workshops with school children, I ask them to brainstorm at least 6 different words to say what they are trying to say. I tell them that brainstorming is like priming the pump. (A metaphor that is so outdated, I have to explain it to them, LOL!) That the first things they think of are the stagnant water that's been sitting in the pipes all day. That to get fresh water, they have to discard the stagnant water that emerges first. An excellent discussion of cliche--a thread that should definitely be archived in our library forum. best, ljc Once in a Blue Muse Blog LJCohen | ||
| steve williams
Board Administrator Username: twobyfour Post Number: 2319 Registered: 01-2003 |
The Most extreme example of a definition for Cliche was "Cliche is everything that has ever been written." I think that rather extreme view helps define the issue of uniqueness. There are some writers who are not interested in being unique, they just want to problem solve on the page. It doesn't matter to them if their problems are new to the world (probably not). So to offer them critique on the value of their uniqueness in writing is probably a waste of breath. To expand on M's point. How can you know if you are using a cliche unless you READ what has come before you? Otherwise, you can only guess. "heavy as lead" is probably over 500 years old. The first person to use it did something new. Everyone else is using a cliche. In order to create, you must produce something new to the world, otherwise all you are doing is copying. Using them in a different way, changing their meaning by changing the context etc. are new ways to use cliches and by making those changes, they cease to be cliche but rather something new. This is very difficult to pull off, but i've seen you do this brenda so kudos to you.  Using cliches is not something dirty but using them and then representing to the world that you have produced great art never seen before, is well, rather uninformed. s | ||
| brenda morisse
Senior Member Username: moritric Post Number: 2813 Registered: 04-2007 |
Dear all, I love this discussion. love, brenda | ||
| Fred Longworth
Senior Member Username: sandiegopoet Post Number: 5161 Registered: 05-2006 |
In my above post, I argued (using a culinary metaphor) that cliche, or for that matter the highly familiar in its many forms, is subject to the requirements of aesthetic proportion. I believe this is true of all forms of art. * * * * * Now I'd like to voice an economic/sociological argument. For most of Western history, tradition ruled. Novelty was NOT desired. The Renaissance is viewed as a turning point, during and after which Western Culture has enjoyed a degree of freedom, that, to name a few developments, has spawned modern science and medicine, representative democracy, tolerance of many religions, the emancipation of slaves and the equality of women. But only in recent decades has there existed what I call the Cult of Novelty. New! New! New! Now, here is my heretical and dangerous idea: The Cult of Novelty has largely been created by the commercial world, as a vehicle for selling products and services. Novelty, newness, innovation . . . these should follow the same dicta of aesthetic proportion or balance that determine selection of color in painting, incorporation of flourishes and loudness dynamics in music, or degree of figuration in a poem. To venerate novelty is, in my opinion, not to fall under the influence of an aesthetic criterion for excellence . . . but rather to fall in the clutches of the grasping tentacles of commercialism. As evidence, simply look around you. Other than the word "save," the word "new" or its synonyms is the most commonly used word in marketing. By encouraging the Cult of Novelty, the commercial world urges the consuming world to become dissatisfied with "old" cars, "old" clothing, "old" places to visit during vacations, "old" medical products, "old" songs . . . the list is ENORMOUS. By urging our disenchantment, by engaging our boredom, by stimulating our desires for material status, the commercial world manipulates us to buy something new. Most recently, many millions of people who couldn't really afford it were manipulated by the commercial world (of real estate and finance) into needing a new home. This need for a new home was part and parcel of a cultural myth called the "American Dream." People who already owned homes were encouraged to refinance their debt and acquire a "new" mortgage. The people who financed these loans knew that the old standards evaluated these loans as too risky, so they came up with new standards which obfuscated the risk. Does anyone reading this NOT know what this led to? If the Cult of Novelty only applied to material things like TV's, cars, homes, toasters, and clothing, I would moderate these comments. But unfortunately, the Cult has invaded the greater culture. It certainly has invaded television and the print media. It has invaded Progressive Politics, resulting in what I call "creeping radicalism." It has had disastrous effects on the Environmental Movement, generating legions of Eco-Wackos, whose voices are loud, but whose thinking is so off-the-wall that their main "contribution" is to generate bad press for Environmentalism. Alas, I believe the Cult of Novelty has invaded poetry, and overwhelmed the aesthetic balance in good writing between the New and the Not-New. Fred * * * * * (Message edited by sandiegopoet on December 25, 2008) From Bambi: "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all." From me: "Even consciousness, a pastiche of recycled cans." | ||
| ~M~
Board Administrator Username: mjm Post Number: 32652 Registered: 11-1998 |
All I know, Freddie, is after you've read what is essentially the same poem (same poem as in I've seen all these images/language/ideas used this way before) 1,245,987 times (and I have), it tends to get old (old as in if I have to read this one more time I'm going to stick knitting needles in my eyes, not old as in isn't my grandmother's antique china beautiful). Sometimes old isn't better and venerable; sometimes old is just worn, tired, and stale. Love, M | ||
| Fred Longworth
Senior Member Username: sandiegopoet Post Number: 5163 Registered: 05-2006 |
~M~, I'm taking this personally. You are of course talking about the middle shelf in my refrigerator, domain of stale bread, shriveled slices of quartered lime, dollops of cheese overgrown with mold, and other things that I'm afraid to get close to, lest a tentacle reach out and grab me.  From Bambi: "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all." From me: "Even consciousness, a pastiche of recycled cans." | ||
| ~M~
Board Administrator Username: mjm Post Number: 32653 Registered: 11-1998 |
Well, really, Freddie, I was referring to that 4 billionth inept copy of Keats' Ode to a Nightingale you have way back there on the bottom shelf, behind the curdled sour cream, the orange growing penicillin, and the carrots that have sprouted more hair than I have left on my head. I'd recommend throwing that out (it's starting to smell) and eating something . . . dare I say it? . . . New. *shudder, shudder, quake*  Love, M | ||
| steve williams
Board Administrator Username: twobyfour Post Number: 2320 Registered: 01-2003 |
Hey Fred I won't argue the your points about the push for something new in society. But I do want to point out the the generally accepted definition of creativity is 'something that is both novel and useful'. As for your assertions about aesthetic proportion, yes I agree with that as well. I'm not saying that a poem should have zero cliches but that the piece as a whole should be creative and thus by definition, novel. warmly s | ||
| Fred Longworth
Senior Member Username: sandiegopoet Post Number: 5164 Registered: 05-2006 |
Steve, when I was young, the generally accepted name for what you and I are vis-a-vis the United States was citizen. When someone said "I am an American," s/he was referring to geo-political status. Some time in the last ten to twenty years, the media stopped calling the people of our country "Americans" or "citizens," and began calling them consumers. (Around election time, they are briefly called "voters."} I find the term "consumer" to be deplorable. We are relegated to being bags of appetites on legs. But it is not surprising, considering that our lives are principally governed by what, for most people, are irresistible influences generated by commercial interests. Now human lives have always been governed by economic forces, or put technically, by scarce resources and the agents that determine their allocation. But for most of Western history until the twentieth century, a typical citizen was mostly concerned with reconciling his or her interests with the needs of his or her family, community, and nation, and was not continually buffeted, solicited or badgered by commercial interests. Only in the modern era has the commercial world achieved such hegemony. * * * * * Now the "poetry scene," which we both participate in, will make nobody rich. This confers on Poetry a significant amount of built-in resistance to commercial interests. But, as I said in the previous post, the poetry community has (to a degree worthy of more scrutiny than this post can muster) not resisted the Cult of Novelty. The amount of novelty or originality that might be considered de rigueur for a good piece of writing were the Cult of Novelty not so pervasive in our culture, is somewhat less than the amount of newness considered necessary in a culture that has, to some degree, succumbed to the Cult of Novelty. Thus, my argument, like the aesthetic balance I cited previously, is itself predicated on the issue of proportion. * * * * * As for creativity, I am reminded of Billy Collins' poem "The Trouble With Poetry," in which he imagines a time when poets have compared everything to everything else, and there is nothing left to do but close up our notebooks and fold our hands. Certainly, what fails to be creative to an editor of a journal who reads many thousands of poems per year may still seem original to a moderately-versed poet, who only reads hundreds of poems, if that. This of course opens up the question of: By whose yardstick is originality to be measured? But I will agree on principle that a poem or story should have sufficient embedded originality so that the typical educated reader will not be inclined to mutter "same old, same old," and stop reading. Fred Lestat's Coffee House Late Christmas Day (11:19 P.M.) From Bambi: "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all." From me: "Even consciousness, a pastiche of recycled cans." | ||
| brenda morisse
Senior Member Username: moritric Post Number: 2816 Registered: 04-2007 |
Dear all, here is my poem Aftertaste and the comments from Tony Barnstone, the July IBPC judge. I use cliches in the poem. For me, they work as anchors. But I am rethinking it. I just don't know. Judge’s Comments: I was tempted to make this poem a winner because of its utter wildness, its relentless flow of metaphorical and surreal jabber, its swerving, unexpected rhetoric. Sometimes that craziness leads to a kind of mental disorder, mixed metaphors, a semantic slippage of adjectives that seem not exactly exact or exacting but certainly interesting. Add some sort of turn to the poem so it develops more, can or renew the few cliches (tugging at heart strings, head over heels), and this one could be a real keeper. --Tony Barnstone Honorable Mention Aftertaste by Brenda Morisse Wild Poetry Forum She sways to this half-tone day, staggers like smoke on a tight rope of discontent. The depth of forever passes for lilies in this muckheap. She has no head for the world and its free-for-all needlework of bill collectors and spiteful windows. The floor is cluttered with bottle caps and cans, so she drapes the sofa on the ceiling and hovers cross-legged and side-by-side with the overhead. If you ask me, she isn't a saint although she's very photogenic. Whoever heard of a pin-up saint hawking pilsner? Her mother nagged her to marry rich, but her heart was never a cash register. It's always been the beer: sweetish, malty Munich and the drier, hoppy Franconian. Her shoebox is filled with bits of broken jewelry: rhinestones and paste, pot metal and silver. Can openers. Hardware softened by careless spools of wires, head pins, eye pins, disheveled bracelets, wrong-way earrings. Orphans in this box have a way of tugging at heart strings. The ring is broken in. Remember when they were head over heels, before life warped the metal, and marriage became too hard to wear? The sum of her memories is tied in knots. I heard she was run out of town, a bartender with stigmata. It's not hygienic. Our St. Pauli call girl resists know-it-all-gravity and the attraction it mandates, contradicts spiked heels, prods her to wear a bra. Pompous gravity, bombastic gravity, she says. I will walk on water, I will stop time. I levitate. Get over yourself! She is younger than her adult children. She prefers polka dot baring midriff tops. Mardi Gras without Lent. (Message edited by moritric on December 26, 2008) | ||
| Hugh W Walthall
New member Username: xenophon Post Number: 34 Registered: 11-2008 |
They don't call 'em cliches for nothin'. Avoid cliches like the plague. Cliche is an excellent movie title word, by the way... Cliche on a hot tin roof How green was my cliche Citizen Cliche Seven brides for seven cliches Cliche club The magnificent cliches My fair cliche The sound of cliche a fistful of cliches for a few cliches more the cliche worker no country for old cliches the cliche and I suffer the little cliches to come unto me... -Hugh- Jacques Lacan, Jacques Lacan you really turn me on.... | ||
| W.F. Roby
Intermediate Member Username: wfroby Post Number: 549 Registered: 03-2008 |
I've SEEN No Country for Old Cliches -- I especially enjoyed the evil character Chigurhh and his vile dead-word air-gun. Now *there's* a guy who can "pump some old death into a new poem". | ||
| Fred Longworth
Senior Member Username: sandiegopoet Post Number: 5167 Registered: 05-2006 |
Brenda, Tony Barnstone has attended too many MFA workshops. The poem is fine. A poem will move from the familiar to the unfamiliar and back again, in a series of cycles. If the poem lingers too long in the familiar, it loses engagement with the sophisticated reader. If it remains too long in the unfamiliar, it risks becoming a puzzle rather than a poem. And that is my #1 criticism of a fair share of modern poetry, and frankly of the seminar-infected poets who write them. In their obeisance to the Cult of Novelty, they have subverted aesthetic balance, and instead pursued new constructions for their own sake. A word like "twilight" should no longer be used. The poem must say something like "the hour of long shadows." But wait, even that has been done; so, to say something new, we must retreat even further into obscurity: "Crepuscular vermin abound." * * * * * As for the need for a turn: maybe. Using "turn" in its implied metaphorical sense, let's imagine driving from one town to another. Whether, to make the journey engaging, it is necessary to take a detour or two along the way, is entirely dependent on whether the scenery along the original route is highly interesting. If a turn has to be incorporated for its own sake, then it's just another goddamn rule. The journey your poem takes, Brenda, is quite interesting all the way. I leave noseprints on the glass. Fred * * * * * (Message edited by sandiegopoet on December 26, 2008) From Bambi: "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all." From me: "Even consciousness, a pastiche of recycled cans." | ||
| ~M~
Board Administrator Username: mjm Post Number: 32654 Registered: 11-1998 |
Dearest borrachita -- Let's take a look at what Mr. Barnstone said, and analyze it. He does make a solid point, in my opinion. Imagine you only referred to the cliche instead of using it outright. What would that do? Let's see -- (I'll only quote the relevant passages) As it stands: "Orphans in this box have a way of tugging at heart strings." What if we played? "Orphans in this box have a way of tugging your strings." It's a very small change, but is an important one. It recognizes the cliche without using it exactly, or being used by it. Those who are familiar with the cliche would catch the reference. And those who aren't will come up with their own interpretation of what strings you mean. That's what I believe Mr. Barnstone means. As it stands: "Remember when they were head over heels, before life warped the metal," What if we played? "Remember when they were heels over head, before life warped the metal," Again, another small change to a cliche that plays with it, refers to it, but gives us something new to consider about it. And look at the line break. We've called them heels, before you get to the "over head" part. How does that change the perception of the characters? Does she mean heels as in "bad people?" I think the whole objection to cliche is that it doesn't give the reader some unusual way to consider the standard. But if you monkey with it, even just a little, you can change all that. These things don't have to be large. And my examples were just from the top of my head. If you gave it more thought, I'm sure you could come up with a way to play the cliche even better. These are just my opinions, of course. But playing with cliche is delightful to me. And I always appreciate when poets take the time to do it, instead of just giving me the old stuff verbatim. I think playing with cliche is a challenge, both to the poet and to the reader. And it can offer a different perspective, one that hasn't been done before. Unfortunately, cliches are negative because they're used so often, people don't even think about the words anymore. They roll over them without deeper consideration. But if you play with cliche, you can give the reader something richer. Or at least something that causes them to wonder. Why did she say heels over head instead of head over heels? See, in the question lies a greater appreciation for the words. Words you might have ignored if they were just the standard cliche verbatim. love, love, swinka who doesn't normally agree with anyone unless they make a very good point *LOL* | ||
| brenda morisse
Senior Member Username: moritric Post Number: 2817 Registered: 04-2007 |
This discussion has been enlightening. Thank-you. What would I do without all of you? I plan to revisit my poems, and revise the hell out of the cliches. I will be very busy. Damn! love to all, brenda | ||
| Gary Blankenship
Moderator Username: garydawg Post Number: 26434 Registered: 07-2001 |
And Brenda, please remember the judge needs to find a difference between the poems in order to justify his selections. Another judge, another opinion. And of course, there is seldom a poem without something than can nitted - except by one poet of course. Grin. Smiles. Gary Celebrate Walt with Gary: http://www.poetrykit.org/pkl/tw10/tw4conte.htm | ||
| Yvonne Marie Crain
New member Username: yvonne_marie_crain Post Number: 44 Registered: 11-2008 |
Good day Roby, I know we did not get off to a pleasant start, however, I want you to know that I never carry around anger or grudges and make every attempt to remain open minded to suggestions, knowing it is to help only and for no other reason. I was quite impressed with your thoughts about cliches, and in fact agree with most of what you have said. Happy 2009, I do hope we can begin a friendship. Regards, Yvonne } | ||
| Judy Thompson
Advanced Member Username: judyt54 Post Number: 1332 Registered: 11-2007 |
and there are times when a cliche, especially used the way you did "head over heels" works just fine, Brenda. If you had said 'head over heels in love' that would have had everyone shouting and sharpening the pitchforks, but to drop it in that way, in the midst of such a wildly original piece, just grounds it. there are time when the only thing that suffices is, heaven help us, a cliche. And from the other side of the coin, not much is sadder than straining at trying to be fresh and new and sparkly, only to end up sounding like you were trying too hard. Gary is right. One man's opinion is just that. Afraid of the Dark | ||
| Gary Blankenship
Moderator Username: garydawg Post Number: 26479 Registered: 07-2001 |
I wanted to use belle of the ball here She was the hit of the party in almost designer fashion, but backed away because of this thread. Smiles. Gary Celebrate Walt with Gary: http://www.poetrykit.org/pkl/tw10/tw4conte.htm | ||
| Aaron Tolley
New member Username: antipodean_anxiolysis Post Number: 9 Registered: 12-2008 |
If you want to write it... write it. No esteemed master should get between you, and your words. Cliches, like stereotypes, become so because they save one of the most valuable commodities - time. Where do we draw the line between cliche and common use? Somewhere between "draw" and "line", hm? This would all be of more use if there was some deity of poetry, some higher force waiting to weigh our souls based on the firstedness of our words... but lets face it,do you really want *me* to get more brownie points just for coming up with "firstedness"m first? Bugger that. Some relative sapling? What WOULD the world come to? Write what you like, just accept noone else has to like it. I am a damn sight "newer" (to make a hollow laughing) than many of the above posters... and believe me... nothing is more sad, more desparate for contemporary status than Grey Matter pausing, then picking it's words. If you want to put in a nail, you use a hammer. Using a screwdriver will do the same job, in the end, and someone may even give you extra points for doing it that way. But sometimes it is a blatant lesson in gratuitous fiddlery. A spade, IS a spade, call it a parter of earth though you might. AnAn | ||
| Judy Thompson
Advanced Member Username: judyt54 Post Number: 1333 Registered: 11-2007 |
sometimes we try too hard to be fresh and original, avoiding anything even remotely close to cliche, and in the doing, end up sounding like we are trying to please our last workshop instructor, rather than ourselves. a pig in a poke a fish in a barrel it's not even a joke so lets not quarrel as blue as the sea as green as spring between you and me the cliche's the thing Afraid of the Dark | ||
| Fred Longworth
Senior Member Username: sandiegopoet Post Number: 5194 Registered: 05-2006 |
That's funny, Judy . . . esp. the "rhyme" between "barrel" and "quarrel." But then, maybe there are places where they DO rhyme! From Bambi: "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all." From me: "Even consciousness, a pastiche of recycled cans." | ||
| W.F. Roby
Intermediate Member Username: wfroby Post Number: 553 Registered: 03-2008 |
Aaron -- you say "When you want to put in a nail, use a hammer" -- and I disagree. Having used coke bottles, steel-toed boots, air hammers, and even the heel of a particularly rough dock worker's hand to accomplish the same task, I must protest and (at the same time) suggest that there is a simplicity in your argument in favor of cliche that is (also) its undoing. Cheers. | ||
| Judy Thompson
Advanced Member Username: judyt54 Post Number: 1335 Registered: 11-2007 |
thank you, Fred. And near rhyme counts, although I try not to take it as far as some writers do-- it can be terribly difficult to avoid cliche, and there are days when it seems that everything is a cliche, all the words are being used up, and when that happens... Afraid of the Dark | ||
| Jan Thie
New member Username: jantar Post Number: 9 Registered: 12-2008 |
A great thread - and I don't think that there is an easy and/or universal answer to the question. The distinction has already been made between writers who know what they are doing and those who don't, when they use clichés, so I will only deal with the former category. I think anyone who uses a cliché as a (lazy) kind of short cut shows a certain disrespect to the reader. It's one thing for a journalist to use clichés; there the 'short cut/time saving' argument makes some sense but a medium like poetry should be more demanding of its writers and readers. I do think though that there can be an argument for using clichés, sometimes. First, if I may, a short digression. As a non-native speaker of English I have one slight advantage over native speakers and this is that I tend to look at words and phrases with the more careful & curious look of an outsider. Those who are born to a language tend to use it more matter-of-factly. It is, of course, one of the duties of each poet to get (back) to that more 'careful and curious' look at (the use of) language. The use of clichés is, in a way, one of the most careless and unthinking usages of language but I would argue that, for the poet, there can be a useful flip side to that almost blind & deaf use of language - and that is that no-one hardly ever really looks at or considers these clichés. They can be like some building you pass in the street each day: You've seen it so often that you no longer look at it or think about either its use or aesthetic value. The same goes with clichés: Most of them will never be of any use for the poet but sometimes you may consider one again, and see some beauty and/or use in it. I don't think (as others suggested in this thread) that it really helps much to slightly rearrange the original cliché. I think that that's a trick that will soon fail to entertain an experienced reader. I do think though that, in certain settings, the cliché can be given a new leash of life. (And no, you won't get any points spotting each cliché I've used in this already much too long comment...) If I may, I will give you one example of this, from something that I wrote & used as one of my blog titles. So, it was not written as part of a poem but I would not hesitate to use it in one of mine. The article was about a church that had started to use its building as a Christian dating service, which was part of a campaign to get people back to church. My title was: 'Pick up lines ring hollow in an empty church' Of the three building blocks, one is a very tired cliché and the two others as strong as second hand chewing gum but I do think that together they make for a pleasing line. I'm aware that not everyone would agree with the usefulness of that example but I hope that some will at least agree with the principle of the argument. Still, it's a very tricky thing, so, as a general rule, I think it's better to avoid clichés. P.S.: I very much enjoyed the (almost) parallel discussion about novelty. Me, I don't trust novelty. It's indeed too much of a marketing thing: A kind of camouflage to hide that the product on offer either is not really doing anything new or useful. More flashy buttons and annoying beeps don't make for a better stereo or phone per se. Same for the arts. When you're looking at quite a lot of modern art, you can often see where and when novelty has won out over content. In poetry, you can also, sometimes, see how gimmickry tries to hide that the writer doesn't have anything more to offer. So, I would say that, in the end, most everything comes down to content (and craft, obviously.) Of course, we don't want endless copies of Wordsworth's bloody daffodils; we do want new 'stories' and, yes, new ways of presenting these stories to us but we should not fall for any argument that states that it's either daffodils or Crazy Frog. P.P.S.: If anyone is still around, sorry for the ridiculous length of this comment... |
