Bewitched, Bothered and Butters: The Interview

[Angeline]

You're asking about the willing suspension of disbelief, that critical quality in writing (though it's traditionally applied to writing drama) that allows the reader to live the words. I've been fascinated by this concept since I first heard of it in school.

I would say that it depends as much on the reader and what experiences they bring to the party as it does on the writer. If I have no experience of what you are writing about it's hard for me to go beyond thinking to feeling. That's why it's important, imho, to find ways to convey the universal qualities in the poems one chooses to write. For example, you may not be familiar with X flower but everyone has had the experience of holding flowers and feeling petals. So my job as a poet is to mix those in such a way as to reach more readers.

Also some poems are more about thinking than feeling. I think of them as "intellect poems." What I get from reading a poem like that is understanding, not necessarily a shared experience. It can be a great poem, just not one that has that feeling effect on me.

I think your poem plenty of fish in the sea is a good example of one where I can suspend my disbelief.

 

[theognis]

If I may, there's a question I'd like to ask anyone who feels like answering:

when I'm reading poetry (mine or other people's), what I want most of all is to be lost in what the lines create . . . to become a part of the poem, for the words themselves to disappear being replaced by colour/shape/light/texture/movement/emotions. In fewer words, to have an "experience". This is something I'm most keen to work towards creating as I write, though it's a matter of feeling my way. Can anyone tell me if I have come remotely close to this for them as they read something of mine, or do the faults and contrivances get in the way too much for this to happen? Am I any better at getting close to this in my shorter pieces, or does their length have no relevance to this?

I wrote this in another thread:

"I think much of the beauty and genius of good poetry is in what's left unspoken. If a poem is really good, the reader is prompted, even commanded, to become his or her own speaker, and to fill in empty spaces with his or her own ideas, images, troubles, conflict, development, etc., until the poem is complete."

Your poem plenty of fish in the sea caused me to be my own speaker, and to provide "color/shape/light/texture/movement/emotions" and a great deal more to the work, some of which you did not intend, as I've since learned. It's a great poem, in my opinion, but I still like my interpretation of it better than the one you intended.

 

[butters]

Thanks, guys. I'll be back tomorrow or Wednesday to reply to these last posts. Really appreciate your responses.

 

[butters]

You're asking about the willing suspension of disbelief, that critical quality in writing (though it's traditionally applied to writing drama) that allows the reader to live the words. I've been fascinated by this concept since I first heard of it in school.

Ah, I suppose that's what the crux of the thing is - is there a shorter name for it than 'the willing suspension of disbelief' applicable to poetry writers?

I would say that it depends as much on the reader and what experiences they bring to the party as it does on the writer. If I have no experience of what you are writing about it's hard for me to go beyond thinking to feeling. That's why it's important, imho, to find ways to convey the universal qualities in the poems one chooses to write. For example, you may not be familiar with X flower but everyone has had the experience of holding flowers and feeling petals. So my job as a poet is to mix those in such a way as to reach more readers.

Love how you explain this so it makes sense!

Also some poems are more about thinking than feeling. I think of them as "intellect poems." What I get from reading a poem like that is understanding, not necessarily a shared experience. It can be a great poem, just not one that has that feeling effect on me.

*nods* Head poems, uh huh, as opposed to heart poems.

I think your poem plenty of fish in the sea is a good example of one where I can suspend my disbelief.

That's because you're a good reader with heart Thanks for taking the time to respond to that question, A.

I wrote this in another thread:

"I think much of the beauty and genius of good poetry is in what's left unspoken. If a poem is really good, the reader is prompted, even commanded, to become his or her own speaker, and to fill in empty spaces with his or her own ideas, images, troubles, conflict, development, etc., until the poem is complete."

Your poem plenty of fish in the sea caused me to be my own speaker, and to provide "color/shape/light/texture/movement/emotions" and a great deal more to the work, some of which you did not intend, as I've since learned. It's a great poem, in my opinion, but I still like my interpretation of it better than the one you intended.

Thankyou, theo, for letting me know that worked so well for you. Not sure I agree with your generous 'great', but it's not a thing I'm going to knock - especially since you illustrate to perfection Angeline's point about what/how much a reader brings to any write. If your interpretation works better for you, it's also worth noting that perhaps a poet needs to not explain their piece as it might highlight the differences between the author's intentions and the reader's perceptions!

 

[Angeline]

butters, dear lady, here is a wiki on the expression "willing suspension of disbelief." I was associating it with drama (and, I think, mixing it up with deus ex machina, which is entirely different). But the real surprise is that the phrase was coined by none other than Coleridge in his Biographia Literaria, which I actually remember reading an excerpt from in my Norton Anthology (and probably then promptly falling asleep!).

So what else can we call it here? Living the poem? By the way I like your distinction between head and heart poems. That's an easy trope to remember.

 

[butters]

butters, dear lady, here is a wiki on the expression "willing suspension of disbelief." I was associating it with drama (and, I think, mixing it up with deus ex machina, which is entirely different). But the real surprise is that the phrase was coined by none other than Coleridge in his Biographia Literaria, which I actually remember reading an excerpt from in my Norton Anthology (and probably then promptly falling asleep!).

So what else can we call it here? Living the poem? By the way I like your distinction between head and heart poems. That's an easy trope to remember.

Thanks, again, Angeline! Coleridge . . . somehow that doesn't surprise me, given his poem (one of my all-time favourites) Kubla Khan which has phrases that entirely enchant me. Interesting to see how the onus of the term has been largely transferred nowadays to the reader/audience rather than its original intention which, I feel, applies to poets today just the same as it did then:

Coleridge recalled:

”... It was agreed, that my endeavours should be directed to persons and characters supernatural, or at least romantic, yet so as to transfer from our inward nature a human interest and a semblance of truth sufficient to procure for these shadows of imagination that willing suspension of disbelief for the moment, which constitutes poetic faith.

poetic faith . . . I believe this is the term I'm going to grab onto and apply myself to.

As to falling promptly to sleep -

Head v Heart - yeah . . . I can really enjoy and appreciate the complexities, skills and whatnots of head poetry, but all at a cerebral level and so it misses engaging my emotional input and it leaves me less satisfied (perhaps more as author than reader) than heart stuff.

Is it just me or do you guys find this kind of cute, how these great poets of their day had discussions about their writing and how best to reach their audience? Time changes and the world moves on, but people - well, people are people:

Coleridge coined the phrase in his Biographia Literaria, published in 1817, in the context of the creation and reading of poetry. Chapter XIV describes the preparations with Wordsworth for their revolutionary collaboration Lyrical Ballads (first edition 1798), for which Coleridge had contributed the more romantic, Gothic pieces including The Rime of the Ancient Mariner. Poetry and fiction involving the supernatural had gone out of fashion to a large extent in the 18th century, in part due to the declining belief in witches and other supernatural agents among the educated classes, who embraced the rational approach to the world offered by the new science. Alexander Pope, notably, felt the need to explain and justify his use of elemental spirits in The Rape of the Lock, one of the few English poems of the century that invoked the supernatural. Coleridge wished to revive the use of fantastic elements in poetry. The concept of "willing suspension of disbelief" explained how a modern, enlightened audience might continue to enjoy such types of story.

I'm loving how Alexander Pope 'felt the need to explain'.

 

[GuiltyPleasure]

Hello, it's me again. I have loved your poem uninvited since you submitted it in '11 I think. You create some great sounds and manage to weave and twist the narrative into new shapes almost with each line. Can you tell us what inspired this poem, if you can remember, it was some time ago now.

 

[butters]

Hello, it's me again. I have loved your poem uninvited since you submitted it in '11 I think. You create some great sounds and manage to weave and twist the narrative into new shapes almost with each line. Can you tell us what inspired this poem, if you can remember, it was some time ago now.

Hey, Tess

Thanks for the vote of confidence on that one. If I remember rightly, it was written for one of the challenges . . . a form one, the name of which eludes me, but we had to choose one line and repeat that line on each verse/strophe but moving it down by one line each time. IF that's correct, it was likely the only stipulation and the rest was all my own fault Could be I was just experimenting with the discipline of form in order to gain more control over how I write.

Inspiration expanded all from that first line - and that first line came from no3 son having eaten biscuits on my bed whilst watching a film; I loathe crumbs in my bed because they really really do drive me nuts, feeling more like pebbles. So I guess that makes me a bit of a princess, hence the deep bed and the peas reference, which led into Grimms fairy tale allusions. I'd hoped they were all familiar enough to readers for them not to have to work too hard to recognise them, and (at the same time) wanted to do that piggy-back thing of using reader's own familiar experiences. Who hasn't had crumbs in their beds from time to time? It's downright irritating!

As Liar so rightly pointed out, the beginning is way stronger than the other three verses, illustrating the difference between the inspiration and the perspiration of puzzling how to make the words and images fit the form and trying to make something cohesive of it.

Thanks again.

 

[GuiltyPleasure]

It is only fair to submit Ms Butters to......


My World Famous Questionaire

• If you could live anywhere in the world where would it be?

• What is the best gift you’ve received?

• Which hobby would you pursue if you had more time?

• If you could have any super power what would it be?

• What is the most spontaneous thing you’ve ever done?

• What was your most epic road trip?

• What food brings back childhood memories?

• Which book most influenced your life?

• What is the most valuable piece of advise you ever received?

• If you could go back and relive one day in your life. Which one
would it be and why?

• What advice would you give your ten year old self today?

• What do you most admire in a man?

• What do you most admire in a woman?

• What word or phrase do you most over-use?

• Who are your favourite writers?

• Which artists do you most admire?

too.

Sincerely, M. Proust.

 

[butters]

i'm so rubbish at these things; they send me spiraling off into deep considerations when the answers are on the surface already i'm better at asking than answering questions. *sigh*

ok, i'll give it a shot

It is only fair to submit Ms Butters to......


My World Famous Questionaire

• If you could live anywhere in the world where would it be?
don't know the name of the place, i'm very adaptable, but my ideal location would be close to the sea but high enough to be out of danger, not on a crumbling cliff-edge but on solid foundations, nowhere near a river prone to flooding or an area known for drought/famine/tornadoes/hurricanes/wars/too hot or too cold. i need seasons, colour, change but on that wheel of the world turning so i kind of know what to expect. i want to see countryside, trees, fields, animals and water - and sky. in fact, temperate, countryfied, near the sea and pretty (safe) rivers . . . sounds like parts of southern england to me

• What is the best gift you’ve received?
hmmn, i would say 'independence' and 'knowledge' but they both had to be bought at some great cost . . . perhaps, then, the gift of books, the love of words. i came from a very poor household, but my mum always got us books - the house was filled with books (both parents were readers) bought from jumble-sales and such and borrowed from the library. every christmas, along with colouring books and pencils, there'd be a book especially for me in my stocking. it introduced me to all manner of stories i might never have read otherwise, so yeah - the gift of books.

• Which hobby would you pursue if you had more time?
writing, but also reading, painting, drawing, gardening, sewing, knitting,crochet, cooking, riding . . . tops would be writing, though.

• If you could have any super power what would it be?
i'd like to be able to stop people hurting - it distresses me, seeing others hurting emotionally (more than physically, even), so maybe it's a selfish thing

• What is the most spontaneous thing you’ve ever done?
this may sound really boring, but my whole life has been so limited as to being spontaneous - due to being a 'good' child, married young and very boringly, married again to a controller, responsibilities of motherhood, financial control in the hands of others and so on - that the few things i have done have seemed pretty spontaneous to me. like the trip to the beach last year, decided on the spur of the moment, middle of the day - just grabbing my stuff and taking off for an afternoon away, on my own, no-one to answer to or look after. as a kid, i actually had more freedom to roam, and did on a daily basis each day in the summer holidays - often on my own, often with siblings or a friend. i was always comfortable on my own, observing, drinking it all in - wandering about the countryside, woodlands, parklands, and frequently with a drawing pad. never really planned, but (as a kid) i didn't think about spontaneity.

• What was your most epic road trip?
don't think i've really had one of those, but i once traveled on the back of no1 husband's 125cc from london to skegness (about 140 miles) and endured extreme arse-ache, thick sea-fog, and quite a lot of happiness on the trip. that little bike was slowwwwww. i think it must have taken us about 8 hours altogether! the most enduring memory of the trip was the deep black of the night, the thick white of the low fog, the riding in the middle of the country lane at a really slow pace in order just to see the white lines and know we were still actually ON the road, and rubbing my husband's butt as he stood up on the footpegs to bring some feeling back into it.

• What food brings back childhood memories?
christmas pudding!
(there are many, including white cabbage and salad cream, chocolate custard and winkles! not together, you understand.)

• Which book most influenced your life?
as a child, it'd have to be the bible - brought up roman catholic, church school, mas, confession, the works. my entire childhood was based around the church, ergo the bible. HOWEVER, as i changed schools to a non-secular one at 11 i left all that behind. i'm not sure i can pick just one . . . in my still very formative years, perhaps The Lord of the Rings was the key to opening up my views.

• What is the most valuable piece of advice you ever received?
be yourself. trust your instincts.

• If you could go back and relive one day in your life. Which one
would it be and why?
probably the one where i decided to listen to my husband-to-be boyfriend about leaving school and going to work instead of finishing my last year in the sixth form and going on to uni as intended. my entire life would have been different, and i would never have met husband no2. of course, that also means i'd not have my 3 sons so . . . gawd, why are these questions so hard?

• What advice would you give your ten year old self today?
being 'good' is one thing, you don't have to be invisible. as for that whole nun or stripper thing? neither, really. live!

• What do you most admire in a man?
honesty, kindness, fairness, diplomacy and a sense of humour i can appreciate

• What do you most admire in a woman?
the very same

• What word or phrase do you most over-use?
and

• Who are your favourite writers?
Tolkien, Byron, Shakespeare, King, Pratchett, Rowling, (hundreds more

• Which artists do you most admire?
i don't know. really. it's about remembering who painted or drew what - as with music, i get blown away by certain pictures/tracks and it's more about their impact on me than about the people who created them which is selfish and awful. i've always been pretty shit at remembering names like that, though i could learn latin names for plants and stuff in biology, no trouble. perhaps i'm vindicated by a sort of mental short-circuiting, where the impact blocks the pathway to name-recollection. maybe? maybe??? *hopes*

too.

Sincerely, M. Proust.

see, rubbish.

 

[Desejo]

7 word autobiography

One more quizzie poo!

7 words that define you.

See link for entertaining examples and more info: 7 word bios

 

[butters]

One more quizzie poo!

7 words that define you.

See link for entertaining examples and more info: 7 word bios

blimey! that's fun

off the top of my head, i'd say i'm a: digitally articulate gregarious hermit, delicate buxom wench




ew

and fingers, not so much numbers

 

[HarryHill]

blimey! that's fun

off the top of my head, i'd say i'm a: digitally articulate gregarious hermit, delicate buxom wench

..
now that's erotic. Are you having fun?

 

[butters]

..
now that's erotic. Are you having fun?

oh! oHH! i meant i type a lot! on the 'puter. through me fingers, init?

and yes, yes i am. thankyou for asking

 

[HarryHill]

oh! oHH! i meant i type a lot! on the 'puter. through me fingers, init?

and yes, yes i am. thankyou for asking

I was using the technological meaning for digital but now that you mention it That is perhaps equally erotic.

 

[butters]

I was using the technological meaning for digital but now that you mention it That is perhaps equally erotic.

not in this heat it's not

 

[GuiltyPleasure]

ok, i'll give it a shot



see, rubbish.

I thought it very interesting and self-aware. Thanks for playing along.

 

[twelveoone]

Good critique
Wow, now I feel even guiltier about not giving as much as I used to And thankyou, again. You'll be only too aware that sometimes you can give hours of your time to the whole process and barely get a grunt in return It is, however, a valuable learning tool in its own right, getting us to look at the whole process of poetry and try to figure out ways to do things better. It shines a spotlight that can, in turn, be focused on our own writing in order to improve it.

do i notice a pattern here?
grunt
Now. Ms. Butters, I've said this more than once, you scare me when it comes to comments. I don't scare easy, and I'm not prone to flattery, but only one or two others have actually referred to things I edited out. I am flattered when someone bothers with the length and depth that you do. It's also neat when you bury some trick and someone catches it, and yes I've always thought that the comments I got, are some of the best that anyone receives (even my anon comments are a cut above,) so I consider myself to be extremely lucky to have met you here. You are the best.
Of course my other reaction is "why in the hell is this woman putting this much effort into my crap for" Well, hopefully you got something more than a grunt.
I also read your posts about poetry with great interest, thinking well yeh, she's right.
Now, here is the embarrassing part, I can't return the favour, you are doing something I don't understand, something is throwing ME off, now about 10 poets here have given me those delicious WTF moments, where I have to go back and find some sort of key, some it takes years, annaswirls was like that for me. Again I'm lucky, whatever you do I wish the best.

Enuff of the asskissery, a serious question here. In the thread you used the word "twatish", is that the Robert Browning "twatish", or the English punker "twatish". Either way Love you babe.
And thank you.

 

[butters]

do i notice a pattern here?
grunt

quite possibly
more mud, piggy? coming right up. it's good for the skin, i hear.

Now. Ms. Butters, I've said this more than once, you scare me when it comes to comments. I don't scare easy, and I'm not prone to flattery, but only one or two others have actually referred to things I edited out. I am flattered when someone bothers with the length and depth that you do. It's also neat when you bury some trick and someone catches it, and yes I've always thought that the comments I got, are some of the best that anyone receives (even my anon comments are a cut above,) so I consider myself to be extremely lucky to have met you here. You are the best.

Me? I'm very non-scary. had a lifetime of observing and making sense of nuance. You lay the crumbs, I'll (usually) follow the trail. Sometimes, though, I end up in the rough, all the crumbs eaten by crows.

This forum, above any other, has been a place of learning for me; having the opportunity to talk with others interested in, and more knowledgeable about, poetry than myself is a sort of freedom. The fact I don't understand parts of the discussions doesn't deter but inspires me to discover more, or write in the trying.

A man who appreciates how lucky he is to have met me is a wise man.

Of course my other reaction is "why in the hell is this woman putting this much effort into my crap for" Well, hopefully you got something more than a grunt.

No need to be suspicious I enjoy reading you; your writes make me see, feel, taste and hear and think . . . which adds up to the experience of the write. I recognise quality and originality when I see it. It's what I based my old site on - I scoured the internet seeking out talented writers to promote online. From the writing side of things, I was very aware that we all like feedback - but specific feedback. We're hungry for that. I enjoy showing a writer how their pieces affect me as a reader and that the tools they've used, the skills they're showing, are not lost to the observer. One of the most frequent responses to this would be 'how did you know that? how did you get where I was coming from?'. The crumb trails. They shine And yes, I got way more than a grunt reading you.

I also read your posts about poetry with great interest, thinking well yeh, she's right.

You seem smarter by the minute.

Now, here is the embarrassing part, I can't return the favour, you are doing something I don't understand, something is throwing ME off, now about 10 poets here have given me those delicious WTF moments, where I have to go back and find some sort of key, some it takes years, annaswirls was like that for me. Again I'm lucky, whatever you do I wish the best.

Please, don't be embarrassed. I comment way better than I write, but I'd like to think there's been some improvement over the years. It's ok not to like my writing
Not 'getting' what I'm doing might be just about me writing in a less sophisticated way than others of your skillsets. Though I've some to hand, it'd be true to say the writing gets done on a more organic level, with little conscious attention to and application of the tools of the trade. I can analyse after the fact, and edit to improve, but it's basically what it is. The main things I rely on are sound and imagery, piggybacking off common human experience and desires, but it all comes from inside the poem, if that makes any sense. The poem has to have its own truth, regardless of how invented it is. So . . . thank you, and it's reciprocated.

Enuff of the asskissery, a serious question here. In the thread you used the word "twatish", is that the Robert Browning "twatish", or the English punker "twatish". Either way Love you babe.
And thank you.

Shame. My arse is rather fond o... hmmmn. I'll be good.

Nothing to do with clothing, everything to do with being a dork/dick/silly person/milder - often familiar and good-humoured - form of cuntish. I could call my sons twats, but wouldn't call them cunts.

i.e He: Hi, I'm just what you've been waiting for, darlin'
She: Don't be a twat

It's applicable to most poets, since poets are known to get a bit twatish on occasion

 

[twelveoone]

A man who appreciates how lucky he is to have met me is a wise man.
You seem smarter by the minute.

very lucky, wusdumb, eh

Please, don't be embarrassed. I comment way better than I write, but I'd like to think there's been some improvement over the years. It's ok not to like my writing
Not 'getting' what I'm doing might be just about me writing in a less sophisticated way than others of your skillsets. Though I've some to hand, it'd be true to say the writing gets done on a more organic level, with little conscious attention to and application of the tools of the trade. I can analyse after the fact, and edit to improve, but it's basically what it is. The main things I rely on are sound and imagery, piggybacking off common human experience and desires, but it all comes from inside the poem, if that makes any sense. The poem has to have its own truth, regardless of how invented it is. So . . . thank you, and it's reciprocated.

I have reasons for not liking, doesn't apply here. No this is more a fridayam, annaswirls, thing. With fridayam it was the voicing, with anna it is primarily a comedic structure coloured with interjections and timing based. A gestalt.
This is a different set of skillsets, so I object to the "less sophisticated", I've seen a small sample of your prose, very lovely, you are condensing things differently for poetry. Right now you are like Stevens to me, something I should know.
Anyway, if literotica is great ( I think it is, despite my PMS*) it is because of you and the others, too numerous to mention. Thank you again.

*PMS? -pissing and moaning syndrome

 

[butters]

very lucky, wusdumb, eh



I have reasons for not liking, doesn't apply here. No this is more a fridayam, annaswirls, thing. With fridayam it was the voicing, with anna it is primarily a comedic structure coloured with interjections and timing based. A gestalt.
This is a different set of skillsets, so I object to the "less sophisticated", I've seen a small sample of your prose, very lovely, you are condensing things differently for poetry. Right now you are like Stevens to me, something I should know.
Anyway, if literotica is great ( I think it is, despite my PMS*) it is because of you and the others, too numerous to mention. Thank you again.

*PMS? -pissing and moaning syndrome

I hope you don't get disappointed if you discover there's not a lot more to it than appears Having said that, though, I forgot that I frequently multi-layer as I write - for meanings, visuals, connotations. Depends on the piece, though. Some of it is just as it is. Perhaps my lack of consistency is what throws you. When I used to play chess, I managed to beat some people some of the time. Not, it has to be admitted, through my own skills in the game - more through being 'unreadable' to those who were used to planning their strategy ahead by so many moves, whereas I played a reactionary game and therefore played moves they didn't expect (they were thinking too hard, lol) and so had to keep readjusting their own tactics. I once beat my husband in 4 moves. He was horrified. Shame I couldn't remember how I did it, though. I was surprised as he was.

Which prose, twelvio? That longish piece about choosing not to speak and stuff? My - ahem - 'poetic' prose?

Seems we all like this place too much to leave - or, in the leaving, find we're always drawn back.

pissing and moaning? you? nevah

 

[twelveoone]

I hope you don't get disappointed if you discover there's not a lot more to it than appears Having said that, though, I forgot that I frequently multi-layer as I write - for meanings, visuals, connotations. Depends on the piece, though. Some of it is just as it is. Perhaps my lack of consistency is what throws you. When I used to play chess, I managed to beat some people some of the time. Not, it has to be admitted, through my own skills in the game - more through being 'unreadable' to those who were used to planning their strategy ahead by so many moves, whereas I played a reactionary game and therefore played moves they didn't expect (they were thinking too hard, lol) and so had to keep readjusting their own tactics. I once beat my husband in 4 moves. He was horrified. Shame I couldn't remember how I did it, though. I was surprised as he was.

Which prose, twelvio? That longish piece about choosing not to speak and stuff? My - ahem - 'poetic' prose?

Seems we all like this place too much to leave - or, in the leaving, find we're always drawn back.

pissing and moaning? you? nevah

you devil
I think it was a pier piece, actually proseing it up may be a tactic worth trying, the surface story

 

[UnderYourSpell]

Well that was an interesting hours reading catching up