Bflag's Pleasures of Criticism

[Magnetron]

In the United States these days, a family must have a certain level of income in order to afford college for each one of their children. You do have to have a certain amount of money to obtain a degree in phyics if a scholarship isn't available.

Any high school drop out with parents on welfare can write poetry.

 

[Senna Jawa]

theoretical physics

I've written:

Thus, while being democratic, physics still is very-very esoteric.​

To this bogusagain responds with silly dictionary games. I've already wrote that physics is democratic, open in principle to everybody. In practice, theoretical physics is open but only to those whose mind is open--there are so preciously few of them. In this sense theoretical physics is esoteric. This is a common way to use this word, despite your, bogusagain demagogy.

 

[bogusagain]

I've written:

Thus, while being democratic, physics still is very-very esoteric.​

To this bogusagain responds with silly dictionary games. I've already wrote that physics is democratic, open in principle to everybody. In practice, theoretical physics is open but only to those whose mind is open--there are so preciously few of them. In this sense theoretical physics is esoteric. This is a common way to use this word, despite your, bogusagain demagogy.

Words matter. That is how we communicate. I thought a poet should know that. As for "in principle", there are about 1,000-1,500 PHDs in theorhetical physics awarded each year in the USA alone and a similar per capita number in Europe. Far more than the economy requires or can sustain.

Most people are locked out of such an education because of economics, not intellectual ability.

 

[bflagsst]

thank you for the critique bflaggst hope someone else steps up for you to look at their work it really is interesting seeing what you see and what your opinion is on my poetry

Thanks for participating. I enjoy reading what you have to offer.

 

[bflagsst]

Words matter. That is how we communicate. I thought a poet should know that. As for "in principle", there are about 1,000-1,500 PHDs in theorhetical physics awarded each year in the USA alone and a similar per capita number in Europe. Far more than the economy requires or can sustain.

Most people are locked out of such an education because of economics, not intellectual ability.

C'mon, just drop it, it doesn't even matter to what you were saying initially, whether or not poetry should ever be written in such a way that a brand new poetry reader can't comprehend it, yes/no?

Prose is a more common artistic tool and more easily understood by ze masses. So why would someone feign an interest in poetry if they're more interested in common speech and telling stories?

 

[Senna Jawa]

Words matter. That is how we communicate.

Right, that's what I said--words matter, that's how we communicate. You can say it again.

[...] there are about 1,000-1,500 PHDs in theorhetical physics awarded each year in the USA alone and a similar per capita number in Europe. Far more than the economy requires or can sustain.

Most people are locked out of such an education because of economics, not intellectual ability.

This is a huge world, 7 billion population. The number of PhD's in theoretical physics is still tiny-tiny. They are mostly very capable people, and still only perhaps something like 300-500 of them can do significant research. Still fewer can make break throughs. The difference between a physics Ph.D. and ordinary people is huge. But then the difference between just a physics Ph.D. and an outstanding researcher is still equally huge. And so is between them and the very-very best. The differences are vast.

Language-wise, the language of a discipline which is next to another's specialist's discipline may feel very esoteric to that other specialist. In mathematics and theoretical physics only very few grasp more than one speciality. Many stick only to one sub-speciality or sub-sub-speciality. Thus you may forget about laymen.

Bogusagain, it is ok for you to talk arrogantly about science, it even keeps discussions lively for laymen, but know proportions, and have respect for the great scientists which according to you go wrong. There are many contexts and many shades for word wrong. And words matter while demagogy is cheap. The great physicists are perfectly safe on their pedestial. Every day provides a tribute to their achievements.

 

[twelveoone]

1. Learn traditional techniques by imitating the sounds brought out in form poetry.

2. Sound is more important than meaning when learning how to write, as constructing complex symbols and metaphor is the more difficult task.

3. The sound mechanics will assist you in learning the more difficult task.

4. Free verse and good prose poetry rely on techniques developed through learning how to say something under form restraints.

For example, here's a prose poem(and not just prose mimicking poetry) from an author who has won multiple publishing grants:

http://www.onibuchanan.com/poetry_samples_girls.html

oh, ok, saying something under form restraints.
implies very heavily in this context "Formalism". Would put it another way, the purpose and the meaning of structures.

3. does not really follow 2, as poetry primarily deals with metaphor, and meaning. You seem to be talking about versification. Swinburne, Algernon.
Following your course may impart a "meaning" but this "meaning" may not be the intent nor desired result.

But yeah, it is a fucking hobby. But the pretense of "art" requires seeing in context, and that context is very meaning dependent.
BWTF do I know? Do you really want me to totally parse foehn's poem, hypothesize the reactions to it? That is another hobby, ne pas? Assign validity?
au to de foe


le chat noir's shadow plays, a ghost
on furrowed brow, no how,

no, howl, I play with words
with vague correspodence in truth -

en vogue hilarity ensues -
who, who am I speaking to?

no noblesse on either part
you are or you are not, but still

le chat noir's shadow stays, almost
in shallow bow, low scowl.

between you and Senna this place may get real

 

[butters]

 

[bflagsst]

oh, ok, saying something under form restraints.
implies very heavily in this context "Formalism". Would put it another way, the purpose and the meaning of structures.

3. does not really follow 2, as poetry primarily deals with metaphor, and meaning. You seem to be talking about versification. Swinburne, Algernon.
Following your course may impart a "meaning" but this "meaning" may not be the intent nor desired result.

But yeah, it is a fucking hobby. But the pretense of "art" requires seeing in context, and that context is very meaning dependent.
BWTF do I know? Do you really want me to totally parse foehn's poem, hypothesize the reactions to it? That is another hobby, ne pas? Assign validity?
au to de foe


le chat noir's shadow plays, a ghost
on furrowed brow, no how,

no, howl, I play with words
with vague correspodence in truth -

en vogue hilarity ensues -
who, who am I speaking to?

no noblesse on either part
you are or you are not, but still

le chat noir's shadow stays, almost
in shallow bow, low scowl.

between you and Senna this place may get real

There's meaning of structure and meaning arrived at from structure, then meaning dependent/independent variables --> how well-read in poems is audience or dear reader, does a line break simulate a period or comma or general pause for other purposes. But the point of Wednesday's skeletal set wasn't to say anything about how one writes metaphor or imparts meaning any further than the meter maid and well-formed will have an advantage in phraseology of contemporary verse, whether piebald with prose or writing rhythmic sentence fragments in stanza.

I'll read anything you want to say about Foehn's poem. Especially a counterpoint to it being a monumental effort in sentimentality.

 

[butters]

if you've time, i'd like to read your critique of this piece. i'm not in the least attached to this and have my own opinions of it and why it managed to win over other pieces i felt far stronger.

12, i'd be glad to read your own thoughts on this... i think some of them might gel with my own opinions as to the whys

Behind the Girl in the Straw Hat

High-noon
and a slow, single bead
paints a copper line
over low stepping stones,
like the memory of water
in a dry river-bed
framed by a muscular valley.

Gravity has its way
pulls eyes
thoughts
to the peeking cleft,
the rolling hills,
where moisture slides
out of sight
to the dark and secret cave.

 

[twelveoone]

if you've time, i'd like to read your critique of this piece. i'm not in the least attached to this and have my own opinions of it and why it managed to win over other pieces i felt far stronger.

12, i'd be glad to read your own thoughts on this... i think some of them might gel with my own opinions as to the whys

Behind the Girl in the Straw Hat

High-noon
and a slow, single bead
paints a copper line
over low stepping stones,
like the memory of water
in a dry river-bed
framed by a muscular valley.

Gravity has its way
pulls eyes
thoughts
to the peeking cleft,
the rolling hills,
where moisture slides
out of sight
to the dark and secret cave.

It plays to the audience, they are receptive. It invokes what they are familiar with, but does not exactly push them there. They have to do a minimal amount of work (engaged). It does not allow much for misinterpretation. Follow the eyes.
Copper tone. The ROI would be rather high with this with an average audience.
Prawn is a much better poem (for me) as the engagement is at a more intense level (crossfires).

 

[twelveoone]

There's meaning of structure and meaning arrived at from structure, then meaning dependent/independent variables --> how well-read in poems is audience or dear reader, does a line break simulate a period or comma or general pause for other purposes. But the point of Wednesday's skeletal set wasn't to say anything about how one writes metaphor or imparts meaning any further than the meter maid and well-formed will have an advantage in phraseology of contemporary verse, whether piebald with prose or writing rhythmic sentence fragments in stanza.

I'll read anything you want to say about Foehn's poem. Especially a counterpoint to it being a monumental effort in sentimentality.

The structure is what supplies the power to this, not the words (which is what is often used for "sentimentality"), it functions on part as the same way as a pantoum, a villanelle.
What is significant is tod does not like pantoums, I do not like villanelles. We both reacted in the positive.
Now we can go toe to toe again on the "meter maid" again, but we both know how pointless that is, as we both know there is more to it then mere on/off. And we both know that you use quite well other supplementation. Vowel length and alliteration. And I suspect you know that there may be more to rhythmic competence than mere on/off. Somewhere I posted a link to a paper by Reuven Tsur regarding such, but I will be damned if I can find it.
So much for "received information" as given by the supposed top here.
What makes it a "fun" hobby is the variance in reading. Poem A can be quite a different poem with another reading, even by the same person. In fact I recommend, taking two steps over for a different view. Again I posted links.
And here I go again boring everyone to tears, I would hate myself, if there wasn't such a long line of noisy fuckheads in front of me, squawking "pseudo science, pseudo science."
Damn??!!!

 

[butters]

It plays to the audience, they are receptive. It invokes what they are familiar with, but does not exactly push them there. They have to do a minimal amount of work (engaged). It does not allow much for misinterpretation. Follow the eyes.
Copper tone. The ROI would be rather high with this with an average audience.
Prawn is a much better poem (for me) as the engagement is at a more intense level (crossfires).

thankyou.

and 'prawn' was fun, even interesting, to write.

 

[twelveoone]

I've written:

Thus, while being democratic, physics still is very-very esoteric.​

To this bogusagain responds with silly dictionary games. I've already wrote that physics is democratic, open in principle to everybody. In practice, theoretical physics is open but only to those whose mind is open--there are so preciously few of them. In this sense theoretical physics is esoteric. This is a common way to use this word, despite your, bogusagain demagogy.

Substitute the word Poetry for Physics, keep in mind Physics is a hard science, and much more applicable analogy here is psychology/sociology, something "softer" something better would be even less Cartesian with the one cause the one effect. It gets "fuzzy", how is that SJ, FOR NOT BEING DEMAGOGIC?
Ah, FUCK ME, wasting time again

 

[bflagsst]

The structure is what supplies the power to this, not the words (which awhat is often used for "sentimentality"), it functions on part as the same way as a pantoum, a villanelle.
What is significant is tod does not like pantoums, I do not like villanelles. We both reacted in the positive.
Now we can go toe to toe again on the "meter maid" again, but we both know how pointless that is, as we both know there is more to it then mere on/off. And we both know that you use quite well other supplementation. Vowel length and alliteration. And I suspect you know that there may be more to rhythmic competence than mere on/off. Somewhere I posted a link to a paper by Reuven Tsur regarding such, but I will be damned if I can find it.
So much for "received information" as given by the supposed top here.
What makes it a "fun" hobby is the variance in reading. Poem A can be quite a different poem with another reading, even by the same person. In fact I recommend, taking two steps over for a different view. Again I posted links.
And here I go again boring everyone to tears, I would hate myself, if there wasn't such a long line of noisy fuckheads in front of me, squawking "pseudo science, pseudo science."
Damn??!!!

Yesterday I was reading this paper on poetic sentences regarding generative/transformational grammar and it's talking about attempts from the past 50 years of linguists trying to fit how poetry treats syntax into the broader "science" of language acquisition. And it's a terrible read and completely uninteresting, because these guys arent all that interested in predicting what would work in a poem, just whether or not certain poetic sentences are violating the current model of transformational grammar. If i remember ill post the pdf.

 

[butters]

Yesterday I was reading this paper on poetic sentences regarding generative/transformational grammar and it's talking about attempts from the past 50 years of linguists trying to fit how poetry treats syntax into the broader "science" of language acquisition. And it's a terrible read and completely uninteresting, because these guys arent all that interested in predicting what would work in a poem, just whether or not certain poetic sentences are violating the current model of transformational grammar. If i remember ill post the pdf.

sounds a blast

 

[twelveoone]

Yesterday I was reading this paper on poetic sentences regarding generative/transformational grammar and it's talking about attempts from the past 50 years of linguists trying to fit how poetry treats syntax into the broader "science" of language acquisition. And it's a terrible read and completely uninteresting, because these guys arent all that interested in predicting what would work in a poem, just whether or not certain poetic sentences are violating the current model of transformational grammar. If i remember ill post the pdf.

of you speak the same thing twice it changes, three times....
In "a walk on the path"
"fucking pink" is said twice, the difference in inflection (reader supplied) would be the difference in reliving or remembering. I am aware of that, even though it was put in there for another reason - impressment of colour, which would be akin to decrepit albino flesh after time (age and dirt). Internal alignment. Dual use.
But Reuven Tsur again. There are some links here.
And this is would be closer to the way people think.

 

[bflagsst]

Yesterday I was reading this paper on poetic sentences regarding generative/transformational grammar and it's talking about attempts from the past 50 years of linguists trying to fit how poetry treats syntax into the broader "science" of language acquisition. And it's a terrible read and completely uninteresting, because these guys aren't all that interested in predicting what would work in a poem, just whether or not certain poetic sentences are violating the current model of transformational grammar. If i remember I'll post the pdf.

I'm trying to read through this 'short' paper, but it's proving difficult.

http://www.discourses.org/OldArticles/Some Problems of Generative Poetics.pdf

"It is necessary now to assign a theoretical status to all these rules that determined the generation of literary texts. Different view-points have been mentioned in this paper: "literary" rules (if they are rules) are part of performance: this implies that they are only specific uses of the rules of grammar and specific violations of them (under socio-cultural conditions). these rules are part of a specific grammar of 'poetic competence'. which contains these specific rules. This grammar is based on (intersects with) the grammar of 'normal' language but is not a part of it. The additional rules formulated in it either replace or transform the rules of non-literary discourse or simply cause their elimination."

But I'm most interested in the genealogy of the poetic aesthetic, so I don't know if this will help at all.

 

[bflagsst]

of you speak the same thing twice it changes, three times....
In "a walk on the path"
"fucking pink" is said twice, the difference in inflection (reader supplied) would be the difference in reliving or remembering. I am aware of that, even though it was put in there for another reason - impressment of colour, which would be akin to decrepit albino flesh after time (age and dirt). Internal alignment. Dual use.
But Reuven Tsur again. There are some links here.
And this is would be closer to the way people think.

Yeah, Versification: http://www.arsversificandi.net/

They're leftover philologists, which is neat, but they aren't or are rarely interested in using the data they mine to write or model what works in poetry right now.

 

[twelveoone]

But I'm most interested in the genealogy of the poetic aesthetic, so I don't know if this will help at all.

thanks
I am interested in pragmatics as opposed to aesthetics, these are interesting to me, whether they have validity is another matter, probably some of it does.
Same as what every one "says" (you, SJ, me, et.al. ) some of it works some of the time...paraphrase of Lincoln.

 

[bflagsst]

if you've time, i'd like to read your critique of this piece. i'm not in the least attached to this and have my own opinions of it and why it managed to win over other pieces i felt far stronger.

12, i'd be glad to read your own thoughts on this... i think some of them might gel with my own opinions as to the whys

Behind the Girl in the Straw Hat

High-noon
and a slow, single bead
paints a copper line
over low stepping stones,
like the memory of water
in a dry river-bed
framed by a muscular valley.

Gravity has its way
pulls eyes
thoughts
to the peeking cleft,
the rolling hills,
where moisture slides
out of sight
to the dark and secret cave.

I have things to say about this poem, but first I want to post this poem for comparison:

no poem
bybutters©

the switch is faulty
toggle it
back and forth
no juice
no muse amused enough to
bite
or even nibble
no
quibble on invisi-lips
no frowns, no
quips
just blinkers, cursing
as they do
and fingers undelivering
this no poem to you

mea culpa

-
-
-

The title of the straw hat poem would lead me to believe that I was going to read behind that thing which resides below the hat. But it's visual imagery and interesting metaphor bundled without much regard for how the poem would sound if read out loud, and more importantly there's nothing about who this person is or even who's admiring/thinking about this girl and her 'secret cave'.

Taken as a moment in time, a reflection on one image it ends too vulgar to be elegant and meditative so I can't recommend it as an example of fine aesthetic. The whole spectrum from erotic to pornographic has its place in well-written poetry but it should enable the reader to stop and ponder the image and/or be arousing in some way.

The reason I posted "no poem" is because if "secret cave" is borderline vulgar a muse that bites or nibbles or brings a quibble to invisi-lips is the slightest of eroticisms. Sure, it's not an erotic poem, it's just a well done one that hits all the markers of a complete construction. I didn't choose an example of your finer erotic poetry http://www.literotica.com/p/on-the-eating-of-soft-fruit, because I'm not getting at your erotic competency or just the 'secret cave' moment, but the poem as entity for consumption.

In "no poem" the suspended no-rhyme creation 'invisi-lips' is excellent, the word placement is right on, the playful full-rhymes through mea culpa works. Everyone who writes poetry knows the difficulty of poems, and most know that if you keep grinding and get something out there you still have a chance at creation of value.

 

[butters]

I have things to say about this poem, but first I want to post this poem for comparison:

no poem
bybutters©

the switch is faulty
toggle it
back and forth
no juice
no muse amused enough to
bite
or even nibble
no
quibble on invisi-lips
no frowns, no
quips
just blinkers, cursing
as they do
and fingers undelivering
this no poem to you

mea culpa

-
-
-

The title of the straw hat poem would lead me to believe that I was going to read behind that thing which resides below the hat. But it's visual imagery and interesting metaphor bundled without much regard for how the poem would sound if read out loud, and more importantly there's nothing about who this person is or even who's admiring/thinking about this girl and her 'secret cave'.

Taken as a moment in time, a reflection on one image it ends too vulgar to be elegant and meditative so I can't recommend it as an example of fine aesthetic. The whole spectrum from erotic to pornographic has its place in well-written poetry but it should enable the reader to stop and ponder the image and/or be arousing in some way.

The reason I posted "no poem" is because if "secret cave" is borderline vulgar a muse that bites or nibbles or brings a quibble to invisi-lips is the slightest of eroticisms. Sure, it's not an erotic poem, it's just a well done one that hits all the markers of a complete construction. I didn't choose an example of your finer erotic poetry http://www.literotica.com/p/on-the-eating-of-soft-fruit, because I'm not getting at your erotic competency or just the 'secret cave' moment, but the poem as entity for consumption.

In "no poem" the suspended no-rhyme creation 'invisi-lips' is excellent, the word placement is right on, the playful full-rhymes through mea culpa works. Everyone who writes poetry knows the difficulty of poems, and most know that if you keep grinding and get something out there you still have a chance at creation of value.

your deliberations are gratefuly received. 'no poem' aside, between yourself and 12 you've pretty much summed up how i feel about the piece. it was a last minute 'what the hell am i gonna write?' thing, though not a live write as the second was - and just one of the reasons i felt others more deserved winners, being better poetry.

in all honesty, i knew the voting audience would be less picky than here, and ended up writing something that to my eyes was the equivalent of an advert - the kind where you don't really care what the product is, you just remember the hook; in this case, the hook was that bead of sweat running down the spine of a suntanned girl and on into her bikini bottoms. focus on that bead of sweat, forget there's little else going on. lazy writing with a commercial bent, but effective enough to buy votes. in that respect i believe it worked - there's a small competitive streak in me and i understand a little about how advertising works. the last line was cliche at best and should have been better. as a poem it was a commercial venture and not one i feel proud of or connected to. a manipulation of the crudest manner and not 'true' poetry in my eyes. there's a whole lot of poetry out there that's marketing itself under that same guise, which is one of the reasons i don't judge the true quality of a poem by how many copies it sells. when it comes to popularity, the best poetry can fall by the wayside ignored while that which doesn't ask much from the general reader reaps the rewards.

 

[twelveoone]

your deliberations are gratefuly received. 'no poem' aside, between yourself and 12 you've pretty much summed up how i feel about the piece. it was a last minute 'what the hell am i gonna write?' thing, though not a live write as the second was - and just one of the reasons i felt others more deserved winners, being better poetry.

in all honesty, i knew the voting audience would be less picky than here, and ended up writing something that to my eyes was the equivalent of an advert - the kind where you don't really care what the product is, you just remember the hook; in this case, the hook was that bead of sweat running down the spine of a suntanned girl and on into her bikini bottoms. focus on that bead of sweat, forget there's little else going on. lazy writing with a commercial bent, but effective enough to buy votes. in that respect i believe it worked - there's a small competitive streak in me and i understand a little about how advertising works. the last line was cliche at best and should have been better. as a poem it was a commercial venture and not one i feel proud of or connected to. a manipulation of the crudest manner and not 'true' poetry in my eyes. there's a whole lot of poetry out there that's marketing itself under that same guise, which is one of the reasons i don't judge the true quality of a poem by how many copies it sells. when it comes to popularity, the best poetry can fall by the wayside ignored while that which doesn't ask much from the general reader reaps the rewards.

Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.
- H. L. Mencken

BTW I may have been mistaken in my paraphrase attribution
some of it works some of the time...paraphrase of Lincoln.(sic) is also attributed to
P.T. Barum
However...this copper tone ad was written for a voting contest, and this is why you frighten me, butters, when you write others I don't understand.

Quick, now who said poetry is a pup tent...?

 

[butters]

Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.
- H. L. Mencken

BTW I may have been mistaken in my paraphrase attribution
some of it works some of the time...paraphrase of Lincoln.(sic) is also attributed to
P.T. Barum
However...this copper tone ad was written for a voting contest, and this is why you frighten me, butters, when you write others I don't understand.

Quick, now who said poetry is a pup tent...?

ok, i'm being dense. in pm if you prefer.

as for the pup thing, i'm beyond lost. i'd like to blame being sick but i suspect i wouldn't get it anyway

 

[twelveoone]

ok, i'm being dense. in pm if you prefer.

as for the pup thing, i'm beyond lost. i'd like to blame being sick but i suspect i wouldn't get it anyway

This is a huge world, 7 billion population. The number of pup tents grows exponentially, on a daily basis. Sure we may talk of demographics, but because pup tents have been brought in, we may have to talk about poles. Such talk can be misconstrued. Right now, at this moment over 21 billion poems have been wrote, that is more poems than the number of people that have ever lived, even throwing in the apes (who probably did not write much poetry, limiting themselves to certain genres of songs uh-huh-huh-yeah-yeah). Now if we throw in songs that would be 42 billion and there may be some significance there, as this is a billion 42's. 42 is the answer to every thing and the age of Elvis when he died. Elvis is a time traveler and he was our primal ancestor.
Elvis invented the pup tent with Raquel Welch Welch in One Million Years BC. There where no poles about, so he had to come up with something.
We have not advanced much with Nooki on the Jersey Shore. Somewhere there is a poem in that, what was your question? This is ancient history.