»
Main Forums
»
English Workshop
»
Jamie's poem - discussion
| English Workshop |
|
Jamie's poem - discussion |
|
|
Severn Member Rara Avis
since 1999-07-17
Posts 7704
|
Ever since your light first fell on my eyes I have been crazy over you Lost in your beauty giving love its rise I could never pass over you Once I had tasted how sweet was the prize I'd not pick another over you Having long been held so high in the skies you've had no one else over you I knew that always for you would be vies men to battle with over you One alone cannot prevent love's demise did my sadness wash over you In the passing years Have regretful sighs or lonesome tears come over you Time has done its job slowing down the cries memories remain over you When more clock has run and I have grown wise I'll put myself first over you Until then I must stay in this disguise since I have nothing over you Soon a day will come saying my goodbyes I will say that I'm over you [This message has been edited by Severn (edited 08-15-2000).] |
||
| © Copyright 2000 Kamla Mahony - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
Poertree Senior Member
since 1999-11-05
Posts 1359UK |
jamie sorry ‘bout this you get my diatribe on your thread as you were first lol... unless her ladyship wants to move it somewhere else ..lol..... don't worry I do get round to a few coherent comments on your poem afterwards ........ ok ..just some random thoughts ... K suggested that it might be possible to write a good poem using repetition ... fine, I guess it obviously is though, as with all poetic devices surely the use of repetition (perhaps even more so than others because it is generally so "in your face") should add to and enhance the poem in some way or ways. Whether this is in terms of simply helping to convey the poets intent as to meaning, or whether it assists in the creation of a particular atmosphere, or whether perhaps it simply allows the composition of a desired form I think it matters not, these seem to me all legitimate reasons for the use of repetition. And repetition is of course surely an oft used tool in free verse, helping to maintain "flow" or "rhythm" and perhaps to some extent substituting for the effect of regular meter in more formal verse. Thus for instance in Gingbergs Howl Carl Solomon! I am with you in Rockland where the faculties of the skull no longer admit the worms of the senses I am with you in Rockland where you divide the tea of the breast of the spinsters of Utica I am with you in Rockland where you pun on the bodies of your nurses the harpies of the Bronx... where the repeated line has an almost cataloguing effect. Perhaps not such a happy use of repetition by another very famous poet (Poe) is this extract from "The Bells": Keeping time, time time In a sort of Runic rhyme, To the throbbing of the bells -- Of the bells, bells, bells -- To the sobbing of the bells : – Keeping time, time time, As he knells, knells, knells, In a happy Runic rhyme, To the rolling of the bells -- Of the bells, bells, bells, To the tolling to the bells -- Of the bells, bells, bells, bells, Bells, bells, bells -- To the moaning and the groaning of the bells. the poets intention was quite clear ..in fact far too clear and overt IMHO with the result that the whole effect is too overdone and obvious ... the poem has I think become victim to the fact that words, though they create sounds and images in our minds, are at the end of the day printed shapes on a two dimensional medium, once that thought occurs to a reader of any poem it probably means the poet has failed (unless he or she is trying for some kind of "form" piece). After reading bells for the 14th time in quick succession ... irritation sets in ... but then I guess I always did have a short attention span. nevertheless the lesson here is surely the obvious one, that repetition in poetry has to be used sensitivity with finesse, maybe ingeniously: Poetry is Repetition right poetry is repetition write poetry as repetition right poetry is repartition write poetry as repudiation right poetry is reputation write poetry as retaliation right poetry is repatriation (author unknown, by me) but certainly not in a ham fisted "just for the sake of it" kind of way. Then again repetition is of course mandatory in many of the poetic forms the villanelle and sestina immediately spring to mind. Of the two forms I find the villanelle by far the most interesting, perhaps partly because I had a serious shot at writing one but also because of the way in which the writer is consistently forced back within the confines of the original propositions by the repeating lines. There are other forms which do this to some extent (the triolet is one is it not Jim), but not quite to the same extent and in a manner which works towards a finale consisting entirely and exclusively of the repeats and therefore by extension the central message. I've dug out a piece which I read a while back which discusses the device of repetition as utilised in the villanelle and argues, in part at least, that expertly handled in this form textual repetition becomes in fact a kind of repatriation ie not in fact opening up and expanding an argument as most repetitive expositions might do, but closing it down and narrowing it until the critical central meaning is captured and imprisoned in the final couplet. (This is a bit heavy going btw ... you are warned ...lol): "Read from a poststructuralist perspective, the villanelle is the perfect means of the preservation and reproduction of a dominant discourse: a product that fails to expand as it repeats, exuviating and excluding other "meanings" or interpretations as it methodically progresses toward monologue. Using the reoccurrence of the first and third lines of its first stanza throughout the rest of its body not to invite dialogue but to both emphasize and narrow the poem's focus (even if the narrative seems to expand), the villanelle moves through gradual constricting contextual changes toward a dialectical (not-dialogic) conclusion. The repeated lines in each stanza contextually "mean" something different, yet they function identically, seeking ultimately to join together in the culminating couplet, gracing the last stanza with the true centered "meaning. The extent, however, to which the traditional French villanelle lingers near the double of a dialogic text through its use of extensive dialectical repetition implies much more than simple readerly discourse. Dylan Thomas's "Do Not Go Gentle into That Good Night," for example can be (re)written as a function of its genius text performance and end-oriented treatment of the imperative monologic repetitions of dialectical discourse. As a writer-privileged text, Thomas's villanelle absorbs activity and translates it into the persona of writer (or even the author, in this case). The seeming divergence of voice consummated in the dialectical ending of the poem, sutures the passive reader into a closed system, leaving him/her to remain passive like the dying father Thomas implores to listen but does not empower to respond. Thomas's master-piece is revealed a master text: a work of repatriation not repetition. Lines or words repeat not to include or expand but to withhold and occlude. Any change of the lines, therefore, is not one of perspective, but one of controlled (writer-privileged) context. The writer chooses to repeat certain lines and give them a meaning which the reader gradually comes to understand/accept: the model of the preeminent readerly poem. The focus of conventional interpretations of villanelle's in the twentieth century however has shifted to envelope and repackage the problematic of traditional form and the reproduction of dominant discourse. Primarily, this criticism centers upon the writer's attempt to escape from the constrictions of form while suffering within its grasp. That is, through focus upon the writer's self-conscious appropriation of a highly constrictive writing environment, many have suggested that a dominant discourse can be subverted. The villanelle's form becomes a center which the writer struggles to escape. Elizabeth Bishop's "One Art," for instance, has often been historicized as the break between the dominance of the form and the control of the writer. This construction, however, is clearly writer-privileged. It assumes a creator of text performing as eclipsing context, existing with the poem as product: (an author). Even Bishop, who quite effectively reflects upon the fabrication of the form she has chosen for " One Art," nevertheless, concedes to both the hierarchical discourse of traditional structure and the exclusionary privileging of the writer. As "One Art" ends, for example, it becomes clear that the reader's "voice" in the poem has been orchestrated from the first line, culminating in the exclamation "(Write it!)"--words forced into a passive reader's mouth. "One Art" is neither cathartic nor subversive; it is the device of a writer manipulating the reader into readerly monologic lip-synching--poetic karaoke." Foe me the other interesting bit of the above commentary relevant to our present discussion is the following passage: "The focus of conventional interpretations of villanelle's in the twentieth century however has shifted to envelope and repackage the problematic of traditional form and the reproduction of dominant discourse. Primarily, this criticism centers upon the writer's attempt to escape from the constrictions of form while suffering within its grasp. That is, through focus upon the writer's self-conscious appropriation of a highly constrictive writing environment, many have suggested that a dominant discourse can be subverted. The villanelle's form becomes a center which the writer struggles to escape." I have seen the issue of whether contemporary writers should "subvert" traditional form poetry debated in both these forums and others with excellent arguments on either side. Perhaps nowhere is the struggle to break free of form more obvious than when a writer challenges the strictures of repetitive verse. For what its worth my own view is that done badly this can be a disastrous exercise but conversely it can also produce some very innovative and exciting poetry where the writer is constantly pushing the boundary of what might be acceptable or not within the defined parameters. ok I've rabbited on sufficiently now .....which is code for "I need a coffee" .... ok coffee on board ... life restored !! on we go: jamie your poem ..well in my opinion your use of repetition was justified mainly on the basis of ingenuity .... The poem itself did not create any particular atmosphere for me and there were no outstanding images. This was simply a statement, a monologue if you like, about the speaker's relationship with his lover and its various aspects. I will say though that I felt that three technical matters dominated the piece, maybe even to the extent of being detrimental to meaning and feeling; these were: the rhyme the syllable count and of course the repetition having said that there is no doubt that the regularity of the line length and indeed the rhyming second lines did give the piece a kind of neatness which I thought worked well with the repetition ... kind of like wrapping the whole in a tight orderly parcel ..... It occurs to me that this may in fact quite accurately and appropriately reflect the whole of the speaker's attitude to this relationship ... I hear the words of passion: crazy love beauty sweet battle sighs etc etc and I "feel" nothing at all .... this effect is further enhanced by the way in which the speaker can seemingly easily look ahead to the future and catalogue the progression of events including the time when: " more clock has run and I have grown wise I'll put myself first over you" the whole poem is mechanical in such a way as to make me as the reader suspect whether speaker is really as impassioned as the words at the start of the poem suggest. By far the cleverest part of this poem however is the use of the phrase "over you" in all its different possible meanings, nice going jamie! So we have "over you" as in: crazy ABOUT you as in: pass you BY as in: pick IN PREFERENCE as in: PUT FIRST as in: DISPUTE over as in: ENVELOPE or COVER IN as in: experience emotion etc etc this was in my opinion a great way to handle repetition which of course was the object of the whole excercise!! maybe you lose the plot slightly at the end, perhaps knocking out a couple of stanzas might help, but mainly I thought you carried off the effect very well. thanks jamie p |
||
|
Severn Member Rara Avis
since 1999-07-17
Posts 7704 |
Sheesh P dear - going to do this to all of them? LOL... |
||
|
Poet deVine
Administrator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-05-26
Posts 22612Hurricane Alley |
Wow! I really enjoyed reading your take on Jamie's poem! |
||
|
Poertree Senior Member
since 1999-11-05
Posts 1359UK |
ok sharon ...lol.. so you gonna break a rule of a lifetime and do a commentary/critique???........ er ..was that a blue pig just flew past the window .....  kiddin' BUT waitin'......!!!!!!! p |
||
|
Sudhir Iyer Member Ascendant
since 2000-04-26
Posts 6943Mumbai, India : now in Belgium |
Well, Mr. P has said all that can be said ... different meanings of the over you, about the rhyming second line in each stanza... he has left nothing out there... not even carcasses of the body to be clawed upon... eeeks what a vultured being to think of that... all in all a splendid poem ... WOW regards to you Jamie, sudhir |
||
|
jbouder Member Elite
since 1999-09-18
Posts 2534Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash |
(Pardon me for a sec Jamie) Philip: I think you touched on some excellent points but perhaps all of our understanding of repetition is a little too narrow. The second poem you posted makes the bold statement in its first line: "Poetry is Repetition". In a broad sense, I think this is true ... in verse the poet relies on repetition of beats in his/her meter, at the ends of rhymed lines there is a repetition of sound and oftentimes internal rhyme carries that repetition into the body of the poem. Furthermore, alliteration, consonance and assonance are tools widely used in verse, blank-verse and free-verse alike and all involve some sort of repetition. So, in a sense, it is generally true to say "Poetry is repetition." David Baker writes: quote: All that said, my lunch hour is over. (Sorry Jamie). I will make every effort to come back later and discuss my thoughts on your poem (after my first read I can say they are positive thoughts). Later guys. Jim |
||
|
Poertree Senior Member
since 1999-11-05
Posts 1359UK |
yes jim i agree, and surely repetition might be said to be the very essence of poetry when we reflect that all poetry, to some degree, has some form of meter. The repetitions of stress patterns (however irregular) are intrinsic to all poetry (and maybe you could argue to prose as well.....Ron wrote a good bit on that somewhere i think) .... good point jim .... worthwhile lunch hour i'd say ... it's my tea time now so i'm outta here ...lolp |
||
|
Dark Angel Member Patricius
since 1999-08-04
Posts 10095 |
Dear Jamie  I really liked your poem and it flowed rather nicely I do agree with Philip, the rhyme, syllable count and the repetition dominated. Well Done Jamie |
||
|
Christopher
Moderator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-08-02
Posts 8296Purgatorial Incarceration |
I dig...I loved the continuing, but subtle rhyme scheme, repeating not only given words, but sounds. A double slam, hit the repetition in both ways. Quite clever and well done to boot. Bravo, I enjoyed. |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
