How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 Philosophy 101
 Ed's poem "The Academician" and discussi   [ Page: 1  2  ]
 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Ed's poem "The Academician" and discussion

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


25 posted 04-29-2007 01:17 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

"I don't think I should answer why. "

That is up to you, of course.  

"I didn't know my poetry was "unhealthy." Could you possibly elaborate?"

I already explained in the "What is Poetry" thread,  I feel a poem needs a form of musical regulation to be strongly poetic.  Therefore, on the poetic level, your poetry is just weak to my ear.  I don't hear any special musical regulation whatsoever.   It is basically just dramatic prose with line breaks. (which is only a criticism on the poetic virtue, not the general literary virtue)

The other is a general point toward artfulness   It looks to me like you are more pursuing a reversal, turning away from grace and clarity, and pursuing cloudiness and uncertainty instead.  Isn't there enough obscurity and uncertainty in "real" life?  Do we need it in art too?  I don't think so.  It just ruins art, and makes it more like the coarsness of life "out there".

[This message has been edited by Essorant (04-29-2007 02:05 PM).]

Edward Grim
Senior Member
since 12-18-2005
Posts 1112
Greenville, South Carolina


26 posted 04-29-2007 08:35 PM       View Profile for Edward Grim   Email Edward Grim   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Edward Grim's Home Page   View IP for Edward Grim

You have your views and I have mine. Although I do think your views are a little old-fashioned, and I mean that in the best possible way.

Personally, I found the "What is Poetry" forum to be pretty useless and silly.

"I feel a poem needs a form of musical regulation to be strongly poetic."

See Ess, that is your problem. Anything that doesn't match your set definition is considered "unhealthy" and "inferior" in your mind. I don't agree with that. I don't like traditional poetry, but I don't say it's unhealthy. I feel you have no openness, and again, I say that in the best possible way. I'm merely speculating.

"Therefore, on the poetic level, your poetry is just weak to my ear."  

I respect your opinion. My poetry has been called many things, but never weak. So you'll have to forgive me if I don't agree. It's not ego, I'm just comparing it to the usual feedback I get and I've never gotten "weak." You are not the type of person who would enjoy my work, so I don't blame you. We are very different, which is groovy, but not so cool when discussing which form is better. I beleive no form is superior. It all depends on the writer, and I don't see how one could possibly even begin to disagree with that.

"I don't hear any special musical regulation whatsoever."  

Hmm, well are you listening? People who aren't open-minded to anything contrary to their own style tend to have deaf ears. My poetry has rhythm. Of course, my rhythm is not the obvious (and hackneyed, in my opinion) rhyming patterns that poets pin to their pieces carelessly. Yes, I find excessive rhyming careless and agitating.

"It looks to me like you are more pursuing a reversal, turning away from grace and clarity, and pursuing cloudiness and uncertainty instead."  

Again, I respect your opinion, no matter how far off it is from the truth. You don't really know my writing style because you've never really read my work. I'm sure you've read the actual words of my poetry, but probably couldn't read the message. It goes back to open-mindedness, something I feel you lack in this field. You are strictly traditional, you only appreciate traditional; so why bother with anything else? I write the way I write. I don't "try" to be cloudy or give off a sense of uncertainty; that is your perception. I don't try to do anything except write. And how I write is how I think, I've said this before. I'm not sitting around thinking up ways to make my work obscure; I've said this before as well.

Just for the hell of it and the sake of the argument. I looked up "poem" on dictionary.com. Here are the first two definitions:

1. a composition in verse, esp. one that is characterized by a highly developed artistic form and by the use of heightened language and rhythm to express an intensely imaginative interpretation of the subject.  

2. composition that, though not in verse, is characterized by great beauty of language or expression.

Let's see, #1. I have a highly developed artistic form, different from many other styles; a style that I've worked on extensively. I use language, many times heightened, sometimes bland (depending on the nature of the piece and the message I wish to portray). And yes, I have rhythm, just not a rhythm you like or recognize. And I do express an intensely imaginative interpretation of my subject. More imaginative than most of the poetry I read, on this site at least (that's not ego, that's the way I see it). I find many of the poems I read to be trite, boring and painfully common. So Ess, I do write poetry.

"It just ruins art, and makes it more like the coarsness of life "out there"."

Heh, "out there?" I'd rather be "out there" than be cooped up in the closet of close-mindedness. But that's just a me thing.

Thanks for the reply!

Head Cheese & Chicken Feet

Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


27 posted 04-30-2007 12:52 AM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

quote:
It all depends on the writer, and I don't see how one could possibly even begin to disagree with that.


I do, Ed. It depends on the reader.

serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


28 posted 04-30-2007 02:15 AM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

Ed?

I don't want to seem like I am joining in a barage against you, but when you said this:

quote:
Let's see, #1. I have a highly developed artistic form, different from many other styles; a style that I've worked on extensively.


Your refusal to study traditional poets, along with a bit of obvious ignorance of specific poetic terms and therefore tools led me to ponder:

"How would he know?"

If you haven't read and studied the works of others, you can't place a claim on having developed something new.

Without study, you have no idea if you aren't utilizing methods previously employed by more mainstream (or even traditional) poets.

It might be new to you--but others might not see it that way.

And please don't feel like I'm trying to attack you either, I believe I was your age when my English Lit. professor told me that "Interpretation is fifty percent of the art of poetry." (And yes, I got just as defensive as you are now.)

An olive branch?

So...I ask you, why not just drop the defensiveness and humor us with a try at...say, a sonnet?

Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


29 posted 04-30-2007 02:28 AM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

I have to agree with Karen Ed ...

Anti-tradition, or Anti-form, can be just as binding as anything.  Closedmindedness comes in many forms, not a few of which try the hardest to appear otherwise.  

I will say that you have valid points in your response to Essorant though.  Modern expressions of poetry, particularly Free Verse, are not antithetical to good poetry.

Both of you need to explore, and add to what you have.


JMO,

Stephen.
Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


30 posted 04-30-2007 03:15 AM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

"Personally, I found the "What is Poetry" forum to be pretty useless and silly."

Fine.  Then there is no point in me speaking further, because I am just saying things that weakly echo what I feel I said more strongly in that thread.  There is no point in me speaking further to you just for everything to be shrugged off as "pretty useless and silly".

rwood
Member Elite
since 02-29-2000
Posts 3797
Tennessee


31 posted 04-30-2007 06:04 AM       View Profile for rwood   Email rwood   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for rwood

Brad and Ed,

This is a little odd, for me, and I know I'm odd, but I rarely dissect a poem unless Iím forced to for an assignment. I always feel like Iím distorting the subtleties or worse--the big picture.

I like your poem, Ed. To me, it represents the need for balance, which isnít anything new in the universality of themes, nor is it hard to understand. This is also why I find the work to be more traditional and less atypical than suggested.  I donít find it dark or disturbing, and the issue of drugs doesnít fit with me either. To me, itís a reach to be inorganic with a very organic aptitude: To be smart enough to experience balance.

Thatís my take, if itís worth anything, if not, disregard it.

The only question I have deals with S1, line 5-6:

ďA fly will go into the deep
intoís the deep.Ē

The repetition of ďinto the deep,Ē Is this meant to be a provocation of deeper still, because Into IS the deep?  The layers suggest the opposite of your explanation: [Meaning happiness is achieved through simplicity.]  Itís hard work to achieve simplicity. This is a contrast, to me, that doesnít fit into the balance, but thatís on an over-read.

The thing that bothers me is: Why do you label other's work on this site as "typical and conforming, trite, boring, and even sickening and painfully common," when your non-conforming work isn't as atypical as you've led yourself to believe? In fact, I find this piece to be as typical of free verse, as you've found the rhyming forms on this site. Your language, metaphor, structure, flow, is nothing so extraordinary that it separated itself from the fold of poetry, which is a good thing. Separating yourself from the commoners is ego, Ed.

Dictionary.com: 1.the "I" or self of any person; a person as thinking, feeling, and willing, and distinguishing itself from the selves of others and from objects of its thought.

I kindly urge you to rethink your stance, as your attitude appears to be separating you more from poetry than your work.

On the issue of obscurity:

I can identify with two types of puzzles writers use/are being taught to use in poetry.

1. The reach for something deeper and more descriptive besides the "cheating words" (heart, love, soul, life) etc.

2. Being caught with the pen down: The writer has no real material but is skilled in metaphor, so a "self-manicure" becomes the foundation of a poem. Writers are hoping that readers mistake "Slicing through the tips of moons," as "time travel" or whatever. They're just cutting their nails and passing the content off as something it's not because they're in a pinch.

Both examples produce obscurity, and the secret should be: How to avoid it. Not so much for acceptance or understanding, but for possible widespread acceptance of something completely misunderstood.

I think writers know what they're doing much of the time. Some are amused by pulling woolly words over on people, but give them a real challenge and they may fail?

I've made a mockery of form before, and I didn't like the results. Lesson learned. And content? Again, pulling words out of my...hmmm, didn't produce what I could be proud of.

Yes, I do love sonnets, and I continue to try...to write them. They keep me balanced and very humble.
Edward Grim
Senior Member
since 12-18-2005
Posts 1112
Greenville, South Carolina


32 posted 04-30-2007 04:21 PM       View Profile for Edward Grim   Email Edward Grim   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Edward Grim's Home Page   View IP for Edward Grim

God, I feel like I'm in front of HUAC with a red shirt on. I guess I'll just answer in order.

Brad,

I think you misunderstood me. I'm not talking about the reader, I'm talking about the writer. My full statement was:

"I believe no form is superior. It all depends on the writer, and I don't see how one could possibly even begin to disagree with that."

As in, a writer of one form is not better than a writer of another form strictly because of the form he chose. If a writer has no talent, it doesn't matter what form he or she uses. No talent equals no talent. The reader has nothing to do with the writing process, they only come into play after the fact.

_______________________________

Karen,

"I don't want to seem like I am joining in a barage against you, but when you said this:"

It's ok; it seems to a popular thing to do.

"Your refusal to study traditional poets, along with..."

Where'd you come up with that? My refusal to study traditional poems? Have I ever refused to study traditional poems? No. I wrote traditional poetry for eight years, Karen. I studied it in school and took extra courses at a community college. When I grew up, I decided I didn't like it. It was boring and dull, so I changed my style; this was about three years ago. So yes, I would know. I'm not the moron everyone thinks I am.

"...a bit of obvious ignorance of specific poetic terms and therefore tools led me to ponder"

That's nice. I fumbled with the speaker and the author once (even when Brad admitted there's sometimes no difference between the two) and I'm all of the sudden ignorant? (I just wanted to make sure Brad didnít think I was a drug addict. Because they know Iím interested in drug culture and apparently I write like a drug addict; I didnít want him to get the wrong idea). You shouldn't be so quick to dish out the ďignorant label.Ē I suppose I can see why you would say that, but no, that's not the case at all.

"Without study, you have no idea if you aren't utilizing methods previously employed by more mainstream (or even traditional) poets"

I am utilizing mainstream methods. Do you think I've created an entirely different style of poetry? Or worse, do you think that I think that? My poetry is not that different and I am not even really good. In fact, I fail to ever see when I'm good because all people can complain about is how supposedly "weird" I write. I don't think my style is strange or that obscure. Itís like was John said, ďWelcome to a world that is not at all impressed by you.Ē Before I was mad when he said that, but heís right.

"It might be new to you--but others might not see it that way"

Karen, I've been writing for almost eleven years now. None of this is "new" to me. Karen, I like you a lot and I think you're a top-notch writer but you have to stop making these funky assumptions. lol

"And please don't feel like I'm trying to attack you either"

I don't think you're attacking me, I think you're really trying to help me.

"So...I ask you, why not just drop the defensiveness and humor us with a try at...say, a sonnet?"

Why? Why do you want to see me write a traditional poem so much? If you look at my early, early posts you'll see some traditional poetry. That was before my style changed. My earlier poetry makes me sick, so you can read it but just don't copy and paste it to discuss it. I really don't want to get into my old poetry. I know you're trying to help and I appreciate it very much my friend. Friend being the key word there. I'll maybe try to write a sonnet, I don't think I'll be able to though, there's only so much I can stomach, heh. If I do, I'll just email it to you because there's no way in hell I'm posting it, lol.

Thanks Karen.

_________________________________

Steph,

"Anti-tradition, or Anti-form, can be just as binding as anything."

Sure it can, if it's not done right. Traditional form can be awful if itís not done right; which brings me back to the fact that the form doesn't matter as much as the skill of the writer.

"Closedmindedness comes in many forms, not a few of which try the hardest to appear otherwise."

True. But I'm not close-minded to traditional poetry because, as I was telling Karen, I tried it for the better part of my writing "career." I tried it and didn't like it. Good thing I was open to new styles.

_______________________________

Oh Ess, Don't be sensitive.

"Then there is no point in me speaking further, because I am just saying things that weakly echo what I feel I said more strongly in that thread.  There is no point in me speaking further to you just for everything to be shrugged off as "pretty useless and silly"."

I said the "What is Poetry" forum was pretty useless and silly. Not you. It wasn't even your thread. I said that because I felt nobody got anywhere in that thread. I'm always interested in what you have to say. I can't guarantee I'll like what you say or agree but I'm always interested.


_________________________

Regina,

"This is also why I find the work to be more traditional and less atypical than suggested."

Wow, thank you. I've always thought of my work as "not so strange" but the usual replies I get made me think otherwise.

"I donít find it dark or disturbing, and the issue of drugs doesnít fit with me either."

You nailed it because it wasn't a dark story to begin with. I rarely write darkly.

[The thing that bothers me is: Why do you label other's work on this site as "typical and conforming, trite, boring, and even sickening and painfully common,"]

Well I'm not really labeling other's works as trite; that's just my opinion. I've read much of the poetry and it doesn't interest me. I dig a lot of the poetry on PiP's, but there's only a few poets on here that I specifically look for. I'm sorry if that sounds "snotty", but that's just how I feel. I also admit that I have horrible taste in poetry. My friends always give me hell for not liking Frost or Longfellow or Louis Stevenson (except Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hide). I can't help it; they just don't interest me, much to my chagrin.

"when your non-conforming work isn't as atypical as you've led yourself to believe?"

Whoa now, hold your horses for a second. I've said many times before that I never thought my work was that different. If I may quote myself from the "What is Poetry" forum:

"I never really thought my poems were that strange until people kept saying so."

I too thought my poems were typical, to a certain degree. But the majority of replies I get on this site suggest that my style is too different to understand or I'm too obscure. I don't get it.

"In fact, I find this piece to be as typical of free verse, as you've found the rhyming forms on this site."

You are the first person on this site to say that and all I can really say is thank you.

"Your language, metaphor, structure, flow, is nothing so extraordinary that it separated itself from the fold of poetry, which is a good thing."

I agree, that is a great thing.

"Separating yourself from the commoners is ego, Ed."

Yes, I'm sure it sounds like that is what I'm attempting to do, but it's simply not the case. (I may be egotistical on some days but for the most part, I have the self-esteem of a fly.) I never thought my poetry was that different until, like I said, people kept saying otherwise. If I may, here are some snippets of usual replies I get:

"I don't always understand what you write, but I don't think you expect me to."

"I am not always clear what the hell you are talking about - but I still like it."

"Too different I guess.  I just don't understand."

"First off I have to say I like your poem a lot but cannot fully understand it."

"I don't pretend to understand all of your work that you do... I want to but it just doesn't get thru to me.."

"ur weird..have some flowers!"

"This is really bizarre"

"i am glad you do not smoke meth."

(The last is one of my favorites.) So as you can see, this idea that my work is "atypical" never came from me. Don't you think it burns me that people rarely understand me? Well, it does.

"as your attitude appears to be separating you more from poetry than your work."

Mmm, I disagree.

"They're just cutting their nails and passing the content off as something it's not because they're in a pinch"

Well, I hope this isn't how my stuff is looked at, probably is. I've said before that my thoughts on paper are how I think. I'm not trying to be obscure, I don't think my poetry is as obscure as some people let on.

Thanks for all the advice Regina, I really appreciate it.

Head Cheese & Chicken Feet

serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


33 posted 04-30-2007 05:42 PM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

I like YOU, too, Ed!

I am, though, admittedly, a drug addict. (They are just administered to me legally now--Um, need a chill pill? ) I drink too. I'm allowed. I don't drive, I'm 45, and I live in Hell.

I am also, admittedly ignorant too. I don't have a problem with ignorance. Stupidity drives me a bit buggy though. There's nothing wrong with ignorance, Ed. Everybody is ignorant about something, only a fool thinks he knows it all. (See? I just had to correct a noun verb disagreement.)

And I'm asking for one  sonnet Ed. I think there's a law somewhere that everyone must write at least 100 really crappy sonnets and attempt a Sestina three times before they can truly say they have suffered for their art. ESPECIALLY THE SESTINA. I cannot write a true haiku to save my life. (It's a very subtle sorta thing, and subtle ain't my specialty.) I drove Balladeer nuts too, 'cause he took plenty of time and trouble to teach me how to create "flow" with neat rhymes, but I just can't put down the free verse. (I generally considered my own poems more like, um, lyric--and I LIKE the slant rhymes.) I also like to employ assonance, occasional alliteration, and layered metaphor. (I over-do that alot.)

This ain't the MIT of Poetry, Ed.

Just write a freaking sonnet. We have several models to choose from, too!

Now if you'll excuse me, I have hot wings in the oven and a genuine rash on me arse.

Subtle....HA!

gleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Just have fun, Ed. I gotta run!------->zip

Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


34 posted 04-30-2007 06:07 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

quote:
As in, a writer of one form is not better than a writer of another form strictly because of the form he chose. If a writer has no talent, it doesn't matter what form he or she uses. No talent equals no talent. The reader has nothing to do with the writing process, they only come into play after the fact.


Ooops. My bad.

Yes, bad poetry comes in many forms (any form).
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


35 posted 04-30-2007 06:45 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

Let's go back to the poem for a moment:

quote:
A fly will go into the deep,
intoís the deep,


ĒOkay, following the first sentence, we get a confirmation that the fly will, at some time in the future, enter the mouth, and presumably fly down the esophagus.Ē

quote:
Ok, here is where weíre having problems. This poem is a metaphor Brad. Donít think of it like ďthe fly will enter the mouth, down the esophagus, through the stomach and intestines.Ē No no. The fly enters the head. The fly like an idea, enters the head. Don't think of it so literally.


But how am I supposed to get from the fly to the idea with what you've given me. Even if I suspect that the fly is a stand in for something else, where do you lead me to the head and not the deep? I don't think it's a matter of literal versus metaphorical but where you, in fact, tell me to go.

A poem read literally can still be a metaphor for something else. A poem read metaphorically should still work within the context of the metaphor itself. Isn't that why we talk about levels or layers to a poem?

If there's anything I'm trying to get at here, it's that a metaphor is never an excuse to avoid getting the 'surface' level right.

Oh, and don't tell me how to read!

------------------------

A couple of quick points:

Please don't feel obligated to defend the poem. You like it, others like it and that's fine. My hope is simply that we can talk about poetry using your poem as an example.

You mentioned Derrida in the other thread. I would be very careful using Derrida as an example of much of anything. Yes, he's funny sometimes, he's provocative, and can be powerful. But he is also horribly, horribly obscure and even contradictory at times.

As someone else pointed out, if you understand everything Derrida writes, you haven't really read Derrida (and I think that's part of the point). I'm not saying that you have made any claims on Derrida (that you understand everything etc.), it's just that when sometimes, someone says, "I don't understand this," that's probably a better understanding than when someone says he does.

rwood
Member Elite
since 02-29-2000
Posts 3797
Tennessee


36 posted 05-01-2007 06:28 AM       View Profile for rwood   Email rwood   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for rwood

Ed,

You're welcome.


At least you're garnering replies.

I personally love this one:

"ur weird..have some flowers!"  Laugh.

Just a hint for future reference: People who use text message code in their replies are not to be trusted as experts on poetry or poets. Like, y'know? They are slinef.

"Don't you think it burns me that people rarely understand me? Well, it does"

Darlin', I'll tell you what I told my daughter. She's 18 and has won 2 very large poetry competitions. Her trophies are bigger than she is. And she's competing for a chance to go to Washington with the last one. Plus, she's earned a scholarship for college over her writing, and she still feels like "no one really gets her." Huh? Her poetry is deeply spiritual and it's her ministry in life to reach out to others with her whole heart and soul.

I asked her, "Do you understand me at all times over every thing after all these years?"

She said, "No. Not always."

"Then quit thinking people should understand you on paper after one read, having never met you without any clue where you came from or where you're going. We're all strangers in the game and we get acquainted through expression. We may connect on a large scale or a tiny one, or we part ways and take separate routes, which is what the majority of her poetry is about, "the path to righteousness, or her spiritual journey."

She needs to understand herself. I guess that's what I'm for? It's a joy to help out.

Keep up the hard work.

Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


37 posted 05-01-2007 11:27 AM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

rwood,

yep.



PS I disagree with everything else.
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


38 posted 05-01-2007 11:28 AM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

What does slinef mean?
Larry C
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Patricius
since 09-10-2001
Posts 10765
United States


39 posted 05-01-2007 08:17 PM       View Profile for Larry C   Email Larry C   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Larry C's Home Page   View IP for Larry C

Reg,
She sure has a smart mama.
rwood
Member Elite
since 02-29-2000
Posts 3797
Tennessee


40 posted 05-01-2007 10:02 PM       View Profile for rwood   Email rwood   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for rwood

slinef= so lame it's not even funny.

I know, I know. Tisnf= That is so not fair.

Yep, people usually do

disagree with me, that is.


Larry~ She's a much bigger person than I'll ever be, but she keeps me alert and on my toes trying.


oceanvu2
Senior Member
since 02-24-2007
Posts 1007
Santa Monica, California, USA


41 posted 05-02-2007 04:53 PM       View Profile for oceanvu2   Email oceanvu2   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for oceanvu2

Edster:

I hate to use quotes brashly,
But here's the gist of the thing expressed in a form uniquely Ogden Nashly:

From "Very Like A Whale"  by Ogden Nash.

One thing that literature would be greatly the better for
Would be a more restricted employment by authors of simile and metaphor.
Authors of all races, be they Greeks, Romans, Teutons, or Celts,
Can't seem to say that anything is the thing it is but have to go out of their way to say that it is like something elts."

These are the first four lines of the poem, memorized when I was 20, so they may be slightly off.  Of course, Ogden Nash was often considered to be slightly "off" himself...

Jim

Edward Grim
Senior Member
since 12-18-2005
Posts 1112
Greenville, South Carolina


42 posted 05-02-2007 06:06 PM       View Profile for Edward Grim   Email Edward Grim   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Edward Grim's Home Page   View IP for Edward Grim

Brad:

"But how am I supposed to get from the fly to the idea with what you've given me. Even if I suspect that the fly is a stand in for something else, where do you lead me to the head and not the deep? I don't think it's a matter of literal versus metaphorical but where you, in fact, tell me to go."

Yeah I see what you're saying Brad. I did repeat the line for emphasis and to add a sinister voice to it, hence the 's, like I said before. The head is the deep, I guess, as in deep into the head. And about me telling you where to go, you really shouldn't take directions from me, heh. I may put up a "big front" but I'm pretty inexperienced. Until I publish something, I consider myself to be completely inexperienced. I don't care what Uncle Sam says, I'm still a kid. Sometimes I let my metaphors and double meanings get away from me, you know? I need to work on that, well, I have been working on that. My recently posted poem "Asian Army of Clay Men" is one of my recent attempts of being straightforward and not "clouding" the piece with too many metaphors.

"A poem read literally can still be a metaphor for something else."

That is very true. I need to learn that.

"A poem read metaphorically should still work within the context of the metaphor itself. Isn't that why we talk about levels or layers to a poem?"

Great advice Brad.

"Oh, and don't tell me how to read!"

Sorry, I wasn't trying to.

"You mentioned Derrida in the other thread. I would be very careful using Derrida as an example of much of anything."

Yeah he's pretty out there. I was just making a point.

"But he is also horribly, horribly obscure and even contradictory at times."

You don't have to wonder why I like him. I like his obscurity but mostly I like that he can get away with it. I saw a great documentary about him and his life; he's crazy. I like how he mostly tells what Deconstruction is not. And how even people who call themselves Deconstructionists can't fully describe it. I just like that whole concept.

"As someone else pointed out, if you understand everything Derrida writes, you haven't really read Derrida (and I think that's part of the point). I'm not saying that you have made any claims on Derrida (that you understand everything etc.), it's just that when sometimes, someone says, "I don't understand this," that's probably a better understanding than when someone says he does."

Yeah well, I don't understand him at all. And that's not to say that I do understand him more than someone who claims to understand him. I'm trying to read Deconstruction and I just don't get it, at the present time at least. I'm hoping by the time I'm done reading it, I might have a clue, hopefully. But who knows, my brain is like a small nightclub and there is a high admittance fee to get in. And there's always drunk people dancing around in it.

__________________________

Regina,

You sound like a super mom. Your daughter is lucky to have you. You said she needs to understand herself. I know how she feels. I understand myself like I understand metaphysics. That's to say, I've heard of metaphysics but I know nothing about it. I'm lucky though, I stopped searching for definition long ago. Thanks again.


________________________

Jim,

I love Nash. I remember my grandpa always reciting some of his little poems, like: Candy is dandy: but liquor is quicker. That's all I can remember. Thanks Jimbeaux, (I dig that spelling man, hehe).

Head Cheese & Chicken Feet

oceanvu2
Senior Member
since 02-24-2007
Posts 1007
Santa Monica, California, USA


43 posted 05-02-2007 06:27 PM       View Profile for oceanvu2   Email oceanvu2   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for oceanvu2

Edster:  "Candy is Dandy" also turned up in a song recorded by Sippy Waters and Bessie Smith among others, and sounds like something from Jelly Roll Morton, who only stole from the best.

Candy is dandy but liquor is quicker,
I can drink all the liquor down in Costa Rica,
Ain't nobody's business but my own!

Which adds absolutely nothing to the discussion.

Jimbeaux
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> Philosophy 101 >> Ed's poem "The Academician" and discussi   [ Page: 1  2  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors