»
Discussion
»
The Alley
»
For Brad
| The Alley |
|
For Brad |
|
|
turtle Senior Member
since 2009-01-23
Posts 548Harbor 
|
Hi Brad, quote: Apparently you think so. Maybe you should explain yourself Brad. I would think, this should be a private disscusion, but if you want to do this in public, be my guest. Perhaps we could all learn something, including me. /pip/Forum28/HTML/002432.html turtle [This message has been edited by turtle (02-09-2009 03:17 PM).] |
||
| © Copyright 2009 turtle - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Interesting....I'd like to hear the answer to this one, too  |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
Sorry, it was not at attack. I was trying to play. Obviously, it didn't work. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Knowing Brad, I agree. It's one of those things that would obviously be recognized as a joke in person but can be misconstrued in print with no smile or facial expression to key on. |
||
|
turtle Senior Member
since 2009-01-23
Posts 548Harbor |
That's certainly understandable Brad. As I said, I was half asleep, I'm currious though what you did mean. There must be some reason that you asked me that??? If there's something with my critique that you question, or disagree with you should tell me Brad. Whether here or in an email. That being said, Hey, I like to play and I'd just a soon play here. If anything we might all get to know one another a little better. Turtle /Please go ahead and delete the post in the critique forum. Thank you. |
||
|
turtle Senior Member
since 2009-01-23
Posts 548Harbor |
BTW, I'm looking for an old friend. Me leeetle yellow emoticon. /pip/Forum13/HTML/001447.html |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
quote: You're making solid contributions to CA. That I disagree with a lot of it is always a good sign. By the way, I use "nuts" a lot because I love the WWII story: "From the American commander to the German commander: Nuts!" |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
ESPECIALLY when Brad disagrees with rhyming techniques! That IS a good thing!  |
||
|
turtle Senior Member
since 2009-01-23
Posts 548Harbor |
Hey brad, Do you mean sort of like chipmunks that sling nuts? lol (kidding) Really, I prefer criticism. I usually learn more and find a greater perspective. To me, the most important thing that a writer needs to consider is how he can shape the readers understanding. I think. the need for the poet's perspective is greater, at this moment in time, than it has been in many years. I know that poets like myself and Balladeer are considered to be dinoraurs in poetry circles. But for the common man, structured verse, when done well, is more memorable, inspirational, and what they expect to read when they read poetry. That is not to say that free verse is not important. It is. But, it usually appeals more to the informed and cerebral reader. (before this post is moved to philosophy 101) My desire to help others find their own voice is more about my love for and belief in poetry. The first thing that I noticed about Allogenes poem is that he chose the wrong form for the the idea/emotion he was trying to convey. I have probably written more sonnets than anything else. The large majority of at least the first half of them, range from the mundane to the absurd. The most important part of the sonnet is the turn. In his poem the turn is neither needed, or supported. It also forces a conclusion on a poem that should not have a conclusion. The sonnet could be used to make an argument, but their are better forms that can make an argument more clever and profound. The sonnet is intended as a suitors verse to be used to convince his beloved that there is only one conclusion she can reach......his. This is probably the only thing that it works well for. I didn't tell allogenes this because I know from experience that much can be gained by writing sonnets. They are a great way to practice and learn structure. Brad, by now you're probably thinking I'm all puffy and full of myself....I probably am lol but because you are the moderator of the crit forum you deserve to have some insight into what I am about.  turtle |
||
|
Sunshine
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-25
Posts 63354Listening to every heart |
Turtle, I had to smile at this... quote:I can be the queen of typos, but somehow dino-raurs simply tickled my funnybone...  Thanks! |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Well, we DO roar on occasion! |
||
|
turtle Senior Member
since 2009-01-23
Posts 548Harbor |
 Where's my coffee?  For a minute there I think I must have slipped back into the 'raurin' twenties  Turtle |
||
|
oceanvu2 Senior Member
since 2007-02-24
Posts 1066Santa Monica, California, USA |
Hi Turtle! Form is still very fine. At the same time, I'll contend that free verse can be highly structured, making it hardly "free" at all. Even though I have promised in these forums never to mention Wallace Stevens again, I haven't mentioned him to you. Stevens is a formalist. It's extremely clear in poems such as "Peter Quince at the Clavier. The formality, or structure is less overt in something like "Twenty Ways of Looking at a Blackbird," yet the poem seems clearly structured, and is "of a piece." I've been thinking lately about the nuances of direct vision and peripheral vision as they relate to poetry. "Direct Vision," in this train of thought, relates to certain forms, the ballad in particular, an attempt to tell a straightforward story on the poet's part, and an expectation on the reader's part to be able to readily understand both the poet's tale and the poem's intentions. No problem with that, if that is to one's taste, poet or reader. But, in some sense, and speaking metaphorically, it's a bit like being a dray horse with blinders on so he/she only sees what's immediately in front of his/her face. "Peripheral vision," again metaphorically, opens up the possibility of recognizing, uh, metaphor, for one. The writer/reader not only sees what is in front on them, but also gets a sense or what might actually be going on, a "freedom" in both the writing and reading process. Part of what this leads to is referential imagery, or left half of the brain thinking/writing/reading. When done well, it's not terribly important where the reader goes with the imagery, as long as it moves the reader to go someplace, moves them, as it were. This is achievable, in part, because of the emotive/structural context in which seemingly structure less, or "free" verse is composed. It's a discipline few master (just like every other form of poetic discipline) and leads to the unfortunate amateur notion that if one sets up any sort of kanoodling with arbitrary line breaks, one has a poem. But this is not much different than thinking any bit of rhyming iambic tetrameter garbaghe is poetry just because it looks like a "poem." To try to be clear, I'm not using the accepted definition of "peripheral" as something irrelevant, or off to the side. We all, who can see, have physical peripheral vision. Simply put, if you spot someone out of the corner of one's eye who is taking aim at you, peripheral vision suggests you duck. It's pretty relevant, say, to survival. Poetically (and metaphorically) many writers and poets work at the edges of their "peripheral" vision, which does not always require an overt form for conveyance, though "form" is not a deterrent. I was just thinking here about William Blake: Formalist to the core, there is still no way to "get" what he's talking about without diving into the periphery. Similarly, and perhaps more clearly, one can't read Poe's "Raven" and think it is about a visit from a bird. Peripherally, one can't help but get caught up in the incantatory music at the very least, and this "movement" may BE the power of the poem. It's certainly the only thing that makes it memorable, and that's fine. ON DINOSAURISM: I'm one of the dinosaurs on this site also. Through circumstance and vagaries of life, my own poetic journey and/or outlook was shaped by some pretty "peripheral" poets and poetry, along with the academic stuff through an ABD. It's not just what I read. I knew and was taught by people like Imamu Amiri Baraka (Then known as LeRoi Jones, now Amiri Baraka, the Poet Laureate of New Jersey), Philip Whalen, Gary Snyder, Alan Ginsberg, Peter Orlofsky, Gregory Corso, Lawrence Ferlinghetti,* Diane diPrima, Judith Molina, Julian Beck and many other, still after 50 years, basically "outsider" or peripheral poets. This was happenstance. Many of my mentors (except Baraka, my teacher at Rutgers) passed through Boulder Colorado and The Jack Kerouac School of Disembodied Poetics, and I lived in Boulder at the time. *Ferlinghetti was the major exception. His book, “A Coney Island of The Mind” sold over a million copies, unthinkable for a poet! By contrast, Ginsberg’s “Howl,” and Corso’s “Gasoline,” were initially published as chapbooks and had (generously estimating) original sales of 500 - 1,000, but remained in limited edition print for many years. As obscure as these poets will be to most folk, many were associated with Black Mountain College, many strongly influenced poet/teacher/literary theorist Charles Olson. So, while these mentors were definitely outside of the academic mainstream, they still represented a consolidated school of thought on the nature of “poetics,” despite highly divergent individual styles. The folks represent, though hardly in full, the poets who immediately preceded my generation. (Most were in their late fifties and sixties when I was a 26 year old “kid.”) So, each person brings the sum of whom they are to the poetic table, through, in PiP, the poetry or discussion forums. And there are, God knows, going to be differences of opinion. I simply suggest that “What is Poetry” cannot be established by fiat or nailed to a table, though lots and lots of people try. I had an “alternative” education from working poets. I got influenced. So it goes. To quote Henry Miller: “Form” is the jackass that continually pops up in literary quarterlies.” I think he wrote that in 1947, and things haven’t changed much. Turtle: returning to your post, for one, I’m delighted to see a conscientious thread on the nature of poetry in ANY PiP forum. I came up with a nice line for “dinosaurs” the other day. “We have minds like steel traps, they’re just rusty and missing a few teeth. Gumming away, Jimbeaux [This message has been edited by oceanvu2 (02-20-2009 07:29 PM).] |
||
|
turtle Senior Member
since 2009-01-23
Posts 548Harbor |
Jim you're clearly a bright fellow and are lucky to have had the background in poetry that you do. i Turtle! Form is still very fine. At the same time, I'll contend that free verse can be highly structured, making it hardly "free" at all." Jim, if you can't define it you can't hang your hat on it. If you remove the description of your hat from it, how are those looking for that hat going to find it? I have nothing against free verse, as a matter of fact I'm trying to find my voice in it right now. All good poets have a need to express themselves. Clearly so do you. Lets look at your argument. I've been thinking lately about the nuances of direct vision and peripheral vision as they relate to poetry. "Direct Vision," in this train of thought, relates to certain forms, the ballad in particular, an attempt to tell a straightforward story on the poet's part, and an expectation on the reader's part to be able to readily understand both the poet's tale and the poem's intentions. Here you describe structured forms as "direct vision" "Peripheral vision," again metaphorically, opens up the possibility of recognizing, uh, metaphor, for one. The writer/reader not only sees what is in front on them, but also gets a sense or what might actually be going on, a "freedom" in both the writing and reading process Here you describe the ability to recognise metaphor as "peripheral vision" Is this a valid argument? I think not. Structured verse is a form and the use of metaphor is a method. These are not two things having atributes that are both similar and juxtaposed to one another. ]i]Part of what this leads to is referential imagery, or left half of the brain thinking/writing/reading. When done well, it's not terribly important where the reader goes with the imagery, as long as it moves the reader to go someplace, moves them, as it were. This is achievable, in part, because of the emotive/structural context in which seemingly structure less, or "free" verse is composed.[/i] I happen to be left handed and use the right half of my brain. I agree that a storyline moves the reader's thoughts in the direction the writer wants to take them. But, here again you compare structure to method. Whether the form is structured or free has nothing to do with what storyline or metaphor the writer chooses to use. Similarly, and perhaps more clearly, one can't read Poe's "Raven" and think it is about a visit from a bird. Peripherally, one can't help but get caught up in the incantatory music at the very least, and this "movement" may BE the power of the poem. It's certainly the only thing that makes it memorable, and that's fine. Here you state an opinion and make no argument at all. ON DINOSAURISM: I'm one of the dinosaurs on this site also. Through circumstance and vagaries of life, my own poetic journey and/or outlook was shaped by some pretty "peripheral" poets and poetry, along with the academic stuff through an ABD. It's not just what I read. I knew and was taught by people like Imamu Amiri Baraka (Then known as LeRoi Jones, now Amiri Baraka, the Poet Laureate of New Jersey), Philip Whalen, Gary Snyder, Alan Ginsberg, Peter Orlofsky, Gregory Corso, Lawrence Ferlinghetti,* Diane diPrima, Judith Molina, Julian Beck and many other, still after 50 years, basically "outsider" or peripheral poets. This was happenstance. Many of my mentors (except Baraka, my teacher at Rutgers) passed through Boulder Colorado and The Jack Kerouac School of Disembodied Poetics, and I lived in Boulder at the time. Much of what I'm reading here is confusing. Perhaps some of that is my fault, BUT! You wrote it.....lol Please organize your thoughts more clearly and site precedence, with links, to support it instead of your credentials. Then come back and present this in an argument that is clear so that I might understand. turtles [This message has been edited by Ron (02-21-2009 07:32 PM).] |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Turtle, What is formal verse? If you check out the Torah, you'll find much of these books to be written in verse. It is not the accentual syllabic verse you use. It is antiphonal in part. There are many essays and books that talk about the formal aspects of biblical verse. Simply because this verse is not accentual syllabic doesn't mean it is not formal. You might check out chinese verse. Chinese verse is also formal, highly so, and cannot be duplicated in English translation. Does this mean that your accentual-syllabic verse is fluff in comparison? I would suggest to you that there are chinese scholars who might think so, and with justification. While there are Japanese scholars who are justifiably proud of their verse tradition, it is fairly free and simple in comparison, at least insofar as my reasonably naive understanding of both have lead me to believe. Classical Greeks from the Greek anthology for the most part would certainly have found accentual syllabic verse a blunt instrument, like using a roast beef to repair an antique pocket watch. Their mastery of metrics would certainly have born them out. Those english-speaking writers who've attempted to use those meters with any degree of sophistication have been all too aware of how profound their failure was, and what amazing things those Greek masters could accomplish. Even those English writers who've modeled themselves on the Greek and Roman masters, Pope and Dryden for example, took pains to maintain their modesty. They had at least some understanding of how much they didn't understand. Johnson, Landor, Gray and the neoclassicists may have tried to write their pindaric odes; they were only too aware they missed the most basic of the real formal elements involved. In fact the works they wrote were frequently fine works — Jonson, in particular had a good feel for the ode — that were wonderful poetry. They were simply different. Accentual syllabic verse is probably not much older than Chaucer. It certainly didn't dominate the poetry of the language until the sixteenth century or so. To suggest that you try to master formal verse is perhaps a mistake, considering the fact that there are so many classic formal verses that fight with each other for recognition not only in our own literature but in world literature. As for rhyme, I've always enjoyed it, but it's not the be all and end all of verse. Many "formalists" will disagree. Milton could and did use it well, but wasn't convinced it was necessary. Most other poets until recently did well without it. Frankly, it works better in rhyme rich languages. Few people use it well in English today, and very few ever have. The structure of the language forces odd locutions and banal matches that take away from the richness of the verse for the most part. Internal half-rhyme works better in English, and the rhymes don't force meaning in stilted and awkward ways. I would suggest to you that any poetry is "Formal" because it isn't prose. An Ode by Jonson isn't an unpoem because it doesn't follow the same conventions as an Ode by Pindar. Free verse is still poetry even though it isn't accentual syllabic verse. It's the poetry that makes a poem work, not the verse. They used to teach verse-writing in school. Everyone wrote verse. Everybody could rhyme, sometimes by the yard. It was nothing special then, it's nothing special now beyond a rote skill open to mastery should you wish to master it. Poetry is the art, and few people attain that. To say that there is Formal verse and Free verse is, to my mind, a 19th century quarrel. I compare these distinctions to some of the discussions about martial arts. There are people who divide martial arts into hard and soft arts, into internal and external arts, into exhibition and fighting arts. These divisions are foolish. The question is, Does your act serve as the proper way for you? In poetry, it doesn't matter if you are a feminist poet, a traditional poet, a free verse poet, a gay poet, a Newyorkian poet or whatever. The question is, Have you a poetry that serves your way in life? You are probably not aware of it, but what Jim has done is to offer you a look at his set of master's credentials. In the martial arts, this is a formal document. It starts out saying who the original master of the style was, and then it goes down from generation to generation, sometimes for several hundred years, specifying exactly who each master was, and exactly whom that master passed his skills to within that single tradition. Go-ju ryu, for example. Or Tai-chi-chuan, where some of these documents are worked around to give ancestors for almost a thousand years. Jim is more modest. He goes back to to forties, though he could have gone back further had he wanted to, and included Allen Ginsburg's dad, who was also a fine poet, and gone perhaps back to Blake. It is a fine tradition and Jim is a very very good writer who's worked long and hard at what he does. He didn't mention his publications list to you, though he might have, because he works at being a regular guy — which he is. Sincerely yours, Bob Kaven [This message has been edited by Ron (02-22-2009 07:13 AM).] |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: Finally, Bob, I think you're getting the idea. Now, let's try inserting some of these labels into your paragraph: liberal, conservative, left, right, Democrat, Republican . . . |
||
|
turtle Senior Member
since 2009-01-23
Posts 548Harbor |
Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha! Bob, I think you misunderstand. I'm not trying to short Jim on the value of his credentials. I'm simply suggesting that they serve ME no purpose. They're his credentials. As far as this argument over what is verse, what is free, what is popular, and to what argument you subscribe. This subject has been going around these poetry blogs for at least ten years that I'm aware of and there are nearly as many opinions as poets. Strike that! There ARE as many opinions as there are poets. You said one thing that I agree with and it is what shoots your argument in the foot. First and foremost it is ART! turtles |
||
|
turtle Senior Member
since 2009-01-23
Posts 548Harbor |
If we want to get down to the bones of this argument, it is the art. Art is a matter of perception and perspective. Art is intended to touch the heart and stir the soul. What am I here for? The art! If you want to impress me, if you want to sway me..... Put it in a poem and post it in CA. Show me want you mean.. Art says more to me than diatribe ever will. turtles |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
I do not wish to impress you. I do not wish to sway you. I do not wish to compete with you. You have what I have to offer you at this point. I'm sorry that it hasn't been useful. |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: Which raises the obvious response, turtle: Why are you reading, let along posting, in the Alley? |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
I keep meaning to come back to this, but something always seems to get in the way. A couple of points then: 1. There are no dinosaurs. --Formalism is alive and well. To take three names off my shelf: Timothy Steele, A.E. Stallings, and David Baker. 2. I think the only real point of contention is this: quote: --I don't know who this common man is any more than I know who Eliot's educated reader is. --Personally, I think readers' tastes change over time but that just may be me (because my tastes change over time). --Ever read "American Psycho"? Look at Bateman's* views on Genesis and Huey Lewis. Do you agree with him? Originally had the character's name as Bates. I hope it is an understandable confusion. |
||
|
turtle Senior Member
since 2009-01-23
Posts 548Harbor |
Hi Brad, After great consternation and considerable consideration I have deemed this subject irrelevant. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Quote: 1. There are no dinosaurs. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ha!ha!h!ha! I wasn't referring to the tangible. I meant that some poetic vehicles are considered extinct, or have been thought to be, over the last 100 years. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Quote: --Formalism is alive and well. To take three names off my shelf: Timothy Steele, A.E. Stallings, and David Baker ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I've read Steele and Stallings, not Baker. They both caution that formal verse has fallen out of popularity. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Quote: --I don't know who this common man is any more than I know who Eliot's educated reader is. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The common man has a day job. Poetry scares him to death because he can't understand it and he rarely reads anything other than the signature at the bottom of his paycheck. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Let me repeat this: Art is a matter of perception and perspective. Art is intended to touch the heart and stir the soul. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ As a whole, today's poet has taken this art form and turned it into a soapbox that he uses to scream his ideas, opinions, and emotions "AT" the reader. Is that art? Gentlemen,. The vehicle chosen is irrelevant. turtle [This message has been edited by turtle (02-23-2009 04:01 PM).] |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
quote: --So you've changed your mind? quote: Who is doing this? I read Louise Gluck's "Averno" about a year ago. It didn't really work for me (though it does have its moments). Is that what you're talking about? quote: Great! Do you like them? I do. quote: Do you ever wonder why we all continue to privilege the visual (Jim did it too.) in what most people concede is an aural art form? I say most because many now argue that it is also visual. But what about the object itself? Doesn't the art itself have a place as well? quote: Both very dangerous things if you think about it. |
||
|
turtle Senior Member
since 2009-01-23
Posts 548Harbor |
Hi Brad, "As a whole, today's poet has taken this art form and turned it into a soapbox that they use to scream there ideas, opinions, and emotions "AT" the reader. Is that art? Hmmmm...Yes you're right that is an erroneous statement' Sorry Brad, What I meant was: "Many of today's poets have taken this art form (poetry) and turned it into a soapbox that they use to scream there ideas, opinions, and emotions "AT" the reader. Is that art? Quote: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Great! Do you like them? I do. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ lol... No, not really They make too many assumtions and I was sometimes left going "Okay....How did we get here?" I used to love a debate. When I was in college (many years ago) I spotted a course in "Aristotelian logic" and I took it...... They lied. The title of the text was "Mathmatical Logic". This book took every form of argument ever concieved and broke them down into mathmatical fomulas. In ink that dried the page, it then went on through line, after line, after line of mathmatical equations..... I've no desire to use these equations, I'm assuredly rusty......and bored, but I think I can get from the premise: "Art should move the heart and soul" to "A poem's form is irrelevant to art." in about eight equations....lol Let's see: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Art should move the heart and soul" If art has many forms and a poem is one of them Then a poem is art. If art moves the heart and soul and not all poems move the heart and soul Then not all poems are art. If not all poems are art and a sonnet is a form of poem Then not all sonnets are art. If not all poems are art and free verse is a form of poem Then not all Free verse is art. If not all sonnets are art and not all free verse is art Then some are art and some are not. If some are art and some are not. Then a poem's form has no bearing on art. If a poem's form has no bearing on art and anything that has no bearing is irrelevent Then a poem's form is irrelevant to art. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Hmmm.....I may have missed an equation or two, but you should see what I'm saying. This argument that free verse is a better poetry form or that structured verse is a better poetry form is not an argument at all, but an opinion. It was perpetrated by Whittman, many years ago and has been perpetuated in poetry circles ever since. This opinion is an erroneous opinion; It was based on Whiittman's belief that it was the best form for him. And, that he deemed it to be the American poetry form . .....According to Aristotle this opinion is in error. I say we dig up Whittman and we dig up Aristotle and we let them fight it out....lol turtle [This message has been edited by turtle (02-25-2009 04:01 AM).] |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Turtle, Your chain of logic has an excluded middle in the midst of one of the syllogisms. If not all sonnets are art and not all free verse is art Then some are art and some are not. If some are art and some are not. Then a poem's form has no bearing on art. In fact both free verse and formal verse are verse that has form. The form in free verse simply has to justify itself word by word as it goes along and, for that reason. it is almost impossible to construct a detailed and systematic metrical commentary that will be generalizable across the board. It nevertheless has the majority of my affections. Breathing and breath-centered attempts to talk about free verse metrics seem useful. The notion of thinking that free verse is formless verse does not seem useful, at least to me. Thoughts? Bob Kaven |
||
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
I agree with you Bob in the sense that you are using the word "form". Perhaps Turtle is defining the word more narrowly. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Perhaps so. Charles Olson "On Projective Verse" remains a thought provoking essay on an alternative sense of form applicable to "Free Verse," nevertheless. I have difficulty with W.C.W.'s notion of "The variable foot." There is always some sort of structure necessary because structure is part of what helps construct closure, which is central to any sort of poetry, most especially lyric poetry. It doesn't need to be syllabics or syllable stress or weight, but there does need to be some sense of structure for the reader to sense to grasp the sense of progression on a level beyond that of story, so that there can be an interplay back and forth between them to create the tension that helps move poems along. Or so I'm thinking at this particular late night moment. |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
Bob, I almost completely agree. I think the problem though is that there's a confusion between poetry (genre) and poetry (good). I don't get the variable foot idea at all. My guess is that it might be called a semantic foot but that seems to multiply terms unnecessarily. It confuses more than it clarifies. For anyone interested, I also suggest Charles Hartman's "Free Verse: An Essay on Prosody". Turtle, This is getting interesting. |
||
|
turtle Senior Member
since 2009-01-23
Posts 548Harbor |
Quote: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Your chain of logic has an excluded middle in the midst of one of the syllogisms. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Yeah Bob, I thought I missed a step or two. I haven't done these in a hundred years lol Quote: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ In fact both free verse and formal verse are verse that has form. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Yeah Bob,,,,,,I thought that was what I said, but I think you mean this in a slightly different way than I do. Free verse is a poetry form that is free from syllabic verse but it still has its own conventions and that makes it a poetry form. Hi moonbeam - When I use form to mean poetry is a form of art. I am using a general term. When I say that a poetry form has nothing to do with wether a poem is art I am referring to the form specific (Poetry forms) Hi Brad - you're right there is a confusion of what is good based on genre when actually the genre has nothing to do with it. As far as what is free verse structure, In the sense that all poetry forms have rules and conventions that distingush one form from another makes free verse another poetry form. To say that free verse is a better poetry form than structured verse is like saying that a Ford is better than a Chevy. One guy could buy a Ford that is not a lemon, and another could buy a Chevy that is a lemon, but that doesn't make a Ford better than a Chevy. It only means that the one vehicle (and only that one vehicle) was better constructed than the other. The main function of any vehicle is to get from point A to point B and if both the Ford and the Chevy do that, then all one could say is that the Ford and the Chevy are similar and serve a similar purpose, but different. Anything other than that is just an opinion. turtle |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Turtle, Wax on! Sincerely, Bob Kaven |
||
|
turtle Senior Member
since 2009-01-23
Posts 548Harbor |
Quote: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dear Turtle, Wax on! Sincerely, Bob Kaven ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Bob..... It's not a good idea to wax turtles Bob,.... Am I wrong here? I'm beginning to think you don't like turtles....... As a matter of fact,... I'm beginning to think you are having cruel and unusual feelings toward turtles.......... Bob,.... Please don't make me think about calling the SPCA. (chuckle) |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Mr. T., Any Turtle with a sense of humor is a turtle that's fine with me. I'm quite find of turtles. Sincerely, Mr. Bob |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Mr. T., Any Turtle with a sense of humor is a turtle that's fine with me. I'm quite find of turtles. Sincerely, Mr. Bob Student: "Professor Quackenbush! Professor Quackenbush! The Dean's outside and he's waxing wroth!" Groucho: " Well, give Roth a cloth and have him wax the dean a while!" [This message has been edited by Bob K (02-27-2009 08:59 PM).] |
||
|
turtle Senior Member
since 2009-01-23
Posts 548Harbor |
Quote: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Sheer Playfulness and Deadly Seriousness are my closest friends. – Philip Roth ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ lol very clever Bob |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
I wonder if we might say that form (any form) is a necessary but insufficient condition of good poetry. Trivial? Perhaps but I've said this before: Poetry is not form, not content (these are abstractions) but how they work together. That is why I think it's worth bringing up. You got blank verse that isn't working for you? Try breaking the meter. You got free verse that isn't rocking your world. Try iambic and see what happens. |
||
|
turtle Senior Member
since 2009-01-23
Posts 548Harbor |
Excellent Brad! That is exactly my thinking and there are examples right here at PIP. Take Allogene's sonnet: He chose the wrong form for his poem, but is that the forms fault? Take my recent post "Metaphor" I did it in free verse because I'm looking for my voice in free verse, but I know in my heart that poem would have been better in a metrical meter to echo the hurdy gurdy organ. Poetry forms are tools used by the poet to best present his idea. It then merely boils down to the skill and talent of the poet to pick the right form for his poem. Saying that one form is better than another, or "The American Poetry Form" only serves to place undue limitations on the talent and freedom of thought of the writer. But, I don't see it as a matter of trial and error, because there are guidlines and suggestions at the writer's fingertips to use; as well as examples of how they are used. This then simply becomes a matter of skill. ie. If I want to write in the sentiment of EB Browning, I might look at the meter she uses in a similar poem. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Think, possibly, rhetoric, strategy and closure as well as meter. There's lots of iambic pentameter around, yet not much Sir John Davies to give an example of movement, as in "Orchestra or a Poem of Dauncing." His iambic pentameter and Samuel Daniel's iambic pentameter seem to carry very different sorts of music, don't they? Meter is interesting, but only carries an (important, granted) piece of the story. Stance, for me, is an extraordinarily important piece, as well as voice. And the beat goes on. |
||
|
turtle Senior Member
since 2009-01-23
Posts 548Harbor |
I think this is kind of opening up a can of worms though Bob. Rhetoric and stance require telling and poetry is about showing. That is what things like metaphor, simile, and double intendre are for. To help sweeten and smooth a message. Lately, what I do....or try to do, is put the message in the telling of the story. Something I conjured up when thinking about the Trickster. But, this is getting away from forms and delving into meter, prosity, syntax, presentation in general, a hugh subject.Many writers believe there is this or that form that is more suited to them and I just don't see it that way. After all poetry is for the reader. The form that works best for the poem is the one best for the reader. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Different training and experience here. The poet follows the poem to the places where the poem is most alive, wherever that may lead. The poet's loyalty is to the poem. Nobody says that you have to show or publish everything you write. You base that on stuff that happens when the poem's done. Maybe it's a poem for sharing, maybe it's simply a personal document that doesn't leave your notebook. If you try to publish it, it should be readable and should communicate at least as well as prose, preferably better. The decision to try to publish is a later decision, though. If you try to impose that on everything, you set yourself up for writer's block and for limiting the exploratory process that writing poems provides. One or two poems not for publication early on may bring you to a point where a larger poem on that theme may become accessible where it would have been walled off beforehand. The earlier poems allowed that process and that imagery to open up. To quote the punch line of a very old very bad joke whose setup cannot be repeated here, "A guy's got to clear his throat first, doesn't he?" He does. |
||
|
turtle Senior Member
since 2009-01-23
Posts 548Harbor |
Yes much of this I can see I do have a little different perspective - as might be expected. Being a lefty I see art in almost everything. For me it is about sharing. It is the moving of the heart and stirring of the soul that motivates me. If I want to show you something with my eyes, and perspective, then I need to give you my eyes for you to see it. For me, The poet creates the story to take the reader to places where his perspective is most alive in their minds. For me, The poet's loyalty is to the reader of the poem. Showing is a motivation, but publication should not be - You're right. Not sure about the early life poems......most of mine are bad....lol BTW - If your writing gets any smaller I may have to stop responding (Squint) |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Turtle, A poem you write today can be an early poem for a poem you write three years from now. You don't know. Indeed, most of the poems I write are terrible and end up remaining in my notebooks in form that's as finished as I can make them. I will go back over the notebooks in a year or five of fifteen and something will jump out at me, and I will be able to make use of it and push it further. Sometimes it will remain a draft and return to the notebooks, sometimes it's good enough to send out someplace. Sometimes I send it out someplace and I'm really wrong about it being ready to go out. At those times, 1) I feel really stupid; and, 2) I understand that editors are my friends, and that they're there to, as best they can, keep me from making a fool out of myself in public. It's been a real turnaround in my attitude toward editors over the years. There's nothing like having some things in print you wish weren't to keep you a bit more grateful. Sincerely, Bob Kaven |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Turtle, A poem you write today can be an early poem for a poem you write three years from now. You don't know. Indeed, most of the poems I write are terrible and end up remaining in my notebooks in form that's as finished as I can make them. I will go back over the notebooks in a year or five of fifteen and something will jump out at me, and I will be able to make use of it and push it further. Sometimes it will remain a draft and return to the notebooks, sometimes it's good enough to send out someplace. Sometimes I send it out someplace and I'm really wrong about it being ready to go out. At those times, 1) I feel really stupid; and, 2) I understand that editors are my friends, and that they're there to, as best they can, keep me from making a fool out of myself in public. It's been a real turnaround in my attitude toward editors over the years. There's nothing like having some things in print you wish weren't to keep you a bit more grateful. Sincerely, Bob Kaven |
||
|
turtle Senior Member
since 2009-01-23
Posts 548Harbor |
Bob......... Your repeating yourself Bob...... Bob........ Am I wrong here? I'm beginning to think you don't like edtiors Bob......... Hmmm.... Good point, probably better to wait on publication until one can go back over their work using age and experience to fix the stupidity........Maybe not.....lol |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Apparently I ended up double printing a comment. Clearly it must have been really interesting. Twice as interesting as usual. I do tend to like editors, with the occasional exception. Not many exceptions, though, they tend to work their buns off for mostly no dough and little appreciation. Lots of them are poets, too, so they know what the grind is like. |
||
|
turtle Senior Member
since 2009-01-23
Posts 548Harbor |
All seriousness aside..... Well now, you are putting ideas in my head. I'm trying to compile my work. Of what you've seen of it, do you think any of these publishers might be interest? |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Haven't seen very much of your stuff. Have you read very many contemporary magazines and poets? Have you had a look at Poet's Marketplace? Do you have any favorite contemporary magazines and writers? Publishers, to say the obvious, are interested in publishing folks that are of interest to other writers who are writing now, if only because a lot of the editors are writers who are writing now, and they like to publish what they like to read. I'd be happy to talk more about this if you want. |
||
|
turtle Senior Member
since 2009-01-23
Posts 548Harbor |
No........ Thanks Bob, I'm well aware of what the Market is looking for. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
I'm reading Glacier Wine, which has a fairly high proportion of formal verse in it, by Maura Stanton. If you haven't had a shot at her stuff, this is a very fine collection. There are a few sonnets in there that make my hair stand up and tap dance down the length of my spine. Much of the rest of the stuff is equally as good. [This message has been edited by Bob K (03-04-2009 03:21 AM).] |
||
|
turtle Senior Member
since 2009-01-23
Posts 548Harbor |
Is this a book you're reading or is there a link online? |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
It's a book I'm reading. I find her stuff worth owning. You might see what you can find online, of course. She's written several books of poems, most of them very good indeed. |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
