Poetry is Dead

[William Haskins]

we live in the dark ages.

[William Haskins]

an era of pop culture, sloth and rejection of deeper thought.

[robeiae]

Do you think it has anything to do with all of the other kinds of media that have proliferated? Do potential poets find other means to utilize their creative talents? What about the level of education? The fact that most people recieve at least (and most likely) a mediocre education might result in a stifling of those voices that once stood out from the crowd (my meaning-everyone is a critic nowadays, though few are properly eqipped).

Rob :)

[BradyH1861]

Actually you are right. I killed it. I wrote a poem that was so horrible, so awful, that it killed the genre.

My apologies.

Brady H.

[robeiae]

Perhaps the poets of this age have fallen under the spell of commercial success...perhaps they are all writing bylines in cubicles...(isn't this a theme of Rush Song?)

Rob :)

[William Haskins]

of salesmen.... of salesmen.....
offfffffffffffffff SALESMEN!

(guitar solo)

[robeiae]

Studio walls=bathroom stalls=subway walls?

Rob :)

[robeiae]

Well, since Rush is still alive, I guess poetry is not dead!

Rob :)

[rhymegirl]

For the words of the profits were written on the studio wall
Concert hall
And echoes with the sounds of salesmen

Shouldn't that be "prophets"?

[William Haskins]

no, it's "profits". a play on words.

it's a statement on the commercialization of art.

[brokenfingers]

Wow, that song brings back memories. I love Rush.

I agree that poetry is on the decline. Or maybe not so much on the decline as receding from the limelight of mass appeal.

It's become the forgotten son, lingering in the shadows of its younger siblings: song lyrics, rap lyrics and advertising jingles.

It's the evolution of culture, I suppose. The same thing that once had people thinking smoking was fine and dandy, but now thinking it's gross and unhealthy.

I think poetry is seen by the common masses as effeminate and ineffective anymore. I, myself, have only recently even read poetry - mostly due to the common misperception that the average TV watching, Top 40 listening population has of poetry.

I'm curious: Does anybody have any ideas or scenarios - no matter how farfetched -that would possibly bring poetry back into the international limelight?

[robeiae]

Nuclear holocaust...

Rob :)

[Alphabet]

Nah... it is like royalty... you must have heard of 'The king is dead. Long live the King!' - it is the same - 'Poetry is dead. Long live poetry!'

although, I'd love to hear an eulogy for it, up to that William? Or, wouldn't it have made a killer for the comedy in a graveyard? Maybe we will wall it up behind a huge stone and then, oh, can I? three days later it will be recognised once more in the world.

[Cassie88]

If Rod McKuen was able to cash in on the masses, then there's hope for poetry. Man, if people like Madonna thought there was money to be made, they'd all be writing poetry. Right now, it's children's books! Wait... I think I meant if McKuen could cash in...there is no hope for poetry... my mind..oy....

[MadScientistMatt]

That's funny, I was listening to that song on CD when I drove to work today.

[arrowqueen]

Hell mend 'em. That's what you get when you throw rhythm, rhyme, meter, form and scansion out the window.

[brokenfingers]

KTC,

I've never heard the term poetry slam or even knew they existed until about 3 months ago. I'm intrigued and have put it on my list of To-Do things - if I can find any in my area (Cincinnati, Ohio)

I'd like to clarify a little:

I don't think poetry is dead - but it's become like disco, typewriters and ham radios.

Yeah, some people still do it - but it's left the minds of mainstream consciousness. It's become a fringe activity, enjoyed by relatively few any more.

[William Haskins]

this is one god damn depressing thread.

[brokenfingers]

Just curious Haskins,

You into Disco?

[William Haskins]

http://simpsonovi.comics.cz/media/Obrazky/Springfield/images/Disco_stu.jpg

[brokenfingers]

(LOL Haskins! Sheesh - you didn't have to go and upload an old photo!)

I'm curious. Do you think part of the reason poetry has fallen by the wayside is the insistence by many that it need have no rules, anyone can do it, poetry is in the eye of the person doing the "poet"ing and not the audience?

In other words, the bastardization of the idea of "art" and the term "artist"?

(Friday nights when I can't go out always make me deeply introspective and contemplative.... or is that moody and angry???? Hell, maybe it's just frustrated and unsatisfied....)

[William Haskins]

I'm curious. Do you think part of the reason poetry has fallen by the wayside is the insistence by many that it need have no rules, anyone can do it, poetry is in the eye of the person doing the "poet"ing and not the audience?

i don't see it being rooted in the relaxation of formalism. i mean, the beats turned language inside-out, and they maintained a strong and serious readership.

one could argue that the decline of poetry corresponds to the rise of mass media, and that's a part of it, in my opinion. most song lyrics, greeting card copy, commericial jingles are tripe. but the message they convey is easy to grasp.

fed on this steady diet of crap, the mental muscles designed to read and process real poetry are reduced to a state of atrophy. a cultural laziness sets in and people are too fat to reach for any but the lowest hanging fruit.

and (quick apology in advance to any slammers) the merging of poetry and performance dilutes and cheapens the writing, because it compensates often bad writing with moody pretention or "you go girl" attitude.

their intentions are good, i think, but the result is mostly disappointing.

i started the thread impulsively, and to be honest, i don't believe poetry is dead, i just think it's really sick. it'll come back around but i doubt i'll live to see it.

oh yeah, the other thing you mentioned, the lowering of the bar. yes.

and the internet had blown that wide open. with forums and websites, all manner of so-called poetry can proliferate to fill scam anthologies and get lots of critiques with dancing smilies.

it's that mentality of automatic validation that "anything can be poetry" and if you say it doesn't work, then you just don't get it or you're trying to tell them how to write.

it's like how they won't let kids keep score in soccer games.

i don't know. i need a cigarette.

[Roger J Carlson]

Poetry died when poets stopped rhyming.

[LieselGarmach]

One of my professors asked me what was wrong with me when I said, "I honestly don't understand what the poet was trying to tell me when I read this".

She told me that poetry didn't have to be "gotten" to be good. I asked her what the point of writing it was, and she asked me why I wrote at all. I told her I thought I had something to say. She asked me what I thought I had to say that anyone else might want to hear.

Ouch.

Then, some years later, I realized that I'd allowed her to snatch my dream of writing from me. Why wouldn't what I have to say mean just as much as the poet's words that I didn't understand? Oh, I still wrote, but it wasn't much, and it was not what I wanted to write. I wrote what was easy. I still write what comes easily to me, and I'm darned good at it. Poetry, though...not more than half a dozen since that day. I like to make it rhyme, and sound like you can dance to it, and have it truly mean something to the reader.

Genuinely, I thought I had it all wrong. I didn't. I don't. Not many want to read it, though.

No one wants to think. Spoon feed the kids. Plop them in front of the TV or the computer and let them think their ringtones are music. It's far more tragic than I'd ever imagined that afternoon when the teacher asked what was wrong with me. Now I'm wondering.....what's wrong with values and making kids learn to think. Quality poetry invokes thought.

[thistle]

Poetry died when poets stopped rhyming.

I disagree, Roger. William Shakespeare wrote in blank verse and his images, words, meter, make his work poetic.

A poem isn't about rhyme, it's about capturing the essence of life and trapping it in words, like light in a bottle.

I think people need poetry. The morning of 9/11, I was teaching. I watched the planes crash and tried to make sense of it as the bell for second period sounded in the halls. My class filed in and took their seats. Everyone was quiet. I asked them to find T.S. Eliot's "Hollow Men" in their books and we read it. Bang or whimper? Which will you choose?

We didn't talk about the people, the planes, the buildings, or the nonsense. We talked about that essence of life.

So many people approached me that week asking for poems for memorial services, assemblies, or just for thought. During the last days of September 2001, people craved a message more relevant than the news crawl and more spiritual than a sitcom. People needed poetry.

Unfortunately, poetry has to compete with advertising, hip hop, reality TV, and Fox News for a spot in people's lives. Poetry's not dead, just like the rhythms of life aren't dead. Sometimes people get so caught up with their remote controls and Playstations that they overlook the beauty and poetry around them.

[XThe NavigatorX]

Most people dislike poetry. We study it in school, we invariably write some here and there, and we, in general, only read it when it's printed inside the CD label.

Poetry is no more alive or dead than it has always been.

[brokenfingers]

Hmmmm, I never really thought about it (as is the case with the majority of my posts – my thoughts are mine but until I actually take a minute, analyze them and then write them down, I have basically been unaware of them lurking underneath my cracked skull) but I see now that Haskins and LieselGarmach are right and thought really is required when reading and enjoying True Poetry.

Funny, but I'd never realized that.

Thinking upon it, I think the decline of poetry is a natural side effect of the decline of reading comprehension and word skills in our schools and in our youth. Combined with the media influence factors mentioned also, of course.

The lack of enthusiasm for poetry, I think, also resides in the fact that it is not "cool". Society's norms have shifted away from appreciation of the written word in favor of the visual and aural.

I can't help but feel that if " Effective Rap Lyrics: How to Use Metaphors" and "How to Add Conflict and Sizzle to Your Video Game Story Structure" were courses, kids would excel.

[Jamesaritchie]

I don't think poetry is dead. I don't think it's even sick. I do think there's so much crap out there pretending to be poetry that no one can find the good stuff without serious effort. It's more than just a lack of rules, though that is part of the problem; it's a lack of even the simplest knowledge about what is and isn't poetry, or is and isn't even a decent sentence.

But poetry is in no way dead. Making money has seldom been the poet's lot, but a great deal of excellent poetry is still being written, and is still being read, even if big bucks aren't connected with it.

[Liam Jackson]

Deep thought is also alive and well. It gathers in a wide variety of venues, from smokey pool halls to quiet river banks. It's also justifiably jaded and tends to choose its own company most of the time.

[jackie106]

and (quick apology in advance to any slammers) the merging of poetry and performance dilutes and cheapens the writing, because it compensates often bad writing with moody pretention or "you go girl" attitude.

their intentions are good, i think, but the result is mostly disappointing.


I stopped going to slams because the audience rewards performance over composition. A so-so poet can bring down the house with a great delivery, while a mumbler with a brilliant poem gets a lukewarm (or negative) response.

Even worse, many slam poets overuse dramatic pauses and end up sounding like William Shatner.

(My apologies to all the good slam poets out there and William Shatner.)

Jackie

[William Haskins]

thanks for the discussion, everyone.

[poetinahat]

no, it's "profits". a play on words.

it's a statement on the commercialization of art.

A converse of the Grateful Dead's "Estimated Prophet"...

[aboyd]

I kinda wonder what specifically brought this on. Was it the "expositional poetry" thread, or was it the poems in the poetry forum, or was it really just an out-of-the-blue reaction to pop-culture poetry?

(Hmm. Maybe it's dangerous to ask. Maybe Haskins will tell me I had my head up my a$$ in a most annoying way, and it's all my fault.)

-Tony

[Birol]

Funny, as I logged on tonight, I was thinking of a couple of my favorite poems.

[William Haskins]

I kinda wonder what specifically brought this on.

just some type of mental menses... pay no attention to the babbling psycho.

(Hmm. Maybe it's dangerous to ask. Maybe Haskins will tell me I had my head up my a$ in a most annoying way, and it's all my fault.)

never, sir.

[Roger J Carlson]

I disagree, Roger. William Shakespeare wrote in blank verse and his images, words, meter, make his work poetic.My point is that at one time, poetry was a pastime for the common man. Rhyme and meter helped people memorize poems in a time the reading and printing were fairly rare. They were devices that helped unlearned people remember poems.

My mother-in-law has many books of poetry: Riley, Longfellow, Poe, and the like. Most of her generation read poetry. Today few ordinary people do. That this shift coincided with a shift to free verse is, I believe, not a coincidence.

When I was in school, (nearly 30 years ago) we studied and memorized poems.

"Into the night that covers me, black as a pit from pole to pole. I thank whatever gods may be for my unconquerable soul." --Invictus (Henley)

"In Flanders fields the poppies grow, between the crosses row on row. That mark our place, and in the sky the larks still bravely singing fly...." -- In Flanders Fields (McCrae)

"Breathes there a man with soul so dead, who never to himself hath said: 'This is my home, my native land..." -- Lay of the Last Minstrel (Scott)

"Whan that April with his shoures sotte, the droughte of March hath perced to the roote. And bathed every vein with swich licour, Of which, verto engendred is the flour." --Prologue to the Canterbury Tales (Chaucer)

"Once upon a midnight dreary, while I pondered weak and weary. Over many a quaint and curious volume of forgotten lore..." -- The Raven (Poe)

"I'm only thus an idiot. That's what folks calls a feller what ain't got no mind of any kind and don't know nothing he's forgot. I'm one of them..." --The Idiot (Riley)

I just typed these from memory, so there may be mistakes (especially in Chaucer). There are many more tucked away in my memory. The only reason I can do that is because of the rhyme and meter. It is BECAUSE of them that poetry was accessable to common people. With the wholesale takeover of free verse, poetry is lost on most people. It has become an elitist artform.

So when poets moan that they cannot sell poetry, that they have to self-publish in order to see print, it is a matter of their own doing. Art is still subject the the market, and as with any product, if you ignore your customers, you're going to lose market-share.

[brokenfingers]

Hmmm, here's a little article kinda related to this thread:

"Poetry is being ruined by establishment"

http://books.guardian.co.uk/news/articles/0,6109,1441234,00.html

[William Haskins]

hmm... do i really want to tread down this path... okay, a little.

the message of this article, and of def poetry jam, slams, etc is that words on the page are insufficient to the modern mind. is this true? perhaps.

but if one subscribes to that logic, performance poetry actually enables and encourages that very decline in reading aptitude and developing a critical eye and discriminating taste.

i can accept, and have accepted, that this has become an offshoot of poetry, a subgenre... but in no way do i feel like this is where the future of poetry lies. if that makes me a staid traditionalist, fine.

i enjoy hearing audio clips of poets reading their work from time to time, but it is no substitute for the printed page; it's an embellishment, a companion piece.

there is something intensely personal about reading poetry. at it's best, it's meditative, even slightly hypnotic. there is absolutely no filter between the deliberate syntax and the reader's mind., it's a direct connection (momentary though it may be) between the mind of the reader and the poet. the interpretive and analytical possibilities are limitless.

inflection, gesture and setting detract from this. maybe, in return, they offer heightened drama, ambiance or communal emotion, but your mind will not process it in the same way as it will words on the page.

jesus christ, why do i rant like this.

(the preceding has been "my dumb manifesto" - part 68.)

[Birol]

William, like you, I always considered the act of reading poetry to be a solitary, introspective act. I liked poetry that speaks to me, that touches a chord in me, but, this past spring, I was in a Lit Theory class and the instructor put a poem on the projector and read it out loud at the end of class -- we'd been studying the author and his theories on criticism that evening -- and we were all laughing out loud. A poem that would've been flat on the page was hilarious when read out loud, as it was meant to be, because of the author's word choices and the rhythm he had chosen. And, admittedly, I sometimes get the biggest stir out of my favorite poems when I read them out loud to myself. Sometimes, poetry is just more infectious when spoken.

Question for William and everyone else. What are some of your favorite poems, if you don't mind sharing?

[William Haskins]

a few of my favorites...

London
(William Blake)

I wander thro' each charter'd street,
Near where the charter'd Thames does flow,
And mark in every face I meet
Marks of weakness, marks of woe.

In every cry of every Man,
In every Infant's cry of fear,
In every voice, in every ban,
The mind-forg'd manacles I hear.

How the Chimney-sweeper's cry
Every black'ning Church appalls;
And the hapless Soldier's sigh
Runs in blood down Palace walls.

But most thro' midnight streets I hear
How the youthful Harlot's curse
Blasts the new born Infant's tear,
And blights with plagues the Marriage hearse.

The Mad Yak
(Gregory Corso)

I am watching them churn the last milk they'll ever get from me.
They are waiting for me to die;
They want to make buttons out of my bones.
Where are my sisters and brothers?
That tall monk there, loading my uncle, he has a new cap.
And that idiot student of his -- I never saw that muffler before.
Poor uncle, he lets them load him.
How sad he is, how tired!
I wonder what they'll do with his bones?
And that beautiful tail!
How many shoelaces will they make of that!

Further Instructions
(Ezra Pound)

Come, my songs, let us express our baser passions.
Let us express our envy for the man with a steady job and no worry about the future.
You are very idle, my songs,
I fear you will come to a bad end.
You stand about the streets, You loiter at the corners and bus-stops,
You do next to nothing at all.

You do not even express our inner nobilitys,
You will come to a very bad end.

And I? I have gone half-cracked.
I have talked to you so much that I almost see you about me,
Insolent little beasts! Shameless! Devoid of clothing!

But you, newest song of the lot,
You are not old enough to have done much mischief.
I will get you a green coat out of China
With dragons worked upon it.
I will get you the scarlet silk trousers
From the statue of the infant Christ at Santa Maria Novella;
Lest they say we are lacking in taste,
Or that there is no caste in this family.

Never Try To Trick Me With A Kiss
(Sylvia Plath)

Never try to trick me with a kiss
Pretending that the birds are here to stay;
The dying man will scoff and scorn at this.

A stone can masquerade where no heart is
And virgins rise where lustful Venus lay:
Never try to trick me with a kiss.

Our noble doctor claims the pain is his,
While stricken patients let him have his say;
The dying man will scoff and scorn at this.

Each virile bachelor dreads paralysis,
The old maid in the gable cries all day:
Never try to trick me with a kiss.

The suave eternal serpents promise bliss
To mortal children longing to be gay;
The dying man will scoff and scorn at this.

Sooner or later something goes amiss;
The singing birds pack up and fly away;
So never try to trick me with a kiss:
The dying man will scoff and scorn at this.

[jackie106]

Ozymandias
by Percy Bysshe Shelley

I met a traveler from an antique land
Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read,
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed,
And on the pedestal these words appear:
"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look upon my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.


The Cremation of Sam McGee
by Robert W. Service

There are strange things done in the midnight sun
By the men who moil for gold;
The Arctic trails have their secret tales
That would make your blood run cold;
The Northern Lights have seen queer sights,
But the queerest they ever did see
Was that night on the marge of Lake Lebarge
I cremated Sam McGee.
(Complete poem available at RobertWService.com (http://www.robertwservice.com/modules/library/article.php?articleid=30).)


La plaza tiene una torre
Antonio Machado (1875-1939)

La plaza tiene una torre,
la torre tiene un balcón,
el balcón tiene una dama,
la dama una blanca flor.

Ha pasado un caballero.
¿Quién sabe por qué pasó?
Y se ha llevado la plaza,
con su torre y su balcón,
con su balcón y su dama,
su dama y su blanca flor.

English Translation:
The plaza has a tower,
The tower has a balcony,
The balcony has a lady,
The lady a white flower.

A knight passed by.
Who know why he went by?
And he carried away the plaza,
With its tower and its balcony,
With its balcony and its lady,
Its lady and her white flower.


"To See a World..."
by William Blake

To see a World in a Grain of Sand
And a Heaven in a Wild Flower,
Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand
And Eternity in an hour.

[poetinahat]

“You must choose between me and your cigar.”
— Breach of Promise Case, circa 1885.

OPEN the old cigar-box, get me a Cuba stout,
For things are running crossways, and Maggie and I are out.

We quarrelled about Havanas—we fought o’er a good cheroot,
And I knew she is exacting, and she says I am a brute.

Open the old cigar-box—let me consider a space;
In the soft blue veil of the vapour musing on Maggie’s face.

Maggie is pretty to look at—Maggie’s a loving lass,
But the prettiest cheeks must wrinkle, the truest of loves must pass.

There’s peace in a Larranaga, there’s calm in a Henry Clay;
But the best cigar in an hour is finished and thrown away—

Thrown away for another as perfect and ripe and brown—
But I could not throw away Maggie for fear o’ the talk o’ the town!

Maggie, my wife at fifty—grey and dour and old—
With never another Maggie to purchase for love or gold!

And the light of Days that have Been the dark of the Days that Are,
And Love’s torch stinking and stale, like the butt of a dead cigar—

The butt of a dead cigar you are bound to keep in your pocket—
With never a new one to light tho’ it’s charred and black to the socket!

Open the old cigar-box—let me consider a while.
Here is a mild Manila—there is a wifely smile.

Which is the better portion—bondage bought with a ring,
Or a harem of dusky beauties, fifty tied in a string?

Counsellors cunning and silent—comforters true and tried,
And never a one of the fifty to sneer at a rival bride?

Thought in the early morning, solace in time of woes,
Peace in the hush of the twilight, balm ere my eyelids close,

This will the fifty give me, asking nought in return,
With only a Suttee’s passion—to do their duty and burn.

This will the fifty give me. When they are spent and dead,
Five times other fifties shall be my servants instead.

The furrows of far-off Java, the isles of the Spanish Main,
When they hear my harem is empty will send me my brides again.

I will take no heed to their raiment, nor food for their mouths withal,
So long as the gulls are nesting, so long as the showers fall.

I will scent ’em with best vanilla, with tea will I temper their hides,
And the Moor and the Mormon shall envy who read of the tale of my brides.

For Maggie has written a letter to give me my choice between
The wee little whimpering Love and the great god Nick o’ Teen.

And I have been servant of Love for barely a twelvemonth clear,
But I have been Priest of Cabanas a matter of seven year;

And the gloom of my bachelor days is flecked with the cheery light
Of stumps that I burned to Friendship and Pleasure and Work and Fight.

And I turn my eyes to the future that Maggie and I must prove,
But the only light on the marshes is the Will-o’-the-Wisp of Love.

Will it see me safe through my journey or leave me bogged in the mire?
Since a puff of tobacco can cloud it, shall I follow the fitful fire?

Open the old cigar-box—let me consider anew—
Old friends, and who is Maggie that I should abandon you?

A million surplus Maggies are willing to bear the yoke;
And a woman is only a woman, but a good Cigar is a Smoke.

Light me another Cuba—I hold to my first-sworn vows.
If Maggie will have no rival, I’ll have no Maggie for Spouse!

[Unique]

Warning



When I am an old woman I shall wear purple

With a red hat which doesn’t go, and doesn’t suit me.

And I shall spend my pension on brandy and summer gloves

And satin sandals, and say we’ve no money for butter.

I shall sit down on the pavement when I’m tired

And gobble up samples in shops and press alarm bells

And run my stick along the public railings

And make up for the sobriety of my youth.

I shall go out in my slippers in the rain

And pick the flowers in other people’s gardens

And learn to spit.



You can wear terrible shirts and grow more fat

And eat three pounds of sausages at a go

Or only bread and pickle for a week

And hoard pens and pencils and beermats and things in boxes.



But now we must have clothes that keep us dry

And pay our rent and not swear in the street

And set a good example for children.

We must have friends to dinner and read the papers.



But maybe I ought to practice a little now?

So people who know me are not too shocked and surprised

When suddenly I am old, and start to wear purple.





Jenny Joseph

[Nicholas S.H.J.M Woodhouse]

My favourite peom of all time (probably because at the moment it strikes the very core of my thoughts) is

Politics by William Butler Yeats -

How can I, that girl standing there,
My attention fix
On Roman or on Russian
Or on Spanish politics?
Yet here's a travelled man that knows
What he talks about,
And there's a politician
That has read and thought,
And maybe what they say is true
Of war and war's alarms,
But O that I were young again
And held her in my arms!

Sums growing up quite well I think.

Nique

[poetinahat]

Thanks for bringing up Yeats!

Here's another of his gems - solace in an unfair world:

To a Friend Whose Work Has Come to Nothing

Now all the truth is out,
Be secret and take defeat
From any brazen throat,
For how can you compete,
Being honour bred, with one
Who, were it proved he lies,
Were neither shamed in his own
Nor in his neighbours' eyes?
Bred to a harder thing
Than Triumph, turn away
And like a laughing string
Whereon mad fingers play
Amid a place of stone,
Be secret and exult,
Because of all things known
That is most difficult.

I recited it for a Toastmasters assignment -- none of them understood. If I can't make Yeats' words reach an audience, there's no hope for me as an orator....

[William Haskins]

The Second Coming

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: somewhere in sands of the desert
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

[Sarita]

I have a lot of favorites, but one that I can never get out of my head is When We Two Parted, by Byron. I read it in high school and it's been with me ever since.

When We Two Parted

When we two parted
In silence and tears,
Half broken-hearted
To sever for years,
Pale grew thy cheek and cold,
Colder thy kiss;
Truly that hour foretold
Sorrow to this!

The dew of the morning
Sunk chill on my brow;
It felt like the warning
Of what I feel now.
Thy vows are all broken,
And light is thy fame;
I hear thy name spoken,
And share in its shame.

They name thee before me,
A knell to mine ear;
A shudder comes o'er me--
Why wert thou so dear?
They know not I knew thee,
Who knew thee too well:
Long, long shall I rue thee,
Too deeply to tell.

In secret we met:
In silence I grieve
That they heart could forget,
Thy spirit deceive.
If I should meet thee,
After long years,
How should I greet thee?
With silence and tears.

[robeiae]

My favorite, next to Inferno and The Iliad:

Kubla Khan by Samuel Taylor Coleridge

In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
A stately pleasure-dome decree :
Where Alph, the sacred river, ran
Through caverns measureless to man
Down to a sunless sea.So twice five miles of fertile ground
With walls and towers were girdled round :
And there were gardens bright with sinuous rills,
Where blossomed many an incense-bearing tree ;
And here were forests ancient as the hills,
Enfolding sunny spots of greenery.
But oh ! that deep romantic chasm which slanted
Down the green hill athwart a cedarn cover !
A savage place ! as holy and enchanted
As e'er beneath a waning moon was haunted
By woman wailing for her demon-lover !
And from this chasm, with ceaseless turmoil seething,
As if this earth in fast thick pants were breathing,
A mighty fountain momently was forced :
Amid whose swift half-intermitted burst
Huge fragments vaulted like rebounding hail,
Or chaffy grain beneath the thresher's flail :
And 'mid these dancing rocks at once and ever
It flung up momently the sacred river.
Five miles meandering with a mazy motion
Through wood and dale the sacred river ran,
Then reached the caverns measureless to man,
And sank in tumult to a lifeless ocean :
And 'mid this tumult Kubla heard from far
Ancestral voices prophesying war !
The shadow of the dome of pleasure
Floated midway on the waves ;
Where was heard the mingled measure
From the fountain and the caves.
It was a miracle of rare device,
A sunny pleasure-dome with caves of ice! A Damsel with a dulcimer
In a vision once I saw:
It was an Abyssinian maid,
And on her dulcimer she played,
Singing of Mount Abora.
Could I revive within me
Her symphony and song,
To such a deep delight 'twould win me,
That with music loud and long,
I would build that dome in air,
That sunny dome ! those caves of ice !
And all who heard should see them there,
And all should cry, Beware ! Beware !
His flashing eyes, his floating hair !
Weave a circle round him thrice,
And close your eyes with holy dread,
For he on honey-dew hath fed,
And drunk the milk of Paradise.

Rob :)

[Sarita]

Annabel Lee- Poe

It was many and many a year ago,
In a kingdom by the sea,
That a maiden there lived whom you may know
By the name of Annabel Lee.
And this maiden she lived with no other thought
Than to love and be loved by me.

I was a child and she was a child
In this kingdom by the sea:
But we loved with a love that was more than love—
I and my Annabel Lee,
With a love that the wingèd seraphs of heaven
Coveted her and me.

And this was the reason that, long ago,
In this kingdom by the sea,
A wind blew out of a cloud, chilling
My beautiful Annabel Lee,
So that her high-born kinsmen came
And bore her away from me,
To shut her up in a sepulchre
In this kingdom by the sea.

The angels, not half so happy in heaven,
Went envying her and me—
Yes! that was the reason (as all men know,
In this kingdom by the sea)
That the wind came out of the cloud one night,
Chilling and killing my Annabel Lee.

But our love it was stronger by far than the love
Of those who were older than we—
Of many far wiser than we—
And neither the angels in heaven above,
Nor the demons down under the sea,
Can ever dissever my soul from the soul
Of the beautiful Annabel Lee:

For the moon never beams without bringing me dreams
Of the beautiful Annabel Lee;
And the stars never rise, but I feel the bright eyes
Of the beautiful Annabel Lee;
And so, all the night-tide, I lie down by the side
Of my darling—my darling—my life and my bride,
In the sepulchre there by the sea,
In her tomb by the sounding sea.

[Sarita]

Kubla Khan by Samuel Taylor Coleridge

One of my favorites, too Rob. This is the first piece I ever used at a poetry reading, memorized. What a great poem!

[robeiae]

One of my favorites, too Rob. This is the first piece I ever used at a poetry reading, memorized. What a great poem!
I have a wonderful collection of Coleridge poems; a fine hardbound volume issued by The Folio Society. It is the only book on my night table (and I have several thousand books).

Rob :)

[jackie106]

Here is my favorite Poe: (But I still love "Annabel Lee.")

"El Dorado"

Gaily bedight,
A gallant night
In sunshine and in shadow,
Had journeyed long,
Singing a song,
In search of El Dorado.

But he grew old -
This knight so bold -
And - o'er his heart a shadow
Fell as he found
No spot of ground
That looked like El Dorado.

And, as his strength
Failed him at length,
He met a pilgrim shadow -
"Shadow, said he,
"Where can it be -
This land of El Dorado?"

"Over the Mountains
Of the Moon,
Down the Valley of the Shadow,
Ride, boldly ride,"
The shade replied -
"If you seek for El Dorado."

by Edgar Allen Poe

[Sarita]

It is the only book on my night table (and I have several thousand books). I've got the complete works of both Poe and Chaucer on mine. I can't get enough.

[William Haskins]

"you do not believe, you only believe that you believe." - sam coleridge

[robeiae]

I've got the complete works of both Poe and Chaucer on mine. I can't get enough.
Poe, I like. Chaucer...well, it's not my thing.

BTW, in this discussion about the death of poetry, no one mentioned how Great Poets used to be treated. In some cases, they were treated alot like rock stars (and some acted like rock stars, as well). Moreover, there was no "sissy" stigma attached to poets, unlike today. Some of these guys were the most macho thing going. If you include opera composers in the group, just look at a guy like Wagner...pretty scary, actually. Maybe I'll start a new thread...Opera is Dead (apologies to ALW, but he's no Wagner, or Mozart, or...well, you get the picture).

[Sarita]

Indeed Rob. Look at Byron. Total pimp. He had every lady (er-whoever) he wanted. He was a stud.

And William, I don't believe that I believe.

[William Haskins]

fame used to be merit-based; even infamy required extreme acts of volition. in our culture, celebrity is handed out like dinner mints.

but what you say is true. in wales, for instance, you can find any number of locations with plaques detailing what poet worked there or what poems were written there.

in the u.s. you get trump tower or some jerkoff selling maps to paris hilton's house.

[robeiae]

in the u.s. you get trump tower or some jerkoff selling maps to paris hilton's house.
Oh!! I have a video I'm selling...

Rob :)

[William Haskins]

And William, I don't believe that I believe.

you don't really believe that.

[robeiae]

If neither of you believe that you believe, if that it is what you believe or don't believe, well then I don't know what to believe, or not to believe...I believe?

Rob :)

[Sarita]

you don't really believe that. How did I know that was coming? Oh, because I believe I can read minds.

[Nicholas S.H.J.M Woodhouse]

Thanks for bringing up Yeats!

It was my pleasure to mention such an amazing poet! Glad to see others appreciate it. Don't worry about not reaching the audience. In my first play (I was working as a script doctor and acting) I did the inspiring role. I had one too many cocktails. Deciding this was my moment, I stood on the table and began to shout from deep within myself. Apparently, not everyone appreciates Whitney Houston's The Greatest Love Of All......

[Roger J Carlson]

I think Poe is my favorite poet, and "The Raven" is my favorite of his works. I won't quote it here, most of us are familiar with it. But my favorite part is this section:

And the silken sad uncertain rustling of each purple curtain
Thrilled me---filled me with fantastic terrors never felt before;
So that now, to still the beating of my heart, I stood repeating,
" 'Tis some visitor entreating entrance at my chamber door,
Some late visitor entreating entrance at my chamber door.
This it is, and nothing more."

"...silken sad uncertain rustling of each purple curtain..." is so incredibly sensuous. I'm not a poet. I'm a novelist. But oh how I wish I could write something that evocative in my prose!

[mommie4a]

And William, I don't believe that I believe.

But, Sara, in the immortal words of Cher, "Do you believe in life after love?"

[Sarita]

No, Jill. But I do believe in the silken sad uncertain rustling of each purple curtain.

[mommie4a]

No, Jill. But I do believe in the silken sad uncertain rustling of each purple curtain.

Ok - but Cher didn't say that, did she? :)

[mommie4a]

(I know
It's Poe)

[rhymegirl]

Thank you for this thread, William.

I like Dover Beach by Matthew Arnold.

Especially this part:

"Ah, love, let us be true
To one another! for the world, which seems
To lie before us like a land of dreams
So various, so beautiful, so new,
Hath really neither joy, nor love, nor light,
Nor certitude, nor peace, nor help for pain" etc.

I always interpreted it to mean that there is no real certainty in the world, you don't know what's going to happen tomorrow, so for this moment in time be happy loving the special person in your life, knowing that love is the one thing you can trust in.

[oswann]

I don't think poetry is dead. I don't think it's even sick. I do think there's so much crap out there pretending to be poetry that no one can find the good stuff without serious effort. It's more than just a lack of rules, though that is part of the problem; it's a lack of even the simplest knowledge about what is and isn't poetry, or is and isn't even a decent sentence.

But poetry is in no way dead. Making money has seldom been the poet's lot, but a great deal of excellent poetry is still being written, and is still being read, even if big bucks aren't connected with it.



I agree. There is the general impression that a glut of bad poetry, for whatever reason, is the end of great poems. There has always been bad poetry in the same way as there has always been bad painting and bad music etc. There has always been too much bad and not enough good but the cream has always risen to the top.

History is a deceptive thing. We are left, in general, with the best of everything, with the worst falling by the wayside. Even within the works of great creators we are left with, or concentrate on,only the best works. To experience the good the bad and the ugly at the time it happens means a system of quality judgment without the benefit of time or other people's opinions.




Os.

[William Haskins]

There is the general impression that a glut of bad poetry, for whatever reason, is the end of great poems. There has always been bad poetry in the same way as there has always been bad painting and bad music etc.

while i don't necessarily disagree with this premise, i would hasten to point out that, up until the past few generations, bad poetry died a slow death in obscurity because, by and large, people who read could see it for what it was.

even young children were taught literature and rhetoric and were trained to some degree in critical analysis. not only has our educational system all but abandoned any real focus on literary appreciation, our culture, via mass media, has the means and the motivation to pass off bad poetry as song lyrics, greeting card verse, ad jingles, etc.

there has been a wholesale displacement of poetry for poetry's sake in favor of bad imitations of poetry. throw in self-publishing, vanity publishing and the internet, and there is a lot of real estate across which substandard work can become, in many people's eyes, the real thing.

and if the supposed "real thing" is flimsy, trite and only momentarily satisfying, no one has any real impetus to dig beneath the surface for something more substantial.

peeling through the layers of mythology and symbolism in robert graves' work, for example, is a thankless task when the pop culture media crowns the latest avril lavigne song as some kind of quantum leap in art.

[Sarita]

peeling through the layers of mythology and symbolism in robert graves' work, for example, is a thankless task when the pop culture media crowns the latest avril lavigne song as some kind of quantum leap in art.
Someone bought me this book of Chaucer with the original text on one side and modern day text and interpretation on the other. It's been on my shelf since the day it was given to me. There's nothing I like more than sitting on the floor of my spare bedroom, reference books surrounding me like a fortress of knowledge, digging through my favorite poetry or prose for some nugget that I missed last time. I abuse my books, write notes in the margins, fold pages that I want to come back to, bend the covers, but it's all loving abuse. I could spend hours researching the particular use of a word and meditating on its choice.

Do you think it's come down to an attention span issue?

[Unique]

Do you think it's come down to an attention span issue?


Yes. Instant gratification and 15 second sound bites. Turn off that television! Do it now! The child you save may be your own!

[William Haskins]

Do you think it's come down to an attention span issue?

that's certainly part of it. we're so bombarded by so-called creative intellectual property that there's no reason (or time) to indulge in anything but that which is most accessible to us at any given moment.

but, beyond that, even if (by some miracle) the average 17 year-old said, "today i will devote to going to the library and absorbing the poems of ee cummings", most likely he or she would not have the mental tools to do so.

so, yes, it's a lack of will and it's a lack of the critical abilities, which have been dulled to uselessness by a steady diet of junk food for the brain.

[mommie4a]

Do you think it's come down to an attention span issue?

Observing my kids, I think the short answer is no.

Here's a longer opinion - just my opinion:

This guy, "Richard Louv, author of seven books about family, nature, and community, and a columnist for the 'San Diego Union-Tribune'" - described as
"a child advocacy expert [who] links the lack of nature in the lives of today's wired generation to some of the most disturbing childhood trends, such as rises in obesity, ADD, and depression...gives advice on how to save our children from what he calls nature deficit disorder" spoke on the Diane Rehm show yesterday. He talked about how kids don't explore uncontrolled environments they way parents/adults used to let them and encouraged them to do.

He said that he doesn't really blame technology or ADD, but rather, the eruption of choices available and the way in which adults fail to direct kids or help kids understand and experience the value of not overdosing on any one, addictive activity (like computer or the overemphasis on sports competition).

I look at my own kids re: poetry/language interest and development, and I think what this guy says has legitimacy. It doesn't hurt that my oldest was blessed with enormous intellectual gifts. But he loves his computer games too. The difference I see between him and other kids his age is that he will spend as much or more time reading, in the library, or at the bookstore. Since his last day of school, he's averaged more than one 300-500 page book a day. He loves all kinds of writing too.

My daughter, on the other hand, loves to read but prefers to play with her friends, her younger brother or watch anything (and I mean anything if we let her - she's mastered that button that switches channels).

My youngest can sit and do almost anything. He too loves to read but also loves computer but also loves running around. At five years old, I see my job with him as enforcing and helping him learn guidelines that will keep him as balanced in his choices as he seems to be now.

Last part of all this:

I was educated in the 60s and 70s, college in the 80s, grad school in the early 90s. I excelled with language and literature but after high school, used that love more to learn foreign languages and study theory, philosophy, religion etc. Not more literature. I regret that. I really blew off my required college English classes.

Everything you all reference here, and in other poetry threads, is very familiar to me. But at 42 years old, it's just that - very familiar but not well-known.

Sara, what you describe - the love and pleasure you get with Chaucer - makes me smile. I think that is beautiful, and everyone should feel that way about at least a few things in their life.

Why kids - and others - don't feel that way about Chaucer now? I don't know the answer. But based on my own experience, I think that it's from exposure and reinforcement and modeling behavior that influences us to pursue certain loves the way you pursue Chaucer.

Parents, teachers, adults have an awesome responsibility. I think we have to look to ourselves first to sort things out re: why people want what they want and how do we influence them to desire something richer.

[oswann]

Not sure I agree. As you said it may look like the real thing, William, but it isn't. The question is then of critical mass. How many people recognize what is good in a sea of bad? I think it's too general to think the people who can really appreciate poetry and prose are members of a dying race.

I maintain the idea of cream rising and would add the numbers of literate people in a positon to read and appreciate good work are increasing. More people buy more books and spend more time reading. I'm not convinced they are all reading fluff and bubbles. There must be substance in the equation somewhere.


Os.

[William Haskins]

i hope you're right.

[mommie4a]

There must be substance in the equation somewhere.

I agree with this observation. Thanks for making the point.

[oswann]

I agree with mommie4a. The post looks like it says it doesn't agree, but I was replying to the post before. My eldest has his nose buried in books continually. He would stay in his room more if I didn't kick him out from time to time to get some air.

I know these anecdotes don't really create any great philosophical basis but I don't mourn the loss of literature at all. I think it's not lost nor sick or dying.
Look at the stuff you write William. There's hope for the world.


Os.

[Sarita]

There must be substance in the equation somewhere.
Like William said earlier, though... it is just difficult to see the substance, what with all of the Lavignes running around being called bloody brilliant. And hearing friends talk non-stop about the latest chick lit to hit the shelves....

[oswann]

Like William said earlier, though... it is just difficult to see the substance, what with all of the Lavignes running around being called bloody brilliant. And hearing friends talk non-stop about the latest chick lit to hit the shelves....



Because the quality judgments are for you to make. But I think it's of utmost importance to continue to think and read with a critical mind. Like William is doing. Just try not to get to depressed about it all.


Os.

[mommie4a]

I hear what you're saying and observing, Sara. But this country is so large and the media outlets so numerous and varied.

Think about what's happened in the 500-600 years since the Baroque and Renaissance periods. No rock and roll existed then. Neither did anesthesia. Forget about concepts of hygiene.

I think it's very, very difficult to get perpsective on the value and impact of trends, even if you survey two, three or four generations. The industrial revolution began barely 150 years ago.

[Roger J Carlson]

Yes. Instant gratification and 15 second sound bites. Turn off that television! Do it now! The child you save may be your own!While I agree that kids today spend too much time in front of the television or computer, I disagree with the mindset that says to disconnect the TV and throw out the video games. The world is changing and we don't want to prepare our kids for OUR world. We need to prepare them for THEIR world. The amount of information in the world is exploding exponentially. TV, video games, and computers are preparing them for their future.

They'll need to make decisions about what is worthwhile a lot faster than we did. They don't have time to spend an afternoon emersing themselves in ee cummings and all the other poets of the past.

Does this mean they should never get outside, smell the air, read a book? Of course not, but there must be balance. They HAVE to experience the realities of their own world, because they're going to have to live there.

How this effects poetry is already evident. My original assertion that poetry began to die when poets stopped rhyming is only partially true. There IS one form of poetry that thrives today. Rap music. Yes, I know. I can barely stand to listen to it. However, consider. It IS poetry. It DOES rhyme and relies HEAVILY on meter. And it is VERY popular and it makes a LOT of money. I think that it does rhyme and scan is one of the reasons it is popular. It resonates with young people.

Notice, I did not say rap is good. I said it was popular. "Good" is a subjective judgment that changes with time.

The older generator always bemoans the death of an art form as they see it evolve. Pre-impressionist painters scoffed at Monet. Impressionists scoffed at Picasso. The flowery prose of the Victorian era gave way to the spare prose of modern literature. Lets not try to lock our kids into our patterns of thought, but allow them to make their own future.

[robeiae]

Interestingly enough, it turns out that the oldest known sample of Phoenician writing, from around 1600 B.C., is actually a diatribe bemoaning the low-quality of poetry and literature that was beginning to appear...

Rob :)

[oswann]

Interestingly enough, it turns out that the oldest known sample of Phoenician writing, from around 1600 B.C., is actually a diatribe bemoaning the low-quality of poetry and literature that was beginning to appear...

Rob :)


The damn Phoenicians. Always griping about something.


Os.

[Roger J Carlson]

But, Sara, in the immortal words of Cher, "Do you believe in life after love?"Actually, they're not Cher's words at all:

Believe
recorded by CHER on Warner Bros. Records 1998
words and music by Brian Higgins, Stuart McLennan, Paul Barry, Stephen Torch, Matt Gray
and Tim Powell

[maestrowork]

I think poetry merely changes forms and shapes, and will continue to do so. What we call song lyrics are really poetry, or writings in video games... people will continue to write poetry -- perhaps not stand-alone, but include them in their stories (as I did)...

[oswann]

I've changed my mind, I'm with Haskins and the Phoenicians. Everythings going to hell in a hand basket.

New day, newly lost glimmer of hope. Maybe it's the 'runaway bride deal'.



Os.

[mommie4a]

I've changed my mind, I'm with Haskins and the Phoenicians. Everythings going to hell in a hand basket.

New day, newly lost glimmer of hope. Maybe it's the 'runaway bride deal'.



Os.

Pamela Anderson and Amy Fisher having their own magazine and newspaper columns gets me more than the bride.

[oswann]

Tell me about it. Makes taking the high road a tough proposition.


Os.

[robeiae]

Pamela Anderson and Amy Fisher having their own magazine and newspaper columns gets me more than the bride.
Really!?!
*sigh* I gotta get out more.
Rob :)

P.S. Is Pam's gonna be adult content? What the hell else could it possibly be about? (Then again, Donald Trump's got a TV show and he's a ...)

[oswann]

Really!?!
*sigh* I gotta get out more.
Rob :)

P.S. Is Pam's gonna be adult content? What the hell else could it possibly be about? (Then again, Donald Trump's got a TV show and he's a ...)



Stay in more.



Os.

[Unique]

The world is changing and we don't want to prepare our kids for OUR world. We need to prepare them for THEIR world. The amount of information in the world is exploding exponentially.

TV, video games, and computers are preparing them for their future.

They'll need to make decisions about what is worthwhile a lot faster than we did. .

Roger,
I agree with a bit of what you said, but I'll be double D**'d dipped if I'll let Television be the educator of my child.

Television is not reality. Advertising is not reality. Yes, advertising exists; but it exists for one reason - to sell. If one grows up believing advertising to be *true*, then one will have no comparision to determine real truth. Everything becomes relative and there goes the republic.

In another analogy, do I need to expose my child to a child molester to prove to him they exist? I think not.

Yes, the world is changing. Yes, young people need to be prepared for those changes. Regardless of what the rest of the world is doing, I'd prefer my child to read poetry than to watch "King of the Hill."
As my wise ol' mama told me, 'just because the rest of the world is jumping off bridges, doesn't mean you have to do it, too.' Just because the rest of the world is doing something, doesn't make it right.

Balance and the ability to think for oneself - those are the keys to an educated person. (That's my story & I'm stickin' to it!)

[mommie4a]

Really!?!
*sigh* I gotta get out more.
Rob :)

P.S. Is Pam's gonna be adult content? What the hell else could it possibly be about? (Then again, Donald Trump's got a TV show and he's a ...)

Rob - I haven't seen it, but it's been out for at least a year. And, I have to confess, by now, maybe it's been cancelled! I'm not around this morning, but I'll check it out later today and let ya know.

Jill

[Roger J Carlson]

Roger,
I agree with a bit of what you said, but I'll be double D**'d dipped if I'll let Television be the educator of my child.

Television is not reality. Advertising is not reality. Yes, advertising exists; but it exists for one reason - to sell. If one grows up believing advertising to be *true*, then one will have no comparision to determine real truth. Everything becomes relative and there goes the republic.

In another analogy, do I need to expose my child to a child molester to prove to him they exist? I think not.

Yes, the world is changing. Yes, young people need to be prepared for those changes. Regardless of what the rest of the world is doing, I'd prefer my child to read poetry than to watch "King of the Hill."
As my wise ol' mama told me, 'just because the rest of the world is jumping off bridges, doesn't mean you have to do it, too.' Just because the rest of the world is doing something, doesn't make it right.

Balance and the ability to think for oneself - those are the keys to an educated person. (That's my story & I'm stickin' to it!)Well, I can't argue with anything you've said here. I agree wholeheartedly.

On the other hand, some people (not saying you) believe that anything that didn't exist when they were a kid is necessarily evil. Certainly there are evil TV shows and video games. There are even evil poems. (If you include rap in poetry, I contend that many are evil -- killing cops, rape, etc.) But all of them are not.

You should certainly not let TV raise your kids. By the same token, you shouldn't let poetry or books raise your kids. You would be equally remiss either way.

All I'm saying is that we need to recognize that the world is changing and our kids may need skills we don't have and some of these skills MAY come from TV or video games or whatever other new thing that might pop up (cell phones, blackberry's, PDAs, iPods, whatever).

Let me use analogy. There are terrible and dangerous things that can happen when you use a computer, especially over the internet. But if we kept computers out of houses, never taught our kids about their good uses, and generally ignored them, how prepared would they be to face the world today?

[maestrowork]

Oh yeah. Pam even said something like "I've always wanted to write, but I really can't write." She used a ghostwriter to write her first novel, and it sold like hot cakes (sex sells, baby). So is she using a ghost writer for her column, too?

Fame trumps talent every time.

[brokenfingers]

The key issue here, I think is reading. In order for anyone to appreciate poetry, they must first have a love of reading. Reading widely helps stimulate a mind and encourages critical thinking as well as daydreams – two critical components for a poem (I feel). The only thing else needed is strong emotion and the desire to combine them all and spit them out..

It can be tough sometimes in this day and age, but the most important thing a parent, or anyone who has influence over a child, can do is show by example. If the parent reads books regularly and encourages reading in their child then chances are the kid will learn to look at books as a valid form of entertainment and receive the included benefits from them.

If a parent uses TV and video games to keep the kid occupied or the parent just doesn’t read much, unless the school picks up the ball (which we all know cannot be counted on nor should it) the child will most likely grow up a limited reader, by which I mean someone who reads when they have to – not because they want to.

Sometimes I think the whole world has been seduced by advertisers etc. to our own detriment. It’s become the prevalent paradigm that you MUST have this new item or that new gadget.

If adults are being overwhelmed by the media messages and the feeling that there’s too much going on and not enough time to do it, and are running to and fro like madpeople to get this and to get that, I can only imagine how kids feel or what they are subconsciously ingesting from our example.

We are the ones paving the road which they must travel…

[mommie4a]

In March 2002, Pamela Anderson publicly stated that she had contracted the Hepatitis C virus from Lee (supposedly from sharing tattoo needles), and began writing a regular column for Jane magazine. From Wikipedia.com

However, janemag.com calls her a former columnist and features Anderson this month in an article about what she's been up to.

[robeiae]

In March 2002, Pamela Anderson publicly stated that she had contracted the Hepatitis C virus from Lee (supposedly from sharing tattoo needles), and began writing a regular column for Jane magazine. From Wikipedia.com...However, janemag.com calls her a former columnist and features Anderson this month in an article about what she's been up to.
Thank you!! :kiss:

Rob :)

[rhymegirl]

I like what brokenfingers said about reading and showing kids by example that reading is a fun, interesting, informative, pleasant thing to do.

I also think that children need to have a well-rounded life. They need to go outside and get some exercise--walking, bike riding, sports, running around. Playing video games is a very solitary, sedentary way to spend one's time. They need to read, exercise, draw, invent things, go places to learn something new.

When I was in elementary school, every day for morning announcements, a different student was chosen to read them over the PA system and that student also had to choose a poem to read to everyone. What a nice way to start the day! I'm sure they don't do that anymore in schools.

So I had a nice foundation for learning and appreciating poetry. I chose to pursue it further when I went to college, but not everyone does.

[Roger J Carlson]

Hmmmm....poetry to Pamela. How many degrees of separation?

[VOTE_BOT]

We're doomed.

[mkcbunny]

Hmmmm....poetry to Pamela. How many degrees of separation?
Only one if you count Motley Crue lyrics.

[robeiae]

Hmmmm....poetry to Pamela. How many degrees of separation?
Didn't she start out on Home Improvement. Man, that Tim Allen is funny! Did any of you see Jungle to Jungle? I thought it was cute, but I liked George of the Jungle better. I really like Brendon Fraser. He was in that movie where he grew up in a fallout shelter, right? Remember when everyone lived in fear of a nuclear war? Times were tense, but look at the music that sprung up from those fears. Bob Dylan had some great songs with that theme. Blowin' in the Wind is one of my all time favorites. His band was something-The Band! The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down, wow...'Course I really like Joan Baez's version, too. But as far as female performers go, I always have preferred Linda Rondstadt. I had such a crush on her when I was younger. Had a poster of her up in my room, right across from a velvet poster of a tiger in a jungle. It was called Tiger, Tiger. Wasn't that from a Blake poem?

I think it started something like this:

Tiger, tiger burning bright
In the forests of the night
What immortal hand or eye
Could frame that fearful symmetry

How's that Roger!!

Rob :)

[maestrowork]

If someone (or your kids) think poetry is boring, sissy, archaic, or whatever, introduce them to it through their normal channels.

Say, if your kids are into video games. Choose one (maybe a fantasy/adventure or RPG like Myst) that employs poetry.

If they like rock music, pick a good song and discuss with them what the lyrics mean, and why it's great poetry (Queen, or Pink Floyd, for example, has some great poetry in their lyrics)...

Can anybody find me somebody to love?
Each morning I get up I die a little
Can barely stand on my feet
Take a look in the mirror and cry
Lord what you're doing to me
I have spent all my years in believing you
But I just can't get no relief, Lord!
Somebody, somebody
Can anybody find me somebody to love?

I work hard every day of my life
I work till I ache my bones
At the end I take home my hard earned pay all on my own -
I get down on my knees
And I start to pray
Till the tears run down from my eyes
Lord - somebody - somebody
Can anybody find me - somebody to love?

Introduce your kids to poetry through some other venues and cultural events, such as opera, musicals, plays, even movies. Frex, Nessun Dorma is very familiar, haunting song (even a Metal band sang it), and the lyrics is very poetic:



No-one shall sleep!
No-one shall sleep!
You too, oh Prince,
In your cold room, watch the stars
Trembling with love and hope!


But my secret lies hidden within me,
No-one shall discover my name!
Oh no, I will only reveal it on your lips
When daylight shines forth!


And my kiss shall break
The silence that makes you mine!


[Choir:]
No-one shall discover her name!
And we will, alas, have to die, to die!
Depart, oh night!
Set, you stars!
Set, you stars!
At dawn I shall win!
I shall win! I shall win!

[mkcbunny]

First, I have to say, Haskins, you start some excellent threads.

It's tempting to vilify contemporary media, but as mommie4a pointed out, modern life has a lot of positive things going for it in addition to whatever "dumbing down" negatives we tend to perceive. We wouldn't be having this delightful chat among distant strangers without tehcnology, for one thing. I think a lousy educational system and a f**ked-up sense of national priorites on the funding front is more to blame than media itself, because media is produced to fill popular demand. It's all business and the producers chase the audience.

Take the movie Sylvia, a biographical drama starring an Oscar-winning actress. It had Oscar-nom written all over it. But nobody went. Well, perhaps some of the folks in this room, but "nobody" from the business standpoint. So, do many movies of its ilk get made? No. Julie Taymor's Frida did a bit better as an artist-bio, but that's because Salma Hayek was rabid about the project, backed it, and put a lot of time and publicity effort into it . But still, how many films do we get like Titus? I think you can make a valid case that some film is poetic, and a film like Titus is a synthesis of visual and written poetry that could not have been matched, obviously, before film was invented.

I used the above examples both because the subjects related to poetry and because the films to varying degrees are poetic. But since our current culture doesn't emphasize poetry or literature, these films are a tough sell. All that said, Shakespeare is still a pretty popular guy. Film adaptations of his works are constantly coming out, some being better than others, and some being of the "reimagined" variety, aimed at the MTV generation. But, hey, Shakespeare filtered through Baz Luhrman is still Shakespeare.

And, lest we not forget, with Titus being an excellent example, that Shakespeare himself was no slouch in the violence and "evil" department.

That was a lot longer than I meant it to be. I have to leave NOW for dinner, or I might weed it down to about three sentences.

[jdkiggins]

Yes, Haskins, I agree that you start some fascinating threads.

Will you be my poetry mentor? I'm really lousy at it and fall into all the categories you spoke about.

Edit: I'm also really bad on a keyboard late at night. :)

[mkcbunny]

Ok, back from dinner [Vietnamese/Spicy Lemon Grass Beef] and had to add another thought.

This lament about the death of poetry isn't isolated to one medium; it's common to multiple art forms at the moment. We just got back from a gallery opening in the city [S.F.], and it was another case of mostly mediocre work. Painting is always "dying," in art circles. It was pronounced "dead" for nearly a decade when I was pretty sure I was still alive and making solid work. But then it surges again, and suddenly painting "is back." It's a similar discussion.

People, especially in this area, are encouraged to express themselves freely as a form of therapy. We're "all artists inside" who should be "encouraged." I think this applies both to both poetry in the public "slam" and coffee-house environments and to visual art. Everyone's capable of picking up a brush. Everyone's a "poet inside." What happens in these non-critical, hyper-supportive environments is that people who aren't very talented are encouraged to continue on for their own pleasure. And when no one critiques them, they just continue to foist absolute crap on the public.

In the case of visual arts, you get the annual Open Studios event, wherein hundreds of "artists" open their work spaces to the public. The public then trots around to see artists in their natural habitat and possibly get a bargain in the process. Talk about depressing.

That's my art rant, but it's the same with poetry, I think. Blare something revealing at a coffee shop and you're a poet. I loathe free-for-all poerty events and will run the other way if I stumble upon one accidentally.

Don't get me wrong. People have a right to paint whatever they want and write whatever they want. I just wish there was an acceptable way to let mediocre artists know their work isn't very good. As it stands, they just throw it out there, and people who don't know any better think it's high art.

I guess it's my east-coast sensibility. Criticism is expected; you survive it and improve. Love the Bay Area, but no one out here has any idea how to critique anyone else; they're all afraid of hurting someone's feelings.

OK, I am done. Do I feel better? No.

[aboyd]

I'm here in the Bay Area, and I'm critiquing a lot -- lots of time invested, lots of detail -- and most poets get pissy about it. I have people on my board who have urged me to say 1 nice thing for every problem area I highlight. That's very karmic, but what do you do when the poem has no (or few) redeeming qualities?

I don't know. The biggest problem for me isn't that there are no true critics. It's that the emotional-support-cheerleaders outnumber the true critics by about a million to one. Post something detailed and possibly negative (or at least, something that isn't all glitter and balloons) in the AW poetry forum, or on mine, or on wwforums. You may find that people pop up quickly with counter-comments like "well I loved it" and "this is a great, great poem." You provide depth and reasoned analysis, they provide a one-liner. Guess what? When you have 1 seemingly-grumpy critic telling you your poem needs real work, and 6 cheerleaders shouting, "yaaaay YOU" it's hard to go with the critic.

I think one of the more annoying issues with new poets is the mindset that anyone can be an expert. Example: a generic person who has written 20 poems. That's 19 more than his/her friends ever bothered to write. Oooooo. So you give the person some pointers, and said generic person basically responds, "whatEVAR! That's not how poetry works." Yay. 20 poems, and the poet is beyond reproach. Great.

I don't get that when I do computer programming. There are no people who pop up on the Webmaster forums and post error-prone, dangerous code and then ignore critique. I don't think I've once had a newbie geek read my suggestions and say, "OMG! That is soooo lame! Who cares if the data is lost and no one else can understand what I wrote?!?" None. Well, OK, I had a boss who said that once, but then everything he touched was hacked, and I quit. 99% of programmers accept critique eagerly.

Anyway, sorry for the rant. I've written maybe 30 crits this week on various sites, and it's on my mind.

-Tony

[robeiae]

I think one of the more annoying issues with new poets is the mindset that anyone can be an expert. Example: a generic person who has written 20 poems. That's 19 more than his/her friends ever bothered to write. Oooooo. So you give the person some pointers, and said generic person basically responds, "whatEVAR! That's not how poetry works." Yay. 20 poems, and the poet is beyond reproach. Great.
You make a valid point, I think, one that applies equally to literature and art, as well.

Here's a question: how "good" should poetry be in order to be recognized as good poetry or maybe even published? Quite obviously, almost anything can end up in book or on a frame. Hell, I've seen photagraphy collections with pictures that my 7-year-old could have taken (and probably has). Yet, some of them have been published and made into coffee table books. I was able to attend some special events to see some private art collections recently, all contemporary art, and I was blown away by what was being labeled as "significant." And of course, for regular literature (and poetry, as well) there are all the vanity presses. However, I happened to browse through the poetry section in a local Borders, not too long ago. I wasn't particualry moved...but maybe it's too early and I should have some coffee before I start critiqueing poetry collections...

Rob :)

[Godfather]

i agree with william.

poetry is dead.
music is dead.
politics are sh*t.


we need another bob dylan
somebody to revive... life.
we need a revolution.

[rhymegirl]

I think the irony of this thread titled, Poetry is Dead, is that in discussing it here, we've brought poetry back to life.

I've always liked this poem by E. E. Cummings. (I also like "my father moved through dooms of love", but it's mighty long to reprint here.)

since feeling is first

since feeling is first
who pays any attention
to the syntax of things
will never wholly kiss you;
wholly to be a fool
while Spring is in the world.

my blood approves,
and kisses are a better fate
than wisdom
lady i swear by all flowers. Don't cry
-the best gesture of my brain is less than
your eyelids' flutter which says

we are for each other: then
laugh, leaning back in my arms
for life's not a paragraph

And death i think is no parenthesis.

[William Haskins]

"I know that poetry is indispensable, but to what I could not say." - Jean Cocteau

"A poet in history is divine; but a poet in the next room is a joke." - Max Eastman

"There is no money in poetry; but then there is no poetry in money, either." - Robert Graves

"Publishing a volume of verse is like dropping a rose petal down the Grand Canyon and waiting for the echo." - Don Marquis

"A publisher of today would as soon see a burglar in his office as a poet." - Henry de Vere Stacpoole

[maestrowork]

A song without poetry is like a body without a soul...

[robeiae]

Not a big fan of Foghat, I take it...

Rob :)

[mkcbunny]

Haskins: You always provide such terrific quotes. Your new User Title cracks me up.

I want you all to know that I still have that accursed Rush song stuck in my head today, and I am not happy about it. Those responsible know who they are.

I'm here in the Bay Area, and I'm critiquing a lot ...
Call us the grumpy Bay Area critics group. Don't get my husband started, he'll offer a rant that would put both of us to shame.

I recall college days when year-end painting critiques would roll around and some people would be in tears by the time it was over. There were always people who added positive comments where warranted, but the "guest critics" [who were usually gallery owners, newspaper reviewers, and the like] were extremely blunt. Rarely were they intentionally mean. It was merely objective critisicm, but artists would take it all so personally. It's hard not to. But that training is what prepares you for rejection in any creative endeavor.

Relating to what aboyd just said, I spent five years as a film critic and editor here in S.F., in which capacity I exchanged editorial critisicm with my fellow editors day in and day out. It's part of the job, and if you can't do it, you get fired. Nobody fires a poet for her coffee-house ramblings. Especially in the East Bay.

[William Haskins]

yeah, a lot of it is the PC "inclusiveness" that tony speaks of. i do my best to encourage young poets; not from any feeling that i'm qualified to make grand pronouncements, but simply because i want to ensure survival of the species.

but i will state, without hesitation, that simply stringing words together in verse form does not a poet make.

the bar has been lowered in many facets of our culture, largely due to the (beneficial, in my opinion) deconstruction of formalism that occurred over the past 125 years or so.

the downside of that experimentation, however, is that it makes various disciplines (painting, music and poetry, in particular) appear deceptively simple. with no rules, there can be no criticism -- or so some would think.

the uniformed could look at a later picasso and say, "hell, i could do that", without any knowledge that picasso painted on par with the great masters as a young teenager; he had excelled in formal style before he ever broke its rules.

the catch-22 for me is that valid poetry is largely locked in the ivory tower of academia. among the unwashed masses, poetry is generic and wide-ranging and, for anyone who wants to see the artform not only survive, but thrive, they will find themselves caught between pushing people away with real, incisive criticism or opening their arms to the intellectually lazy, the historically ignorant and, let's face it, the talentless.

[maestrowork]

... i promise i won't bastidize poetry anymore...

[William Haskins]

trust me, sir. you don't. i like your work.

[mkcbunny]

yeah, a lot of it is the PC "inclusiveness" that tony speaks of. i do my best to encourage young poets; not from any feeling that i'm qualified to make grand pronouncements, but simply because i want to ensure survival of the species....

... the catch-22 for me is that valid poetry is largely locked in the ivory tower of academia. among the unwashed masses, poetry is generic and wide-ranging and, for anyone who wants to see the artform not only survive, but thrive, the find themselves caught between pushing people away with real, incisive criticism or opening their arms to the intellectually lazy, the historically ignorant and, let's face it, the talentless.
There's the rub, indeed. Survival of the fittest is irrelevant if the species becomes extinct.

[jackie106]

I take issue with the way that poetry is taught in many workshops. The focus is often on "finding your voice" or "unlocking your creativity" rather than on learning the fundamentals of the craft. This method of teaching assumes that everyone has poetry inside of them, they just need the right tools to find it.

It takes more than glorified navel-gazing to write poetry. Many would-be poets don't read enough poetry to become competent.

Learning to write poetry involves a lot of reading, a lot of writing and a lot of failures. I look at the poetry that I wrote a few years ago--even the poems that I got published in semi-well known journals--and cringe. Everything turns to dust with time. I write, rewrite, rewrite the rewrite, fall in love with with my own work and shove it in the back of the closet. Months, days, years later, I pull it out and start the process over again. Gutting my work and compulsively rewriting is the only way I know how to write fiction or poetry.

Jackie

[mommie4a]

I don't know the answer to this question, but I would like to know the answer. In all of time since poetry has been available to read, has it ever been the predominantly read form of written expression? Is the decline of poetry, as described in this thread, relative to poetry only? Or do you believe that it used to be on par - as far as a form pursued by writers and readers - with other forms (prose, fiction, other forms of storytelling) but is now in decline due to competition from 20th and 21st Century elements?

[robeiae]

A loaded question, since that portion of a society that was/is literate has varied greatly, both in comparison to other societies and across time in the same society...but an excellent question nonetheless!

Rob :)

[mommie4a]

A loaded question, since that portion of a society that was/is literate has varied greatly, both in comparison to other societies and across time in the same society...but an excellent question nonetheless!

Rob :)

Hmm - didn't mean to make it loaded. I really meant it as it stands - I don't know the history of poetry as a form embraced or ignored by people through time. I only know it as I learned it, was exposed to it, in school and then occasionally on my own.

Any ideas as to the answer?

[robeiae]

I think it was largely a function of proficiency. When the most proficient creative talents in period chose poetry, the general inclination of the talent pool was to follow suit. Also, the dominate form of public entertainment would tend to affect this inclination.

Now there are several schools of thought out there that seek link methods of expression with culture. Nieztschean thought, for intance, places poetry with music as form, insofar as it is more linked to emotion and tends to the formless. Here, it is the Dionysian element that is more true; those cultures that are more Dionysian are more real and more poetic/musical (and vice-a-versa). Thus Greek trumps Roman, but Romantic trumps Enlightened, etc. If this anlysis is correct, poetry would be "bigger" in the former cultures of each pair. What do you think? (I think this view is flawed, though somewhat consistent with the development of historiography)

It's late, isn't it?

Rob :)

[mommie4a]

I think it was largely a function of proficiency. When the most proficient creative talents in period chose poetry, the general inclination of the talent pool was to follow suit. Also, the dominate form of public entertainment would tend to affect this inclination.

Well - I have to reach back into my history annals but I think of Greek plays as a dominant form of expression for a long time. And of course, it depends on the eras and cultures as you suggest other schools of thought believe. What about tribal cultures where oral storytelling survived for hundreds of years. But I think overall, this premise (in your first sentence) is logical.

Now there are several schools of thought out there that seek link methods of expression with culture. Nieztschean thought, for intance, places poetry with music as form, insofar as it is more linked to emotion and tends to the formless. Here, it is the Dionysian element that is more true; those cultures that are more Dionysian are more real and more poetic/musical (and vice-a-versa). Thus Greek trumps Roman, but Romantic trumps Enlightened, etc. If this anlysis is correct, poetry would be "bigger" in the former cultures of each pair. What do you think? (I think this view is flawed, though somewhat consistent with the development of historiography)

I think it is in fact late. I also think, based on my cursory recollection of the Englightenment and subsequent eras, that as science and industrialization took hold in certain societies and economies, they too affected the use of and view toward poetry.

I think any poet who would refuse to go on Oprah might also help tighten the noose around the accessibility and interest in the form.

Jill:)

[robeiae]

I also think, based on my cursory recollection of the Englightenment and subsequent eras, that as science and industrialization took hold in certain societies and economies, they too affected the use of and view toward poetry.
This is predictable from the Nietzschean perspective and completely consistent with it. The antithesis, Apollonian culture, is sculpture, science, etc.

I think any poet who would refuse to go on Oprah might also help tighten the noose around the accessibility and interest in the form.
I think you are right, but doesn't this reflect the elitism that is a consequnce of the narrowing of access to the form, brought on by the very commercial success it repudiates? (though that doesn't change the validity of your point)

Rob :)

[aboyd]

Here's a question: how "good" should poetry be in order to be recognized as good poetry or maybe even published? Quite obviously, almost anything can end up in book or on a frame.Well, I don't want this to sound old-fashioned -- because it truly applies to any medium, from books to Web sites to whatever is next -- but I think editors are important for this. This is what the slush pile is for. Have a vetting process.

I happened to browse through the poetry section in a local Borders, not too long ago. I wasn't particualry moved...but maybe it's too early and I should have some coffee before I start critiqueing poetry collections...I wasn't either. Been there, done that. There is something to the local Borders, though. They are presenting books primarily from "real" publishing houses, run by editors who only publish the works they deem to be worthy. I know most books I see in Borders did endure some kind of vetting process. Of course, the editors may have different goals than I. They may choose the most shocking/titillating work, hoping controvery sells. I think Billy Collins (http://www.whysanity.net/creative/collins.html#victoria) plays into that a little bit. But typically even the attention-grabbing stuff is at least competently written.

I think the best bet before going into Borders is to hear from other readers. What do they love? What author did they stumble upon, and end up loving with passion? I was always disappointed with bookstore poetry until I went in there as a man-on-a-mission. I had a shopping list, and sitting down to review 20 suggested books went over a lot better than spot-checking the whole section.

Anyway, you probably didn't expect someone to use your post as a launchpad for another rant, so I'll shut up now. But thanks all for the good discussion.

-Tony

[mommie4a]

I think you are right, but doesn't this reflect the elitism that is a consequnce of the narrowing of access to the form, brought on by the very commercial success it repudiates? (though that doesn't change the validity of your point)Rob :)

Yes and no, because some things which start off seeming erudite and inaccessible, become known to greater numbers and then desired by them, to the point that no one who originally was interested any longer wants the affiliation. I had a roomie from Libya who shopped at Benetton in Italy. Once Benetton was available here, she stopped wearing it. That kind of thing. I'm not a trendspotter, so I can't really speak about this phenomenon, but there are books about it. The Tipping Point - isn't that a new book about trends and how they last/die?

[brokenfingers]

I finally got around to reading this month’s Writer magazine, which I received almost a month ago, and was surprised to find this filler piece that kind of echoed some things said here so I figured I'd post it.
Quality poetry invokes thought. Liesel Garmach
fed on this steady diet of crap, the mental muscles designed to read and process real poetry are reduced to a state of atrophy. a cultural laziness sets in and people are too fat to reach for any but the lowest hanging fruit. William Haskinsbut I see now that Haskins and LieselGarmach are right and thought really is required when reading and enjoying True Poetry. Funny, but I'd never realized that. brokenfingersthere is something intensely personal about reading poetry. at it's best, it's meditative, even slightly hypnotic. there is absolutely no filter between the deliberate syntax and the reader's mind., it's a direct connection (momentary though it may be) between the mind of the reader and the poet. the interpretive and analytical possibilities are limitless. William Haskins

Here is the article:


"Preliminary research by psychologists at two Scottish universities indicates that it takes more brain power to read poetry than it does to read prose. Using an infrared beam, researchers studied the eye movements of subjects as they read passages of either poetry or prose.
The results showed that subjects reading poetry generated far more eye movement, which is associated with deeper thought. Using brain-imaging technology, greater levels of cerebral activity were also found when subjects listened to poems being read aloud.

Dr. Jane Stabler, a literature expert and member of the research group, tells the Edinburgh Scotsman, “When readers decide that something is a poem, they read it a different way. As literary critics we would like to think that this is a more thoughtful way, more receptive to the text’s richness and complexity, but in psychological terms it is the same sort of reading produced by a dyslexic reader who finds reading difficult.”

The next time you want to exercise your mind, you might want to reach for the work of John Donne instead of Jane Austen."
Hmmmmmm, beddy interdesting....

[oswann]

Don't know if has been said, but the closest I come to the feeling of a direct link between the work and me in the way William described is with jazz music. I listen to a lot of jazz and expression through the music in this sense slots me into a space with resembles the unfiltered deliberate syntax thing.

I'm not sure if the Scots' laser beams can determine my thought processes and if the fact that I'm listening to jazz makes me listen differently or not. Och Aye! Beam me up Scotty.


Os.

[William Haskins]

good point about jazz. with formalized music, the brain can anticipate and predict, as the eye can often scan the page with prose.

but you're right, with jazz (and poetry) one never knows what the next measure will hold; it requires a deeper sense of engagement.

[maestrowork]

I agree. That's why I love Jazz (and free verse poetry), and none of that teenybopper pop.

[Nicholas S.H.J.M Woodhouse]

I don't think poetry is dead and I don't think it is dying. Jazz and poetry have been mentioned as forms of expression not playing to any rules. I think that exists for many young guns today. Where I come from, football (or soccer I suppose in the US) is very important to working class children. Its a chance to express yourself. Just like jazz and poetry. Yes there are rules (you can't just kick someone and get away with it), but you can break them. Some people are so creative. Some people only pass backwards. It truly is the modern poetry - it is poetry in motion. Where I come from poetry is seen to be upper-class and for a different world. But, self-expression lives on everywhere. It is football that first got me into poetry.
Its not dead, it just beats in different ways for now.

[rhymegirl]

Maybe you should start a Poetry is Alive thread.

[robeiae]

Just got my new hardbound collection of John Donne in the mail; can't wait to dig in!!!

Rob :)

[rhymegirl]

Tell us when you're donne reading him? Tee hee.

[pconsidine]

Here's a question -

Does anyone think that the decline of poetry is related at all to the rise of free verse? I mean, is it a parallel development with the history of painting since the advent of Cubism and Abstract Expressionism? I was thinking about when poetry was last valued as an art form and I suspect it was in the late 19th and early 20th Centuries, when poets still worked in the more traditional forms of poetry, with very demanding rhyme and meter. With the rise of free verse, the feeling that "anyone can do it" grew, until it became the verbal equivalent of the elephant that paints. It's the novelty of the artist, not the quality of the art, that attracts attention.

As the discipline of an artform declines, so does its perceived value.

[Nateskate]

I'm not a poet. I couldn't even name the kinds of poetry. But I'm getting into it. And as I said on one post on the poetry thread, "Don't blame the Genre for what I'm getting away with."

But here's the thing. I've enjoyed the poetry of others, and find some deep and even inspirational, but really, all people seem to do is give a pat on the back.

And I think it's because poetry is such a private domain. It's someone laying a part of their soul out there, so you have to walk softly. But I'd love to see discussions form about the meaning of poetry, what the author meant. Maybe that won't happen here.

At any rate, there's a poetry contest on the Poetry thread, and it's open to all here. It's "Who can do the worst poem", and I fear William will have his way with the rest of us, as if this were another AI competition. But hey, competition is good. And even if William is as bad as he is good, and therefore worse than me, the more the merrier.

[poetinahat]

I'm not a poet. I couldn't even name the kinds of poetry. But I'm getting into it.
...
At any rate, there's a poetry contest on the Poetry thread, and it's open to all here. It's "Who can do the worst poem", and I fear William will have his way with the rest of us, as if this were another AI competition. But hey, competition is good. And even if William is as bad as he is good, and therefore worse than me, the more the merrier.

Nate, your post struck a chord with me. Despite my AW name (I've had it for some time, long before I arrived here; it's a boring tale), I'm not a poet either. Well, I lie: I've written a few poems, but only for personal pleasure (special occasions, gifts, inspiration). What better reason?

Anyway, what I'm working up to is that I'm really only getting into it as well. If some of us are just picking it up, then poetry may yet not be dead!

There's some good banter at the Haikuicide and Limerick threads for all brows (high, middle or low). Just because, I've started a Sonnets thread as well (I need to bump it, but it's been like that this past week). I know little about them, but working within a form interests me.

Anyway, just felt compelled to respond. See you around.

Rob

[Nateskate]

Nate, your post struck a chord with me. Despite my AW name (I've had it for some time, long before I arrived here; it's a boring tale), I'm not a poet either. Well, I lie: I've written a few poems, but only for personal pleasure (special occasions, gifts, inspiration). What better reason?

Anyway, what I'm working up to is that I'm really only getting into it as well. If some of us are just picking it up, then poetry may yet not be dead!

There's some good banter at the Haikuicide and Limerick threads for all brows (high, middle or low). Just because, I've started a Sonnets thread as well (I need to bump it, but it's been like that this past week). I know little about them, but working within a form interests me.

Anyway, just felt compelled to respond. See you around.

Rob

Hey Rob. Good to see you around. Poetry isn't dead, and never will be. It's like the eternal coming out of the shell format. Give a tortured soul a pen and paper, and there will be a poet.

That may sound kind of cynical, but it's actually a reality. As long as people are tormented, there will be poets, and I think we can count on enough new poets springing up. The question is venue, and whether people will get together and do poetry.

I never tried the poetry thread, because it wasn't my thing. But one day, I just started reading, and saw brave souls spewing their guts on canvas, and I was hooked.

Confession, the AI thread was just too much for me to absorb. However, I always enjoyed William's oddball comments. He sees the world through a twisted glass, and although I don't see the same world the same way, I find some of his poetic comments very funny. In his other thread, I threw out the "Deep calls unto Deep" comment, which is essentially borrowed from Solomon. In a sense, I didn't take what he said as a joke, because honestly, if you've been there, you've been there. (feeling like a leafless tree, dried up and withered)
Deep people are simply drawn to deep people. And poetry is deep.

[aboyd]

Give a tortured soul a pen and paper, and there will be a poet.Maybe I'm just in a grumpy mood today, but if that's what qualifies as "poetry isn't dead" I think I'd rather it be dead.

I want more qualifications than "tortured soul." Perhaps "amazing skill with meter or rhyme" or "natural talent for original writing" or "extensive experience with poetic styles and awareness of the formal rules of poetry" or all three plus some.

Personally, I'd be willing to shoot a few of these tortured souls if it puts 'em out of their misery. But maybe I'm too close to this to be objective anymore. :)

-Tony

[poetinahat]

You're right: only properly trained and talented people should be allowed to express themselves. Isn't that what's meant by 'poetic licence'?

That'd be good: you can only write poetry if you already have extensive experience in writing poetry. Sorry, cummings, come back when you can capitalise. Sorry, John Lee Hooker, no more singing until you can rhyme. Sorry, Oscar Wilde, you're too miserable. This Reading Gaol thing is too much of a downer. Try again, but make it happy.

Shooting them? Is that funny?

Hey, looks like I'm in a grumpy mood too!

[poetinahat]

Yeah, me too Tony. I need someone who knows words and their place. Some tortured souls might be poets...but not all poets are tortured souls. And not all tortured souls are poets. Some are just depressing to be around. I like those who could lay down words in the right order...a poet is the master of his own language.

Not all poets have to be good. That doesn't make their pain less real. And you don't have to read it. Better yet, criticise!

I agree there's a lot of crap in the world. Allow me a banality, though: that's what feeds the roses. (Of course, you only go out of your way to smell the roses, but no one pretends otherwise.)

[William Haskins]

god dammit note: this was originally intended to be a short, wiseass response and grew into the goofiest, most misguided tripe ever to sully these boards. please don't read it.

i thought about just deleting it, but then i decided to leave it here, like people in alaska would hang a slaughtered wolf from the beams of their front porch, as a warning to the others.



poetry's cultural relevance depends on a readership outside of academia and fringe literary circles. but poetry requires a high level of mental engagement—it is quite simply read differently.

it's a meditation of sorts in that, when it works at its highest level, it often elicits a reflective, introspective state of mind. in other instances, it connects the reader to an emotional and intuitive perception of life, rather than the sensory, intellectualized experience of daily life.

this is why i think that, within the last 20 years, it's been dying a slow death.

now, a legitimate argument might be that people today read a lot. and this is true. but even a cursory glance of any bookstore reveals that people read for a) information (from cook books to political commentary) and b) for entertainment.

the men's bathroom at my local barnes and noble is bigger than the poetry section. throw in the women's bathroom (trust me, i've been in there...) and you can swallow up the classics section as well.

classics are largely relegated to high school sophomores and english majors. and what they share in common with poetry is that they are "literary"—most make broad use of literary devices that require a similar level of engagement as poetry.

now, before i get jumped on for condemning reading for entertainment, let me say: Not that there's anything wrong with that. But novels tend to be very external lately, and most people want to be transported to these fictional worlds to enjoy them, not to learn or think about deeper implications nested in them through literary parlor tricks.

as for why, i think it's simply a matter of human overstimulation. between cell phones, computers, 4,312 cable stations, a new movie every weekend... we live outside our minds nearly all time. our ability to internalize and abstract experience decays.

sometimes, when i'm driving to work (a rather lengthy commute), i'll watch people jabbering on their phones. and i think to myself, "you know, they're going to go straight to work and start talking to people, then they're going to meet the gang for drinks, then talk on their phones all the way home, and then turn on the tv..."

it's amazing to think that some of these people never have a five minute stretch in their day when they live inside their own heads. where they get to know themselves, or ponder a philosophical question, a consider the beauty of a flower.

so, anyway... i must report that i stand by my position (that poetry is, for all intents and purposes, dead).

if you read all of this, please get some professional help.

-william

[poetinahat]

I disagree with you, which I realise may amount to my signing my own death warrant as far as this community goes.

How is today's mobile phone-jabberer different from the illiterate serf of earlier times? Leading horses to water, casting pearls before swine: it's nothing new. Whether we're overstimulated or understimulated, most people will turn their minds primarily to practical matters. Whether it's to survive or to raise an already lofty standard of living, what's the difference in terms of literary appetite? I think the result is the same: a small proportion of people choosing to pay attention to literature such as poetry. And are novels really more external now than in earlier days?

Anyway, this won't be the first thread from which I've been ostracised today. I'm sorry to have contributed to the corruption of your thread, but I won't be deterred from reading your opinions and admiring your writing.

Over and out.

[William Haskins]

I disagree with you, which I realise may amount to my signing my own death warrant as far as this community goes.

jesus christ, dude. you're giving me way too much credit. nobody's going to rally to my side because i'm some big man on campus. my current approval rating is lower than bush's...

i don't know what's happened elsewhere but none of what i said was directed at you.

i would answer your post by saying that while there were, in fact, a majority of illiterate people until relatively recent times, there was an oral tradition that extends from the dawn of humanity and, whether it was religious allegory, scripture, beowulf or pecos bill, life was such that nights were quiet and campfires were warm and language was infused with poetry.

modern life, and its pace, has had significant psychological ramifications, not the least of which is a more practical and less reflective pattern of thinking.

anyway, this is only my perception, or theory if you like, but it's not based on some hatred of modern times or some wistful nostalgia for days gone by.

about the other stuff, fvck that. it's a messageboard.

gimme a kiss...

[robeiae]

I like your theory, since it is consistent with my own, to some extent.
modern life, and its pace, has had significant psychological ramifications, not the least of which is a more practical and less reflective pattern of thinking.
But it's a trade-off, don't you think? The campfire was that moment of community, that moment of delight, people used to depend on in an uncertain world. Poetic talent was cultivated for the thoughts and feelings it aroused (yes, I said aroused). In the modern world, delight is to be had at any moment and communal feelings are ephemeral, but the world is more certain. Which is better? Is either, or are they just different?

But still, there is room for poetry in the modern world; the room is just no longer at the top (more likely the basement, depending on where you live).

Never mind, it's still depressing...

Rob :)

[poetinahat]

i don't know what's happened elsewhere but none of what i said was directed at you.
Sorry -- I'm pretty self-centered. Retract previous knee-jerk.

about the other stuff, fvck that. it's a messageboard.

gimme a kiss...
Aw, just when I was building up a head of steam. Ya big lug.

[aboyd]

You're right: only properly trained and talented people should be allowed to express themselves.I never said that, nor did I intend to imply it.

That'd be good: you can only write poetry if you already have extensive experience in writing poetry.I never said that, nor did I intend to imply it.

Sorry, cummings, come back when you can capitalise. Sorry, John Lee Hooker, no more singing until you can rhyme. Sorry, Oscar Wilde, you're too miserable. This Reading Gaol thing is too much of a downer. Try again, but make it happy.I never said any of that, nor did I intend to suggest it. See previous posts in this thread for a discussion of the difference between a master who learns the fundamentals and knows when to break the rules versus a sloppy writer who uses "it's poetry" as an excuse to avoid learning anything at all.


Shooting them? Is that funny?It amused me.

So it appears that after clearing up all this misunderstanding, we have no disagreement at all.

-Tony

[poetinahat]

Ah, I find myself in another violent agreement. Time for a look in the mirror. Thanks for responding so civilly!

I'll attempt to explain my comments to you in a PM.

[Nateskate]

Maybe I'm just in a grumpy mood today, but if that's what qualifies as "poetry isn't dead" I think I'd rather it be dead.

I want more qualifications than "tortured soul." Perhaps "amazing skill with meter or rhyme" or "natural talent for original writing" or "extensive experience with poetic styles and awareness of the formal rules of poetry" or all three plus some.

Personally, I'd be willing to shoot a few of these tortured souls if it puts 'em out of their misery. But maybe I'm too close to this to be objective anymore. :)

-Tony

The good news is that it doesn't take "Perpetual Torture". And it's all in perspective. If you haven't lost a love, then maybe you never found love. Poetry doesn't have to come from a negative place, but it generally comes from an emotional place. So, if you have someone who breaths in life so deeply they cannot contain it, you also get a poet.

A story is a bunch of voices. In poetry you are seeing through one pair of eyes, your own, or someone elses, but in such a way that you are attempting to convey something with passion.

[Nateskate]

William, I have read a number of books written by people from different countries and different ages. You rarely have shallow thinkers before the industrial age.

One of the reasons I think this is true, without the distractions, espectially "Techno" distractions, people took time to think and meditate. And secondly, without all the entertainment options, people were forced to converse. This is where ideas are birthed and become refined.

I'm convinced that too much electronic stimulation (Visual/Sound) is like too much cold on the body; it numbs.

However, there are poets. And maybe the format is changing, with people looking for immediate gratification, and blogging instead of publishing.

[aboyd]

So, if you have someone who breaths in life so deeply they cannot contain it, you also get a poet.Hmm, no, that's the part I don't buy. When I embrace that line of thinking, I get depressingly bad results. Once bitten, twice shy.

I think that someone who breathes in life so deeply that they cannot contain it is simply someone who cannot contain it. How they express that, totally up for debate. Someone who expresses his/her deeply felt emotion by writing schlock that betrays a full ignorance of the language... is writing schlock. They can call it poetry, but I would submit that the overriding classification should be schlock.

EDIT: Aaaaand... someone who expresses his/her deeply felt emotion by painting... is painting. They can call it poetry, but I would submit that the overriding classification should be painting. Aaaannd.... I can post a poem about flowers in the sci-fi forum and call it a novel, but that doesn't make it a sci-fi novel. There are norms, customs, commonly accepted standards that make something fall into one category or another. Poetry has these too, so the bar is a little higher than "be passionate." At least, that's the point I'm putting forward. And I'll admit I'm depressed to see that many people think the bar should be even lower.

I believe it's no different from any craft. I can grab a hammer, nail some boards together, and call myself a carpenter. But I'm not. It might hurt my ego if someone said "actually, you're just a guy who pounds nails at random," but that wouldn't change the truth. If someone gave me the blueprints for a porch and said, "build that, carpenter" and I couldn't read the blueprints, that's quite telling.

I would submit that 90% of the people out there who breathe life so deeply that they must put pen to paper are actually journaling. They're not writing poetry, they're writing diary entries.

I'm just not ready to concede poetry to the "it's whatever you want it to be" crowd.

-Tony

[robeiae]

William, I have read a number of books written by people from different countries and different ages. You rarely have shallow thinkers before the industrial age.
You mean you rarely have written works by shallow thinkers? Certainly, there have always been shallow thinkers and non-thinkers throughout history.

But really, there were plenty of shallow thinkers who took pen to paper before the industrial age. It's just that no one saw any reason to save their efforts for posterity!

However, I don't disagree with the general gist of your statements...

Rob :)

[robeiae]

I believe it's no different from any craft. I can grab a hammer, nail some boards together, and call myself a carpenter. But I'm not. It might hurt my ego if someone said "actually, you're just a guy who pounds nails at random," but that wouldn't change the truth. If someone gave me the blueprints for a porch and said, "build that, carpenter" and I couldn't read the blueprints, that's quite telling...I'm just not ready to concede poetry to the "it's whatever you want it to be" crowd.

-Tony
Just to play devil's ad for a moment...you can make a table and not be a carpenter; you can plant a flower and not be a gardener; you can even do an experiment and not be a scientist. Can you right a poem and not be a poet? Is this a question of occupational designations, or one of talent?

Moreover, to what end must talent lead to allow such classifications? If I write one really great poem, and everything else I write is crap, am I a poet? Compare that to someone who writes tons of so-so poetry; who is the "better" poet? The same is true for crafts like carpentry. I would never call myself a carpenter, but I have made several items that I believe are of excellent quality; certainly of higher quality than similar items I have seen that were professionally made. Am I a "better" carpenter by virtue of a single production, even though I lack many of the skills possessed by those who fashioned the lesser quality products?

Finally, who gets to decide?

Rob :)

[pconsidine]

You're right: only properly trained and talented people should be allowed to express themselves. Isn't that what's meant by 'poetic licence'?

I know you were being tongue-in-cheek with this, but there's a germ of truth here. There's a vast difference between simple self-expression and the dissemination of that expression to the masses. Everyone should express themselves through whatever medium they see fit. However, not everyone's self-expression should be seen by other people. The value should be in the act of expressing one's self, not the reception of that expression by other people.

At least that's how I see it.

[Nateskate]

Okay, I may not know where you are coming from, so if I'm misunderstanding you, feel free to let me know.

It sounds like you are saying poetry is a calulated formula. Some people get it, others don't.

I do agree it is like any craft, as you say. But not everyone who swings a hammer is a carpenter. Not every carpenter is a finish carpenter. Not every finish carpenter is an artist. Some are. Some just know how to saw.

Did you ever hear the phrase, "Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks?"

In my mind poetry is an expression, and if someone is speaking their mind, having no substance there, that will show. But more often, you'll see something, even if it's nothing more than cynicsm, and a hatred for poetry as a craft.
Anger, envy, joy, hatred, love, praise are passions. Some negative, some positive, and I think most people enjoy peotry as an honest expression. Anything less than an honest expression may be possible. Their only motivation may be to impress someone or get a grade?

However, as an artform, I don't believe they always have to feel everything they write, but they have to at least understand it, or appreciate it.

On one hand, it sounds like you imply "No depth of soul needed, just talent, it's a craft, and there are many posers who don't measure up to the standards of good poetry. Well, you can have heart without talent. But to me, that is better then talent and no heart."

If there is no passion behind it, but only a clever computer like mind who gets "it", whatever "the poetry it" is, what's the motivation for writing in the first place? I can't imagine someone writing just to prove the point they can do it better than someone else, cold, calulated with no feeling. To me that is akin to faking an orgasm. Louder doesn't mean better. And why would someone want to fake it anyway, when they can have a real one?

I just don't understand poetry as you do. Or am I not getting your point?

[Nateskate]

You mean you rarely have written works by shallow thinkers? Certainly, there have always been shallow thinkers and non-thinkers throughout history.

But really, there were plenty of shallow thinkers who took pen to paper before the industrial age. It's just that no one saw any reason to save their efforts for posterity!

However, I don't disagree with the general gist of your statements...

Rob :)

Rob, you'd be surprised what kind of books I've read. Reading for entertainment is rather new to me. I've read quite a number of books from People who were in the death camps in Germany, and political prisoners in Russia and China. But of the books of yesteryear, you are right, not all of them were serious. However, I tended to read more serious works any way.

So, perhaps I'm just comparing the thinkers of yesterday and of other cultures with the thinkers of today. Blame it on my weird tastes, and trying to understand humanity.

[aboyd]

Can you right a poem and not be a poet?I think they're just titles like any other -- they have commonly accepted criteria attached to them that make them qualify, or not. So, sure. I think it's just whether you decide the label fits. In fact...

If I write one really great poem, and everything else I write is crap, am I a poet?...this is probably a case where the author isn't far enough along to call himself a poet. But if you knew this about yourself -- if you referred to your own work as "one really great poem, and everything else is crap" -- then I'd at least be far far more willing to indulge you in the "poet" title. But I get weary of people who don't know what a stanza is insisting that everything they do is poetry.

Do you know what I mean? Imagine you were a race car driver, and everyone you met said, "Yeah, I have a car, so I'm a race car driver too!" At a certain point, you might want to shout out (or scrawl on a big sign) "Becoming a race car driver took training! Driving a mini-van does not mean you can take a corner at 200 miles an hour!"

Am I a "better" carpenter by virtue of a single production, even though I lack many of the skills possessed by those who fashioned the lesser quality products?I don't know, but it sure lends you credence were you to call yourself one. Bang out a few top-quality carpentry projects, and I may inclined to call you a carpenter, even if you can't read blueprints. You know what I mean? I have a bar for what qualifies, but in my mind it's malleable. With a certain level of competence, I'll let go of the steering wheel and trust a person can find whatever destination we're going for. I do that when I'm looking for a handyman, a plumber, a lawyer, a book of poetry, etc.

Finally, who gets to decide?Well, I think if the poet is keeping her poetry to herself, then she can decide whatever she wants about it. But the second that poem is passed to others, I think the poet has opened herself up to outside judgement. As one of those outsiders, I'm just saying that I want to resist the drive to lower the bar. I want to keep some criteria for what constitutes a poem.

If someone were to say to me "I'm passionate," I would probably reply, "uh, no, I've been burned before by making that the sole criteria." If that person came back and said, "I'm passionate, I've read a lot of different styles of poetry, and oh yeah, I spellchecked everything" I would probably pull up a stool and say, "let's read your poems!"

-Tony

[William Haskins]

But the second that poem is passed to others, I think the poet has opened herself up to outside judgement.

i think herein lies the crux of the issue.

as i've mentioned before i believe that the function of a poem goes beyond the simple expression of ideas or feelings committed to paper. it depends on establishing a connection with at least one other person. it's a form of communication. that's not to say it can't be a cathartic exercise in solitude, but then it's like the tree falling in the woods with no one there to hear it.

[aboyd]

It sounds like you are saying poetry is a calulated formula.Not quite -- that makes it sound like computers would make excellent poets. I don't think "what makes a poem" is rigidly defined, but I do think there are a few fundamentals that really help sway me in that direction.

For example, on my own site, I have one person in particular who has posted long paragraphs of text in the poetry forum. The "poems" do not have line breaks, do not have stanzas, do not have meter, do not rhyme, do not have even a melodic tone when read aloud, and do not appear to be "the best words in the best order." So do you see what I mean? It's not hitting any bar, so I have a hard time getting past the classification, much less getting into the details of implementation.

On one hand, it sounds like you imply "No depth of soul needed, just talent, it's a craft, and there are many posers who don't measure up to the standards of good poetry. Well, you can have heart without talent. But to me, that is better then talent and no heart."You put quotes around a whole lot of text there. Are you suggesting that I implied all of that, or was some of it supposed to be your response?

In any case, regardless of whether those words were supposed to be in your mouth or mine, I don't agree with the sentiment. It's a false dilemma. The options are not limited to "heart without talent" and "talent without heart." There are at least two others, "no heart and no talent" and "talent and heart." For me, of those four options, I would say they all lead to dreck, except for "talent and heart." I personally admire another variation, "no talent, lots of heart, lots of research, lots of training." In other words, I know quite a few poets who have no natural ability with poetry, but they doggedly learned the craft, and brought up their writing in the process.

If there is no passion behind it, but only a clever computer like mind who gets "it", whatever "the poetry it" is, what's the motivation for writing in the first place?I don't know. I'm not proposing such a thing.

To me that is akin to faking an orgasm. Louder doesn't mean better. And why would someone want to fake it anyway, when they can have a real one?But see, the reader isn't having the orgasm, they're just watching the writer have an orgasm. So it really matters how well that writer can express the orgasm. Someone who has an orgasm and expresses it with this...

ow wow oh it changing my life i think i found g-ospt...just isn't doing anything for me. I've got to set the bar higher -- fewer typos, some kind of structure, less sloppiness, more inventiveness. For example, and just to prove that I'm not terribly rigid, I think E. E. Cummings wrote a great and clever sex poem (http://www.americanpoems.com/poets/eecummings/331) that gets me charged when I read it.

-Tony

[JAlpha]

we live in the dark ages.

When you said, "poetry is dead", were you referring to . . .

a. amateur poetry

b. commercial poetry (like the kind published in mainstream magazines)

c. poetry that is anthologized by the literary gatekeepers

d. all of the above

or . . .

e. none of the above

Just curious :Shrug:

[William Haskins]

poetry is dead.

the scope of the statement is self-evident.

[JAlpha]

poetry is dead.

the scope of the statement is self-evident.

Now I get it, :Smack: The reason you believe poetry is dead, is because

you want to. The truth is self-evident.

[William Haskins]

yes, that's what i want.

[JAlpha]

yes, that's what i want.

Then you shall have it http://www.thepetsforums.com/forums/images/smilies/smiliesII/velho.gif
Poetry is officially dead, because you said so. Works for me :Hail:

[William Haskins]

i think even a casual reading of this thread will show my thoughts, from readership, to writing, to its place in the public arena.

have you read the thread, or did you just jump in to snipe?

[JAlpha]

Yes, I read the whole thread, and it seemed too broad a statement to suggest All "poetry is dead," and I did try to get you to narrow your "scope".

I happen to agree with you that "some" poetry is dead, but other forms of poetry, the amateur variety, is on the rise, as a means of self-identity. You didn't leave me much latitude with your "self-evident" response. For the record, I don't snipe--I play :) .

[aboyd]

i believe that the function of a poem goes beyond the simple expression of ideas or feelings committed to paper. it depends on establishing a connection with at least one other person. it's a form of communication.Yeah, see, you and I are saying the same thing, but it took me 20 paragraphs and a lot of rambling. It took you 3 sentences.

I'll go find a pump and see if I can deflate my windbag. :)

-Tony

[William Haskins]

okay then.

i won't comment on the "amateur" issue because, quite frankly, i don't concern myself with commerce as it relates to poetry.

but poetry's value being reduced to a "means of self-identity" doesn't exactly make me want to do back flips...

[William Haskins]

I'll go find a pump and see if I can deflate my windbag.

don't you dare, sir. extending your thoughts gives way to important nuance.

[JAlpha]

okay then.
i won't comment on the "amateur" issue because, quite frankly, i don't concern myself with commerce as it relates to poetry....

Ok, so help me out here . . . you weren't commenting on "amateur" poetry when you said, "poetry is dead." Correct?

And you don't concern yourself with commerce as it relates to poetry. So, does that mean that you were referring to literary poetry, when you said, "poetry" is dead?


but poetry's value being reduced to a "means of self-identity" doesn't exactly make me want to do back flips

Exactly. I couldn't agree with you more. I've been watching the growing movement of what I like to call "outsider" poetry (as in "outsider" or "naive" art when the terms are applied to visual arts), and I'm not doing back flips over the concept either. It's just something I became fascinated with as a social movement, every since I read Mona Van Duyn's address to the Library of Congress as U.S. Poet Laureate in 1993. http://www.english.uiuc.edu/maps/poets/s_z/van%20duyn/popular.htm

I was just interested in your opinion. Wondering if you "truly" thought that poetry was dead, how do you feel about the growing number of "outsider" poets filling the vacuum? Truly if poetry is dead, I would think it would have created a tremendous vacuum--the deafening swish of our brains being sucked out of our heads through our eyes and ears!

See, not sniping at all, just trying to get you to expand your definition of poetry, so I could determine whether or not we agree with the concept that not all poems, poets or poetry are equal.

That said . . . What's dead and what's alive?

[pconsidine]

Consider this, Alpha:

The rise of "outsider" poetry is the death of poetry as a studied and cultivated art form.

Does that help you any?

[JAlpha]

Consider this, Alpha:

The rise of "outsider" poetry is the death of poetry as a studied and cultivated art form.

Does that help you any?


Yep! Helps a lot. I've decided to write an essay based on the theme that

poetry has been dying its whole life. I'm taking the side of Donald Hall--the

doomsayers are dead wrong--as per his essay at the following link.

http://www.poets.org/viewmedia.php/prmMID/16222


Hall's essay is from 1989, and I think there is plenty new fuel for a refreshed

version. Plus, there appears to still be a large audience for the topic, based

on the over 2,300 hits William's thread has gathered just since the 17th of

June. :idea:


Besides, I detect several sour notes on this thread, including my own, so I'm

heading off to do what I do best--make lemonade!

[Nateskate]

Not quite -- that makes it sound like computers would make excellent poets. I don't think "what makes a poem" is rigidly defined, but I do think there are a few fundamentals that really help sway me in that direction.

For example, on my own site, I have one person in particular who has posted long paragraphs of text in the poetry forum. The "poems" do not have line breaks, do not have stanzas, do not have meter, do not rhyme, do not have even a melodic tone when read aloud, and do not appear to be "the best words in the best order." So do you see what I mean? It's not hitting any bar, so I have a hard time getting past the classification, much less getting into the details of implementation.

You put quotes around a whole lot of text there. Are you suggesting that I implied all of that, or was some of it supposed to be your response?

In any case, regardless of whether those words were supposed to be in your mouth or mine, I don't agree with the sentiment. It's a false dilemma. The options are not limited to "heart without talent" and "talent without heart." There are at least two others, "no heart and no talent" and "talent and heart." For me, of those four options, I would say they all lead to dreck, except for "talent and heart." I personally admire another variation, "no talent, lots of heart, lots of research, lots of training." In other words, I know quite a few poets who have no natural ability with poetry, but they doggedly learned the craft, and brought up their writing in the process.

I don't know. I'm not proposing such a thing.

But see, the reader isn't having the orgasm, they're just watching the writer have an orgasm. So it really matters how well that writer can express the orgasm. Someone who has an orgasm and expresses it with this...

...just isn't doing anything for me. I've got to set the bar higher -- fewer typos, some kind of structure, less sloppiness, more inventiveness. For example, and just to prove that I'm not terribly rigid, I think E. E. Cummings wrote a great and clever sex poem (http://www.americanpoems.com/poets/eecummings/331) that gets me charged when I read it.

-Tony

Okay, first off, let me say I probably misunderstood you. You have a high standard, and probably far higher than I'd measure up to. Nonetheless, I understand, because I feel the same way about people who play guitars that are out of tune and can't tell they are out of tune. If they are a good player, why not find a great sound?

As a basketball player, I always hated playing competative basketball with guys who didn't care if we won or not. I'm not saying that's healthy, but when you grew up playing on ghetto courts, you don't mess around. If you lost a game on those courts, you might not get a chance to play again that day, because there might be fifty guys or more sitting on the sidelines, waiting to play the winner.

Yet, in tennis, because I stunk, nothing mattered. Anyone with a half decent serve could beat me. So, my standards are relative, and I guess I could drive someone crazy as a poet.

In a sense, my attempt at poetry is like my tennis. I feel I have nothing but honesty and feelings, not polished skill. However, I could do rhyme all day long, because it's like writing songs. That's the one kind of poetry I might be able to at least pretend to know what I'm doing.

But I've tried not doing rhyme on the poetry thread, except in the Cat in the Hat type address to William. I'm trying to grow by doing what I'm not comfortable doing.

However, in terms of meter, I'll say this; because I've structured songs before, what I write on the paper may not translate to the reader, unless it is read outloud. Some things might be lost in translation, because performed poetry is different than written, insofar as there can be a theater type dynamic.

On torment: In my area, I've seen poetry slams, and most of the poets tend to fall into the "outsider" category, round pegs in a square-hole world. Of the ones I know personally, all of them have gone through major pain at some point in their lives. So, I tend to know poets who fit the "Tormented Poet" picture, and in fact, these are the majority of poets I know.

So, perhaps my stereotype is based on a limited experience.

[Nateskate]

okay then.

i won't comment on the "amateur" issue because, quite frankly, i don't concern myself with commerce as it relates to poetry.

but poetry's value being reduced to a "means of self-identity" doesn't exactly make me want to do back flips...

I don't see it as that. I see people who are good at poetry, and bad at poetry, and the difference is obviously talent. It's like good songs and bad songs, you can tell the difference.

Again, we may not be talking about the same thing. I'm picturing the Martin Crane vs Frazier Crane opinion about what constitutes good food. To a degree, if someone finds it edible, it's food. But some people have a palate for recipes the common man can't appreciate. I tend to be much more Martin Crane as far as poetry goes, not because I understand great poetry, but because I don't think I do have the ability to comprehend great poetry.

I see it kind of like this, the more of a perfectionist you are about any art, the harder it is to enjoy common.

[Nateskate]

I see people who are good at poetry, and bad at poetry, and the difference is obviously talent.

But is the difference between what you see as good poetry and bad poetry somewhat like the difference between good songs and bad songs. Or is it the difference between sophisticated songs and sing-a-long songs?

At one time I thought that those who understood music were the ones who were best at differentiating between good music and bad music. However, the more I've understood this, musician's tastes are often altered by the fact that something is easy for them to duplicate. So they appreciate people who are the hardest for them to duplicate- "wow, that was hard to play, and difficult to figure out..." You'll find there are musician's musicians, because only musicians can fully understand the complexity of what they are doing. And degree of difficulty plays into their appraisal of music.

But there are "fan" musicians who consistently play something most fans would like. You can tell the difference. A musician's musician plays for the musician and not the large crowd. What he plays isn't comprehended by the average fan. In fact, fans prefer the less complex music.

I'm picturing the Martin Crane vs Frazier Crane opinion about what constitutes good food. To a degree, if someone finds it edible, it's food. But some people have a palate for recipes the common man can't appreciate. I tend to be much more Martin Crane as far as poetry goes, not because I understand great poetry, but because I don't think I have the ability to comprehend great poetry.

I see it kind of like this, the more of a perfectionist you are about any art, the harder it is to enjoy what is common. But it's kind of like Mars Hill Philosophy. Is the most brilliant Philosophy the thoughts that only the few can understand or the thoughts that even a child can grasp? Is wisdom speaking words beyond comprehension, or is it speaking words easily understood, because wisdom breaks things down to the simplest form?

I no longer see the musician's musician as the superior talent. He just does something different than the fan's musician. They are connecting with different people for different reasons. Is this the same with poetry?

[aboyd]

Is wisdom speaking words beyond comprehension, or is it speaking words easily understood, because wisdom breaks things down to the simplest form?I think the wisest poets are the ones that successfully convey deep meaning and insight, however they manage to do it. Unfortunately, that usually requires a blend of invention and accessible language. That's hard. Straddle that fence and you can end up a mess. Billy Collins does an OK job of it, although a lot of poets think he's too common-man. But that's the whole issue of poets writing for poets, again.

-Tony

[Nateskate]

I think the wisest poets are the ones that successfully convey deep meaning and insight, however they manage to do it. Unfortunately, that usually requires a blend of invention and accessible language. That's hard. Straddle that fence and you can end up a mess. Billy Collins does an OK job of it, although a lot of poets think he's too common-man. But that's the whole issue of poets writing for poets, again.

-Tony

I agree with your answer. I'm not saying there is no wisdom above the masses. There is, and in general, it's as high as a person wants to climb. But I think wisdom wants to be understood, and says things at the level people are at, and at least tries to become accessible.

Now, that doesn't mean dumbing down either. I think wisdom will come to wherever people are listening and speak the language they are most comfortable with.

I've always appreciated sophisticated people who never seem pretentious, and in fact, make people comfortable.

I made up a word once, "Profoundism". It is a word to describe the Hollywood stereotypical jargon placed in the mouths of their versions of wise men. But it is also good to describe those who wanted to baffle people into thinking they have some profound wisdom of the ages. If you were around in the late sixties and early seventies, every street corner Guru resorted to either stone cold silence, "I am so far above you, you can never understand my wisdom fool..." or the spacey LSD trip like sayings that really had no meaning.

In fact, to sound most profound, you have to come off with something that has absolutely no meaning. It has to sound abstract because you want them to think you've obtained something far above the reach of the masses.

And so all of the students seeking wisdom, would gather around the master, who would say something like, "The waves of the amber sun are fluid like the milk pouring from the happy goat. When you are at one with the wave you shall understand wisdom."

So, if you have a really abstract mind, you can make sense of madness, and although it didn't mean anything, you'd have students saying, "Yes, now I see...Master...I must learn to be content..." And he'd give the nodding wink of approval.

Now, the others wouldn't admit they didn't get it, because they didn't want to look too stupid.

[kdnxdr]

Poetry is Dead = Sex is Dead

Now, I can relate.

Sometimes, this is a certainty. I'm sure a universal feeling. And, sex has always been dying and is a death process. However, even though we try (oh, the myriad of ways), try again to capture it's quinessecential essence, we often end up a lemming.

But, it has so many rewards to try.

One thought I keep to guide me: Love and sex take seperate paths, but when they walk together, the heights and depths are never forgotten.

Love dismantles the machine.

[robeiae]

*sigh*

What a great thread.

Rob :)

[mkcbunny]

I think truly magnificent work speaks to both the art specialist and the "common man." A combination of elegance and simplicity.

[maestrowork]

Let the dead lie.

[aboyd]

Awww, but it brings us all back together. :hi:

-Tony

[William Haskins]

just wanted to welcome this thread to its new home in the poetry forum.

those who've participated in it thus far know it for the mess it is; those who are new to it... enjoy.

[aspier]

Ok, so now I know this ... wait, I just to finish the poem I'm busy with, ok? 'll be back 'cause this is heavey. Death of poetry and so.

[kdnxdr]

Shouldn't there be some responsibility of the ones who are true poets and excel at the art of poetry to maintain the perfection of poetry as a standard that keeps poetry alive and gives the novice, the inept something to strive for, to achieve?

If only the perfect has a right to existence, then what becomes to the imperfect?

If I sing a song with inept ability, is all value of the song or my singing of it, lost?

If there is a place for the imperfect, a value for it's existence, then doesn't human life have worth? I've yet, and doubt I ever will, meet a human that does anything perfectly.

And, if all is perfect, then how could anything ever consider the need for perfection.

Don't we work puzzles, our own self, not because the puzzle needs to be worked but because we have a need to see if we can, in fact, work the puzzle, and that is the beauty of the puzzle, to challenge each person's ability to discover it's secrets?

If only the perfect can write poetry, I am a dead poet, but poetry lives through their perfection. It is only I who am dead.

[William Haskins]

personally, i encourage a big tent. not all of it will appeal to me, but i can recognize its value.

your perception will likely vary. as will the next person's. and the next's.

it's not about imperfect vs. perfect. if any poet attained perfection, why pick up a pen ever again?

a poem competes only against its potential, in my estimation.

one should never have to block out a sour note in a piece of music, or squint to make out the true intent of a painting.

[kdnxdr]

but I block out lots of sour notes and I squint at alot of paintings, so I can hear the beauty that's imbeded in the ugly.

every human effort is a blending of the sacred and the profane.

[William Haskins]

the sacred alternating with the profane, i can handle. i think we may be talking on different tracks with the painting and music analogies.

[kdnxdr]

Life and human endeavors, including the arts of expression, should be an apprenticeship.

To say that poetry is dead is to say that it cannot be passed any longer as there is no one to "catch it".

[brokenfingers]

Hmmmmm... I think maybe it should be "Poetry as we know it is dead" - but I feel that is not true as well, or at least not wholly so.

Poetry is evolving, as all things do - but do we like what we are seeing it become?

[William Haskins]

actually i backed off the "dead" thing pretty early on.

http://absolutewrite.com/forums/showpost.php?p=228513&postcount=34

it seems like you're framing this as me having something against novice work or work that represents a fairly early stage of a poet's evolution. i'm not.

i'm arguing that a) poetry is at a low point in its history since the renaissance, and b) that a lowering of the bar as to what constitutes poetry has contributed to this (along with a host of other things, most of them related to pop culture and post-modern lifestyles).

[Perks]

I may be too basic and I'm definitely ignorant on the nuances of poetic disciplines and history, but I'll go out on a limb and say that every therapy session broken into little chunks of cryptic words with erratic puncuation is not poetry.

For visual, auditory and written expression to be considered art, in my opinion, there must be a foundation of talent. Otherwise there's nothing worth pausing in your routine to admire and my mailman is just as worthy a poet as was Edgar Allen Poe.

Of course a 'big tent' has to be pitched to satiate the many appetites and what satisfies me may leave others cold. There's room for so many styles. But sour notes spoil music and suggest that the singer should soothe his longing in the shower and work to develop something that he actually possesses an aptitude for. And a painting that you can't figure which way to mount to the wall may be better suited to a career as a throw rug. There is an Emperor's New Clothes element to the you-can-be-anything-you-set-your-mind-to mentality that I think cuts the legs out from under true admirable ability.

[Unique]

Poetry is evolving, as all things do - but do we like what we are seeing it become?

I look at it as chocolate/strawberry/vanilla vs. Baskin-Robbins 31 Flavors.

I like the fact that poetry doesn't have to be one certain way or another in order to count.

As most people do, I have favorite styles and styles that I don't like at all. And just like when I go to B-R, I don't choose the styles I don't like. It doesn't mean it isn't ice cream, it just means I don't care for those flavors. But others do.

So, que sera sera...

[poetinahat]

You're my kind of Philistine, Perks.

I may be too basic and I'm definitely ignorant on the nuances of poetic disciplines and history, but I'll go out on a limb and say that every therapy session broken into little chunks of cryptic words with erratic puncuation is not poetry.

For visual, auditory and written expression to be considered art, in my opinion, there must be a foundation of talent. Otherwise there's nothing worth pausing in your routine to admire and my mailman is just as wothy a poet as was Edgar Allen Poe.

Of course a 'big tent' has to be pitched to satiate the many appetites and what satifies me may leave others cold. There's room for so many styles. But sour notes spoil music and suggest that the singer should soothe his longing in the shower and work to develop something that he actually possesses an aptitude for. And a painting that you can't figure which way to mount to the wall may be better suited to a career as a throw rug. There is an Emperor's New Clothes element to the you-can-be-anything-you-set-your-mind-to mentality that I think cuts the legs out from under true admirable ability.

[William Haskins]

two years later kick.

[Angelinity]

this born before me time.

wow, two years on, is poetry deader? at least moribund. who but poets and would-be poets (if only...) still read poetry?

[William Haskins]

what reminded me of it is this:

http://authorscoop.com/?p=59

[Ken]

when The Who declared that Rock was dead I grieved.
So too when Neitzche declared God dead.
But now, with this latest revelation about Poetry, I'm truly heart-broken...

:cry:

[William Haskins]

sometimes (and now i know why)
they say one should let sleeping dogs lie...

[aboyd]

Just when I thought that I was out, they pull me back in!

[William Haskins]

hey!

how are you?

[Shweta]

I'm glad you brought this back to life, Haskins. It were before my time too.

I don't know what to think on this. On the one hand, my intuition says you're right. Poetry seems like something that most people roll their eyes over. So if there isn't enough cultural momentum for people to be given context for poems, and a way to understand them outside painful english classes, would that lead to the prevalent feeling that it's "just pretention"? It's so easy to think that about any art we don't get the context for. Add that to the notion that anything goes, so that most of the poetry out there is just pretention, and ... ick.

It also makes me question anything I write, to the point where I'm scared to share it here. Am I just doing anything-goes pretention?

But it also seems to me that every generation thinks the next one is a victim of sloth and sloppy thinking. And I'm not sure, from what little history I understand, that true love of poetry (as opposed to claiming adoration of popular poets) has ever been more than a subculture. Are we the generation that's right? Every group seems to think that. So I maintain hope that my intuitions are wrong.

And I just.. don't know.

I look at it as chocolate/strawberry/vanilla vs. Baskin-Robbins 31 Flavors.

I can totally get behind this (though I read that as Haskins-Robbins at first... :Wha:) but I guess the question is, are we also claiming that colored chalk is ice cream now?

[JBI]

Actually, there are two excellent (and even more than two) books on the subject. The first one, a canonical work of literature, Turgenev's Fathers and Sons details this in an examination of the trends of thoughts and reactionary psychology, philosophy, and art surrounding his contemporary time in tsarist Russia. The second, Harold Bloom's Anxiety of Influence actually creates a form of literary criticism out of the concept that the poet must find fault within his predessesor as a means of escaping being unauthentic, and therefore will destroy the perceived view of the "master" in favor of the new. This of course all seems rooted in Nietzschean philosophy, with the concept of the Ubermench, and the setting the bar by means of an Ubermench to create a new train of thought. Indeed, Marcel Proust in his famous novel In Search of Lost Time argued that all poetic movements eventually get blended into a larger movement by time period, rather than reactionary thought, since they all are being drawn chronologically. The publication of such volumes as the Norton Anthology of Postmodern Poetry seem to echo this thought, with the mixing of poets as different as Jayne Cortez and Alan Ginsberg.

[Shweta]

Actually, there are two excellent (and even more than two) books on the subject.

That's very cool information, Jon. I'll look those up. Thanks.
But what do you think about it? :)

[JBI]

It's inevitable. If one is saying the same thing as the master, then they are inferior, since the master has said it first. If however, they destroy, or detract from what has been done before, they are more authentic, since they are offering something new that hasn't been done before.

The whole modernist poetry movement seems to be fueled by such notions. The ground work outlined by critics like Pound seems to be a direct retaliation to the Victorian poets, specifically Tennyson, and his American contemporary Longfellow, in addition to the Romantic poets, who went under turbulent attacks during the first half of the 20th century by poet-critics as renowned and well known as T. S. Eliot.

There also seems to me to be a catch. All poets, except the very early poets, and those stemming from the oral tradition, seem to be reacting, and yet idolizing something else. Pound was attacking poets left right and center, yet he, and many others, heavilly drew on antiquitas sources for inspiration. His range of allusion in his work seems to clear all poetry up until, and excluding Milton, in addition to strange western sources, especially Li Po, the famous Chinese poet, who he even learned to read in the original. The reverence to the poets of old, who "had it right before these fools meddled with it" seems to be an inherited trait amongst poetic disciplines.

Was Virgil's great epic not a direct retaliation against the influence of Homer, who he loved, yet had to overcome, as a means of securing the Roman tradition on par, or even higher, than the Greek tradition.

Even writers as excellent as Shakespeare seem dependent on these traits, which can be seen with his interior war with the influence of Marlowe, and the reverence of Chaucer.

It seems actually that all booms in literature seem to ride the wakes of large socio-political changes, and begin with attempts at a Renaissance, a new start, with the fallacious hope of this time having it right.

[Shweta]

It's inevitable.

Perhaps I am very stupid just now (have a headache, so it's likely), but after reading your post twice I can't tell what you're saying is inevitable. So clarification: do you mean poetry being dead, poets thinking poetry is dead, or something else?

[JBI]

It's inevitable that the poet will struggle with the anxieties of influence.

[Steppe]

My Favorite is this Johannes Bobrowski poem-" Windmill "

Light,
foaming light,
over the plain,steep,
mountain of radiance, monstrous
roaring,the storms fly
breathing lightning,the terrible wall
rises in the sky.

I came over the dunes
from the sea
to the treeless riverland,
shadowless,dreamless,I walked
with the reapers,the mill stood
stiff and old. Now with grey
sails it grips the air.
Silent it lifts itself above the land.

It flies off
with the herons,hugh
on the white sky. The gleaming eye
of winter watches wildly
in the distance.

Ice-bird heart,
build your nest
of fishbone
and fin in the hollow,
in the whispering blood.
Stay with the children of the plain,
daughters and sons,
stay with the small shadows
of songs and dances,
hold a November grass
against the snow.

[Shweta]

Steppe -- it's lovely, but I'm not making the connection to the rest of the thread. Is there a link to poetry being in trouble or the poet being anxious about influence, or something else I'm missing? Help me out here!

[Steppe]

Steppe -- it's lovely, but I'm not making the connection to the rest of the thread. Is there a link to poetry being in trouble or the poet being anxious about influence, or something else I'm missing? Help me out here!

Sorry SHweta. You are right.I'll post my thoughts later.

[Steppe]

Poetry may be having a hard time in some countries right now, but the poem will never die!
As you all know, the poem and poetry are not synonymous. The poem was there long before the poet and poetry ever showed up.
If a genie poped up and said, no more poems, would the poet still survive ? Yes! He/she would simply find another medium to apply the art of poetry to.
The poet is still very much alive and so is the art of poetry.The poem itself has been with us since the first man or woman looked at the moon at said "Ugh" and no genie will take it away! We have a right to it, and to try our hand at the poem.
Poetry is another matter.

But poetry might have difficulty with it's medium, from time to time.JMO.

[Medievalist]

JBI

Where on earth are you getting this ... stuff?

[Medievalist]

My Favorite is this Johannes Bobrowski poem-" Windmill "

Great poem, but it's sorta rude to post the whole thing when it's covered by copyright.

[Steppe]

Great poem, but it's sorta rude to post the whole thing when it's covered by copyright.

Well I am a little forum and internet illiterate so I'll take a lesson from this and won't do it again.

[Steppe]

JBI

Where on earth are you getting this ... stuff?

Are you refering to my post Med ? If so I did say it was just my oppinion.

[Steppe]

Sorry Med. I did not see the JBI attached.

[JBI]

JBI

Where on earth are you getting this ... stuff?
Observation, and reading.

[JBI]

JBI

Where on earth are you getting this ... stuff?
Also, why "stuff"? what have I said is false.

Edit, also I would like to point out that there is an incomplete epic poem, which I am sure you are familiar with, Hyperion by Keats, that seems to illustrate this sort of conflict between the titan Hyperion, and the Olympian Apollo who succeeds him.

Second edit, also, this site which has an excerpt from Bloom's book could be of help to understanding the formation of these ideas: http://prelectur.stanford.edu/lecturers/bloom/excerpts/anxiety.html#anticrit

[Medievalist]

Also, why "stuff"? what have I said is false.

To be blunt it's the sort of sweeping generalization I'd expect from a high school intro to lit class. It's naive to the point of being inaccurate since it relies on broad generalizations without a context -- and some of those generalizations are inaccurate.


Edit, also I would like to point out that there is an incomplete epic poem, which I am sure you are familiar with, Hyperion by Keats, that seems to illustrate this sort of conflict between the titan Hyperion, and the Olympian Apollo who succeeds him.

It's a standard literary theme, it's a topos in fact.

It's inevitable. If one is saying the same thing as the master, then they are inferior, since the master has said it first. If however, they destroy, or detract from what has been done before, they are more authentic, since they are offering something new that hasn't been done before.

The problem with this, aside from extreme naivete, is that poets do draw on what's gone before -- and for the first couple of thousand years, that was was a poet was supposed to do; there's a reason that "original" was primarily used as a literary slur for hundreds of years.

The whole modernist poetry movement seems to be fueled by such notions. The ground work outlined by critics like Pound seems to be a direct retaliation to the Victorian poets, specifically Tennyson, and his American contemporary Longfellow, in addition to the Romantic poets, who went under turbulent attacks during the first half of the 20th century by poet-critics as renowned and well known as T. S. Eliot.

This sounds very much like something in a half-witted intro to lit class -- one written by someone didn't actually read the poets themselves. Pound was reacting less to the Victorians, whom he didn't actually read, and far more to the Romantics -- from whom he cribbed, shamelessly. It's a lot of general assertions made without a context -- and they're sort of well, either inaccurte or obvious.

There also seems to me to be a catch. All poets, except the very early poets, and those stemming from the oral tradition, seem to be reacting, and yet idolizing something else. Pound was attacking poets left right and center, yet he, and many others, heavilly drew on antiquitas sources for inspiration. His range of allusion in his work seems to clear all poetry up until, and excluding Milton, in addition to strange western sources, especially Li Po, the famous Chinese poet, who he even learned to read in the original. The reverence to the poets of old, who "had it right before these fools meddled with it" seems to be an inherited trait amongst poetic disciplines.

This is less about "all poets," than it is about Pound, who, while an excellent poet was bat-shit crazy. The reference to "All poets, except the very early poets, and those stemming from the oral tradition, seem to be reacting, and yet idolizing something else" is just ...

Oral poets are more accurately called oral formulaic poets because they rely on verbal formulas, down to repeated catch phrases and constantly re-cycled lines. Poets have always, and still do, stand on the shoulders of those who have gone before.


Even writers as excellent as Shakespeare seem dependent on these traits, which can be seen with his interior war with the influence of Marlowe, and the reverence of Chaucer.

Dude, don't use all the prepositions up at once; save some for the rest of us.

It seems actually that all booms in literature seem to ride the wakes of large socio-political changes, and begin with attempts at a Renaissance, a new start, with the fallacious hope of this time having it right.

Err . . . you do know that the Renaissance poets didn't actually know that they were participating in a renaissance? And, despite the emphasis on "rebirth" in survey classes, while the turn to classical models was crucial, what made that return possible was the printing press -- which made original language and translated texts widely available and affordable -- and the emphasis on writing poetry and prose in vernacular languages.

[JBI]

I'm not sure where you are disagreeing with me. If anything it seems to agree with me, but say that I am generalizing. Of course I am generalizing, how could I not, and yet include everything that I desire to say within the limits of this thread. It is not as if a) everyone on this thread has read the same things, and b) everyone on this thread has the time to read a 10,000 page post detailing influence and originality in the history of literature, let alone the fact that I am simply unable to offer such a post. A little bit of generalization is of course in order.

Err . . . you do know that the Renaissance poets didn't actually know that they were participating in a renaissance? And, despite the emphasis on "rebirth" in survey classes, while the turn to classical models was crucial, what made that return possible was the printing press -- which made original language and translated texts widely available and affordable -- and the emphasis on writing poetry and prose in vernacular languages.


Which renaissance are you talking about, English or Italian? It would make it easier to answer if you specify. As for Italian, which is the easiest to answer, the notion that they didn't know that they were participating in a movement is highly irrelevant to the fact that they were. Of course the printing press was an essential instrument, but the artistic outburst was occurring regardless of it. It must be taken into account that literature was just one form of artistic output. The visible downpour of unique artworks in both the visual and musical fields seems to imply (to me at least) that something was going on. I was under the impression that Italics were more important than the press for the renaissance, but I guess we learn something every day.

[Medievalist]

Which renaissance are you talking about, English or Italian? It would make it easier to answer if you specify.

It doesn't make a whit of difference. It's true for both, though the English are typically a century or two behind.

Look; Boccaccio, Dante and Petrarch were shocking, shocking, when they began to write in Italian rather than scholastic Latin.

Chaucer wrote first in French, then in English.

Spenser made it a point to write in English -- even returning to a bad re-invention of the Southern/London dialect of Middle English -- as a way of saying "We are English, and these words are ours," just as Boccaccio, Dante and Petrarch, had done before him.

[MacAllister]

Second edit, also, this site which has an excerpt from Bloom's book could be of help to understanding the formation of these ideas: http://prelectur.stanford.edu/lecturers/bloom/excerpts/anxiety.html#anticritBWAHahahaha!!!

As a lit crit person, I gotta say, that explains EVERYTHING.

You've got to read real crit, JBI, if you plan to run with the big dogs. Harold Bloom really isn't on the cutting edge of theory, and hasn't been, for years.

Secondly, you're clearly badly misunderstanding what you've read.

This is going to be a lot better starting place. (http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&id=c4NDzZYiFCUC&dq=terry+eagleton&printsec=frontcover&source=web&ots=UNrw854Uu5&sig=5i035-N4eyzJuIExZGzdjWXCAiA)

[Ken]

like all fields, a bit of comraderie between fellow poets might help to get poetry alive and well again. Seasoned poets should help out those just starting off for instance and offer them encouragement and instruction. It is great to see this happening on AW, where those versed in a particular genre regularly reach out to novices and help them along their course.

[JBI]

It doesn't make a whit of difference. It's true for both, though the English are typically a century or two behind.

Look; Boccaccio, Dante and Petrarch were shocking, shocking, when they began to write in Italian rather than scholastic Latin.

Chaucer wrote first in French, then in English.

Spenser made it a point to write in English -- even returning to a bad re-invention of the Southern/London dialect of Middle English -- as a way of saying "We are English, and these words are ours," just as Boccaccio, Dante and Petrarch, had done before him.
That still leaves less answers, and no contradictions. The question that really should be looking for an answer is, "why did they decide to do this". What possessed the unprecedented to do what had not yet been done?

[Medievalist]

That still leaves less answers, and no contradictions. The question that really should be looking for an answer is, "why did they decide to do this". What possessed the unprecedented to do what had not yet been done?

Umm . .. I already said that. Right here:


Spenser made it a point to write in English -- even returning to a bad re-invention of the Southern/London dialect of Middle English -- as a way of saying "We are English, and these words are ours," just as Boccaccio, Dante and Petrarch, had done before him.

It's an indication of ethnic/national and linguistic pride.

Look, JBI, I'm going to be frank. You're a smart kid, but you'd do better to base your arguments on the texts of the poems themselves than attempting to rely on a critic that you don't really have the context to thoroughly understand because critics, like poets, stand on the shoulders of those who have gone before.

[Angelinity]

i have come to believe that poetry will survive. maybe not in written form, likely not in books as such... yet this brief moment of epiphany (i guess) set my heart at ease: poetry is not written to be read from a book, but to be recited and remembered long after -- in verse and rhyme perhaps, as simple or complex as one's imagination.

poetry will always be for the poets, i now see, and never will this change. it is poetry herself that shall change and morph to suit the times and the poets' tastes. as the world changes, poetry breeds timely new versions.

this makes me happy: there have and always will be poets out there. she'll make it.

[ddgryphon]

Just a little story:

Several years ago I sat in on an IT meeting in which our director announced: "Mac is a dead technology, so we aren't going to invest any more money in them." At the time I worked at a university where the creative groups relied heavily on Macs (Art, Theatre, Creative Writing, Music) and this was, to say the least, poorly received. Less than two years later he was eating crow--by the heaping spoonful.

As far as I can tell God is doing well, and some of the old gods are doing just as well if not better.

My moral--don't count anything dead that has the capacity to affect the way people live their lives. Poetry does this--even for those who don't know it does this until confronted with it.

I wouldn't ever consider it dead--hibernating perhaps? Unpopular, sure. Dead? I don't think so.

[Shweta]

"There's a big difference between mostly dead and all dead. Mostly dead is slightly alive. With all dead, well, with all dead there's usually only one thing you can do." :D

[Medievalist]

i have come to believe that poetry will survive. maybe not in written form, likely not in books as such... yet this brief moment of epiphany (i guess) set my heart at ease: poetry is not written to be read from a book, but to be recited and remembered long after -- in verse and rhyme perhaps, as simple or complex as one's imagination.

So much for song lyrics .. .

[Cthulhu]

There are 42 different definitions of the word dead (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dead). I would classify poetry as being none of them.

[Medievalist]

There are 42 different definitions of the word dead (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dead). I would classify poetry as being none of them.

Poetry is NOT dead.

It's pinin' for the fjords.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6Lq771TVm4

[Dichroic]

There's always been lots of shallow crappy poetry around. It's just that pre-Internet it didn't get seen as much. Pre-mass-education, say mid-1800s, it didn't get written down.

I recently had an experiece that pointed out to me just how nonuniversal literature was. It was in a Jane Austen discussion (because some classics *can* be read for pleasure!) and amid all the discussion of Lydia Bennet's elopment and how that could have ruined the lives of her sisters as well as herself, someone pointed out that for the great majority of Britons, the laboring class who weren't writing the books, pregnancy before marriage was more common than not. I think in that period, poetry was less common than more.

Sure, many more people knew rhymes and verses, but a lot of those would have been lyrics, folk songs. It's true there was a period of a hundred years or so when many kids, not just the upper class, were forced to memorize and recite poems in school, but I think that's a bit of a historical blip.

[Dommo]

I think poetry is just like any other art form. It goes in cycles of growth and decline.

Right now, I have to agree with Dichroic in that it's just that because "everyone" can put out poetry to be read, that the overall quality tends to be diluted a bit. However, the good poetry will still be in there. It's not really any different then what the internet has done for everything else.

As I've heard said "The best thing about the internet is that everyone has a voice, and the worst thing about the internet is that everyone has a voice."

[Angelinity]

So much for song lyrics .. .

well, when society as we know it finally goes poof -- as other equally-or-almost-as astute civilizations have done before ours -- and humanity may once again have only sticks and stones to build with... i'll take what i can get.

i suspect ancient stories and whatever history survived along the way as societies were born and destroyed, did so via oral communication from father to son, each generation embellishing a little at a time, adding rhyme, simile and metaphor, and at some point finally composing poetry.

[Medievalist]

Right now, I have to agree with Dichroic in that it's just that because "everyone" can put out poetry to be read, that the overall quality tends to be diluted a bit. However, the good poetry will still be in there. It's not really any different then what the internet has done for everything else.

Umm . .. no.

Look y'all think that poetry used to be better because you look at nicely edited poetry anthologies based on the canon.

Stuff that's been pre-selected by people like me.

Well, there's a lot more--a whole lot more, two or three times more--that y'all never see.

But I do. The stuff printed on broadsheets, the medieval and later "best sellers," in short, the crap.

You're comparing relatively unfiltered poetry with heavily filtered poetry from the past--not fair.

[Ken]

Stuff that's been pre-selected by people like me.

Holy Toledo! :-O
*scrapes foot, bows, and makes a rapid retreat...*

[Shweta]

But I do. The stuff printed on broadsheets, the medieval and later "best sellers," in short, the crap.

And surely even that crap was pre-selected? Like, there was poetry so bad that it would get thrown out by the broadsheets too?

You're comparing relatively unfiltered poetry with heavily filtered poetry from the past--not fair.
Relatively? I'd say that's true if we're looking at "properly" published poetry of the day. When all a person needs is an internet connection and a livejournal... *goes to scrub brain out*

[Medievalist]

And surely even that crap was pre-selected? Like, there was poetry so bad that it would get thrown out by the broadsheets too?

No, not at all; broadsheets, penny sheets, and the eighteenth and nineteenth century pamphlets are the equivalents of LiveJournals and Blogs in a lot of ways--both really thoughtful and well written works, and painfully awful ones.

Relatively? I'd say that's true if we're looking at "properly" published poetry of the day. When all a person needs is an internet connection and a livejournal... *goes to scrub brain out*

What does "properly published" mean? Remember, I am a medievalist . . . :D

Keep in mind that the early printed publisher model was that a writer paid the printer to print, or, sometimes, the printer essentially thieved it (none of the extant printed Shakespeare texts before the First Folio were printed with his consent, as far as we can tell, and the First Folio was a memorial after Shakespeare died. Much of the quarto plays were illicitly printed from parts, usually the prompter's parts.

I'm beginning to be tempted to post some of the more awful stuff I've had to read . . .

[Shweta]

No, not at all; broadsheets, penny sheets, and the eighteenth and nineteenth century pamphlets are the equivalents of LiveJournals and Blogs in a lot of ways--both really thoughtful and well written works, and painfully awful ones.

So there was no editorial weeding at all?

What does "properly published" mean? Remember, I am a medievalist . . . :D

Depends on the answer to the above, if we're considering an analogy. I guess I'd assumed that the broadsheets etc were more analogous to a magazine, or a blog where stuff is selected by an editor, than to a random lj posting stuff. But since you bring up the pay-to-publish model, I'm probably thinking much later. My sense of history is pretty confused.

I'm beginning to be tempted to post some of the more awful stuff I've had to read . . .

Do! That would rock :D

[Medievalist]

Medievalist, I don't know how you can deny the fact that increased literacy rates, the internet, and cheaper paper has led to a new form of poetry spawning.

Speaking of increased literacy rates [cough]--You might want to re-read. Nowhere do I deny that there's a "new form of poetry," err ... "spawning."

I simply point out that the quota of crap vs quality poetry is not necessarily any different.

For the most part, as I have come to believe, poetry as we generally see it (Wordsworth, Frost, Yeats, Keats, Goethe) was fueled and patroned by the wealthy (as with every art) however, now it is possible to see the arts mass produced for the public, in areas that have not been conquered before. An example would be a print of a famous art-work in someone's house, or digital recordings of music that can be enjoyed by everyone.

JBI -- Don't include me in your self-referential "we."

You have no clue how I "generally see" poetry -- and you don't have a chance of seeing poetry as I "generally see" it until you at least get the same level of familiarity. That means, at the very least, you better start learning dead languages, and realize that poetry doesn't begin with the Romantics, or even with English--and it wouldn't hurt to avoid sweeping generalizations, either.


With all these things flying around, it is inevitable that you will be overwhelmed with mediocre poetry, if all you read is the internet. And it is also inevitable that one will always run into great poetry, if all they read is major poets. I think the only way, now adays, to get a balance is to have a subscription to regular periodicals (these would need to be niched periodicals, since even literary magazines like The New Yorker seem to have leaned more towards a more pop-culture audience). I guess all there is to do is wait, and see what lasts from our generation. The Internet is probably the worst place to find any poetry (I say this, with the full knowledge that my crummy verse is stuck up here as well).

Good heavens "these would need to be niched periodicals, since even literary magazines like The New Yorker seem to have leaned more towards a more pop-culture audience"--err... that's umm . . .

Half or more of the "great poets" were scorned in their own lifetimes as vulgar poets writing for the vox populi--pop culture, as you put it.

I'd suggest looking for the next generation of poets in lyrics as well as the usual places.

Again, my point remains -- most people don't know about the crap of the past since it's not in nicely edited douce little anthologies.

[Medievalist]

Here are some lovely bits for you Shweta. This first one is from Crashaw, a "metaphysical" poet from the seventeeth century--he was wildly popular right through the Victorian era, and tended to right about saints, mostly, about female saints, being tortured.

Here's a "favorite (http://www.luminarium.org/sevenlit/crashaw/weeper.htm)" [cough] by him.

I particularly like this description of eyes, weeping:


And now where'er he strays
Among the Galilean mountains,
Or more unwelcome ways,
He's follow'd by two faithful fountains ;
Two walking baths, two weeping motions,
Portable and compendious oceans.

[Medievalist]

And here's another for Shweta. Robert Southey was adored in his lifetime; he was the poet laureate in Wordsoworth's youth.

Here's his most famous poem; Inchape Rock (http://www.poemhunter.com/poem/inchcape-rock/). You need to read it aloud for the ah, full effect.

[Shweta]

You must love me so much, to give me these gems.
:wipes a tear from her eye:

[Priene]

Quoth Sir Ralph, “The next who comes to the Rock,
Won’t bless the Abbot of Aberbrothok.

Oh Lord. I'd thought McGonagall had no rival.

[KikiteNeko]

Although I write novels, and rather suck at my lame poetry attempts, I do very much enjoy poetry and don't think it's dead. I read my little T.S. Eliot book every night.

[slcboston]

And now where'er he strays
Among the Galilean mountains,
Or more unwelcome ways,
He's follow'd by two faithful fountains ;
Two walking baths, two weeping motions,
Portable and compendious oceans.

:Jaw:

Oh my lord... and I thought some of the dreck and drivel I had to read in that college writing class was bad.

But, a thought occurs to me - is there a "bad poetry" thread here? if not, perhaps we ought to make one? :D

[KikiteNeko]

Er, with how subjective writing is, that might be a not-so-hot idea.

:Jaw:

Oh my lord... and I thought some of the dreck and drivel I had to read in that college writing class was bad.

But, a thought occurs to me - is there a "bad poetry" thread here? if not, perhaps we ought to make one? :D

[slcboston]

Er, with how subjective writing is, that might be a not-so-hot idea.

Oh, i thought of that. But we can be safe and stick to the authors who are dead. (By no means will I cast stones at the living - although my first published piece EVER was in fact a poem, it also represents the only good poem I've ever written. The others were horrid, horrid things. :D)