a companion to 30 in 30

[Eluard]

By contrast, Eliot footnoted the hell out of his obscure references so that we would be sure to know exactly what he was talking about.

bijou

I don't disagree with anything that you and Tathagata below are saying. I do tend to think, however, that successful works, by definition, communicate with and reach some readers. It is not possible to communicate with all or perhaps even most people, but if there is even one person who just "gets" what you are trying to say then you can't have failed. (If even one person can solve a maths problem then it must be solvable.)

And that has always been the case with me: I don't think I write easy poetry, but there have always been people who have gotten it very well. So I know that I am not failing to express what I wanted to get across. Those who don't get it, therefore, are not my concern: they will like someone else's work perhaps.

BTW — I think the above comment about Eliot is wrong. Eliot only added those notes to The Waste land because the quarto volume would have had blank pages otherwise. He had the option to either add more poems, or fill the pages with notes. He chose to do the latter, with tongue firmly in cheek. Po-faced English professors make far too much of those notes. Eliot was really trying to distance himself from his own nervous breakdown, by pretending that it involved a lot of scholarship! But even he had a humorous view of the matter.

 

[unpredictablebijou]

BTW — I think the above comment about Eliot is wrong. Eliot only added those notes to The Waste land because the quarto volume would have had blank pages otherwise. He had the option to either add more poems, or fill the pages with notes. He chose to do the latter, with tongue firmly in cheek. Po-faced English professors make far too much of those notes. Eliot was really trying to distance himself from his own nervous breakdown, by pretending that it involved a lot of scholarship! But even he had a humorous view of the matter.

Y'see, there ya go. I didn't know that. And isn't it ironic, and completely within the topic, that those references and notes, though they were relatively unimportant to Eliot, are often the focus of scholarship about his work now.

Learn somethin' every day, I do.

bijou

 

[Tzara]

BTW — I think the above comment about Eliot is wrong. Eliot only added those notes to The Waste land because the quarto volume would have had blank pages otherwise. He had the option to either add more poems, or fill the pages with notes. He chose to do the latter, with tongue firmly in cheek. Po-faced English professors make far too much of those notes. Eliot was really trying to distance himself from his own nervous breakdown, by pretending that it involved a lot of scholarship! But even he had a humorous view of the matter.

Well Eliot's story was that he added the footnotes to fill out the book:

The notes to The Waste Land! I had at first intended only to put down all the references for my quotations, with a view to spiking the guns of critics of my earlier poems who had accused me of plagiarism. Then, when it came time to print The Waste Land as a little book - for the poem on its first appearance in The Dial and in The Criterion had no notes whatever - it was discovered that the poem was inconveniently short, so I set to work to expand the notes, in order to provide a few more pages of printed matter, with the result that they became the remarkable exposition of bogus scholarship that is still on view to-day.

from "The Frontiers of Criticism"​

but apparently that has been disproved (see paragraph four).

You're right, though, about much of this being tongue-in-cheek. And certainly The Waste Land is the apotheosis of critlit among twentieth century poems.

 

[unpredictablebijou]

Maybe Eliot wasn't the best example. There may be a better case of a poet who had an immense attachment to making sure their references and meaning were absolutely clear.

The main question is one of balance, I think. One has to ask, what's my goal for this piece, and what sort of feedback, if any, is going to assist me in reaching it?

It seems to me that it might be really productive, when asking for feedback, to say a bit about what your goal is, what your ideas were for the piece. That way, folks can tell you whether or not you accomplished it, and possibly even help with ways to clarify or improve on the message.

In writers groups of the distant past, I found that sort of dialogue immensely productive. It really helped to be able to say, well, here's what I was trying to get to, and have people tell me how I succeeded and failed at those goals.

m'self, I don't give a shit. I just post so that everyone will tell me how wonderful I am all the time. At the first sign of negative critique, I'm going to take my Byron and run home, crying petulantly about how you're all trying to ruin my natural and authentic voice.

bijou

still waiting for the application form for the Oval to arrive in the mail.

 

[Eluard]

Well Eliot's story was that he added the footnotes to fill out the book:

The notes to The Waste Land! I had at first intended only to put down all the references for my quotations, with a view to spiking the guns of critics of my earlier poems who had accused me of plagiarism. Then, when it came time to print The Waste Land as a little book - for the poem on its first appearance in The Dial and in The Criterion had no notes whatever - it was discovered that the poem was inconveniently short, so I set to work to expand the notes, in order to provide a few more pages of printed matter, with the result that they became the remarkable exposition of bogus scholarship that is still on view to-day.

from "The Frontiers of Criticism"​

but apparently that has been disproved (see paragraph four).

You're right, though, about much of this being tongue-in-cheek. And certainly The Waste Land is the apotheosis of critlit among twentieth century poems.

Thanks Tzara — a very interesting article! But I would like to see more on the real scholarship — who knew what when, at exactly what date did the notes first make their appearance, etc.

This article argues what I have long thought was true: that the notes are a cover and a distraction from the very personal nature of the poem, from Eliot's nervous breakdown. They wrap the whole thing in an order that it doesn't really possess. But then how could it? We've known for years that the structure of the poem is really Pound's structure — he edited a very sprawling manuscript down to about a third its size. Whatever was left makes a unity that is imposed by Pound, not Eliot.

One problem that I have with the article is the hilarious postmodern posturing that it goes in for — "as postmodernism has demonstrated" etc. Christ I find those people insufferable!

 

[Eluard]

I am tired of being
together so I promise
to hold still while you take
me apart. I won’t cry
unless you want me to
or complain that I can’t move.
I want to keep my mind
but I don’t want it full
of decisions. Move the focus
out of my skull and spread
my thoughts over my skin, warming
the surface and then sinking
in a cycle that drains
me until I am only in this moment
and all that matters is that it never ends.
Make this room a window
to the night and me your mannequin
but leave me with eyes
that dilate in the light
so I can close them
against the dawn and the return
of my one pose and the unanswered
knocks against my plastic skin.

The best poem I have seen from you! Well done!

 

[Eluard]

[/indent]but apparently that has been disproved (see paragraph four).

You're right, though, about much of this being tongue-in-cheek. And certainly The Waste Land is the apotheosis of critlit among twentieth century poems.

I did some digging: apparently the person who did the scholarly investigation is one Stanley Sultan, in Joyce, Eliot and Company. I'm going to get the book and have a look at his evidence. It will be interesting to see whether this is all just his opinion, or if it's well-suppported.

 

[Tzara]

One problem that I have with the article is the hilarious postmodern posturing that it goes in for — "as postmodernism has demonstrated" etc. Christ I find those people insufferable!

Oh, fine. Urinate all over my fantasy of retiring from my dull but well-paid job in software sales to earn a PhD in English Lit and go on to instruct eager undergraduates on the subtle joys of poetry and to write detailed and fussy articles about fey modernist, uh, writers. Poets. Writers.

Whatever.

I know what you mean about that article. Academic writing can epitomize caricature. That is especially painful when it is analyzing the work of people who actually can write. Write well.

But I can be as obtuse and logorrheic as anyone, godammit. Hey, Freshman! Drop down and give me a sentence! No run ons or comma splices! Hup! Hup! Hup!

 

[Eluard]

Hey, Freshman! Drop down and give me a sentence! No run ons or comma splices! Hup! Hup! Hup!

Ummm that freshman who is giving you a "sentence" — how old is she?

Gotta watch out for that there textual harrassment…

 

[Tathagata]

sara - 7

I am tired of being
together so I promise
to hold still while you take
me apart. I won’t cry
unless you want me to
or complain that I can’t move.
I want to keep my mind
but I don’t want it full
of decisions. Move the focus
out of my skull and spread
my thoughts over my skin, warming
the surface and then sinking
in a cycle that drains
me until I am only in this moment
and all that matters is that it never ends.
Make this room a window
to the night and me your mannequin
but leave me with eyes
that dilate in the light
so I can close them
against the dawn and the return
of my one pose and the unanswered
knocks against my plastic skin.

I would say this ranks up there among your best


You are writing some great stuff this time through
very personal, honest, stark poetry
keep tapping that place where it's coming from

 

[unpredictablebijou]

Ummm that freshman who is giving you a "sentence" — how old is she?

Gotta watch out for that there textual harrassment…

Aaaaargh!
That was excellent. It caused me actual physical pain.

 

[Angeline]

<snip>

still waiting for the application form for the Oval to arrive in the mail.

There is no application form. You become a member by osmosis. In fact, you won't even realize you've become a part of the oval until some angry person here accuses you of membership (usually in relation to their having been somehow excluded). Then you really know you've ascended.

 

[unpredictablebijou]

There is no application form. You become a member by osmosis. In fact, you won't even realize you've become a part of the oval until some angry person here accuses you of membership (usually in relation to their having been somehow excluded). Then you really know you've ascended.

So hey, I need to start going round and deliberately trying to piss people off. Instead of just doing it accidentally like I have been. Thanks for the tip!

On the actual topic of the thread, I went down in flames yesterday on my most recent attempt. Drama overwhelmed me. I will begin again stat. It's becoming a fun exercise now. Besides, I'm still waiting for the next foodfight.

 

[Angeline]

So hey, I need to start going round and deliberately trying to piss people off. Instead of just doing it accidentally like I have been. Thanks for the tip!

On the actual topic of the thread, I went down in flames yesterday on my most recent attempt. Drama overwhelmed me. I will begin again stat. It's becoming a fun exercise now. Besides, I'm still waiting for the next foodfight.

No! That's the beauty part: you don't even need to try. Just write poems and say whatever you like in your posts, no subtext. About six months from now you will be accused of belonging to an exclusionary clique (aka "the oval"). Well, you might say something--innocuous, even helpful, from your standpoint--like "people should edit their poems and fix the typos." Three unnamed poets will have vapors and any poems you have posted will be one-bombed.

I swear I am not making this up.

 

[Eluard]

Besides, I'm still waiting for the next foodfight.

Ha! Ovaltine! When you least expect it!! A pie in the face for you, SC, and Angeline. :: runs away, laughing in deranged fashion ::

 

[unpredictablebijou]

Ha! Ovaltine! When you least expect it!! A pie in the face for you, SC, and Angeline. :: runs away, laughing in deranged fashion ::

* tasting *


...say. What kind of pie IS this?

I'm gettin' the moo shu shrimp. Right now.

bijou

 

[Eluard]

* tasting *


...say. What kind of pie IS this?

I'm gettin' the moo shu shrimp. Right now.

bijou

Baked it ma self, from home grown ingredients.

And no, that's not "shrimp" — we bakers don't like to use that word.

But I believe that gives me the first strike.

 

[unpredictablebijou]

shrimp. jelly.

noble thoughts on poetry.

that's my story and I'm sticking to it.

 

[annaswirls]

Originally Posted by unpredictablebijou

<snip>

still waiting for the application form for the Oval to arrive in the mail.

interestingly enough, from my limited experience, people who are in the Oval, due to some mysterious optical illusion, are the only ones who cannot see it.... so if you can't, congratulations, you are already in!

 

[Sara Crewe]

Indeed, which gives me the right to avoid all blame for what happens next, since I can always show clear evidence that you started it.

Right then.

How would you like your chocolate cake, sir? mashed into the front of your shirt or crumbled up and sifted into the back of your pants?

and... ha HA!
Grape jelly in a squeeze bottle!

*running away really fast*

*tripping and falling down*

I am stuck pondering if grape jelly in a squueze bottle is kinda gross even before it's squirted at anyone. It's a personal revelation for me. I had no idea I was a jelly/jam snob.

 

[annaswirls]

4degrees:

I love your idea of a reverse Frankenstein, and hope you write even more about him! A series!!!

 

[Eluard]

Indeed, which gives me the right to avoid all blame for what happens next, since I can always show clear evidence that you started it.

Right then.

How would you like your chocolate cake, sir? mashed into the front of your shirt or crumbled up and sifted into the back of your pants?

and... ha HA!
Grape jelly in a squeeze bottle!

*running away really fast*

*tripping and falling down*

Well let me just savour the cinematic aspects of that first pie — you recall Cagney and the grapefruit? Just like that it was!

As for how I'd like the chocolate cake? It's thrower's choice, baby! Gimme your best shot!

Grape jelly in a squeeze bottle seems to be ratcheting the warfare up a notch. Do we really want what amounts to biological warfare? Or do we want to keep this within the Gen. Con.?

 

[unpredictablebijou]

I am stuck pondering if grape jelly in a squueze bottle is kinda gross even before it's squirted at anyone. It's a personal revelation for me. I had no idea I was a jelly/jam snob.

It's good ONLY as a weapon, not as a food source.

That's not snobbery. Grape jelly in a squeeze bottle is just wrong.

slightly and accidentally on topic, I will start attempt number three tonight.

or maybe tomorrow.

Tzara:
sometimes I wish you were T.S. Eliot. I can't be that well-read in everything...

bijou

 

[unpredictablebijou]

Well let me just savour the cinematic aspects of that first pie — you recall Cagney and the grapefruit? Just like that it was!

As for how I'd like the chocolate cake? It's thrower's choice, baby! Gimme your best shot!

Grape jelly in a squeeze bottle seems to be ratcheting the warfare up a notch. Do we really want what amounts to biological warfare? Or do we want to keep this within the Gen. Con.?

I know that scene very well, mister, and that was mean. Not just regular mean. Cagney mean.

hence the grape jelly. Screw the Geneva Convention.

I've got a jar of Nutella too. So watch it.

 

[Sara Crewe]

I know that scene very well, mister, and that was mean. Not just regular mean. Cagney mean.

hence the grape jelly. Screw the Geneva Convention.

I've got a jar of Nutella too. So watch it.

If you want mean, tie him up and make him eat a grape jelly from a squeeze jar and nutella sandwich.