How original are you?

[Senna Jawa]

One may also adopt certain artistic devices of others in a creative way. It's possible to do all these things and still be highly original.

Great Du Fu has creatively absorbed all styles of the Chinese poetry before him (and has created new ones too), while he is among the most original poets of all time.

 

[champagne1982]

Liar, you questions, "how original are you?" and the rest, induce the audience to think and talk about themselves ( "I am this... but I am not that, I am almost..., I..., I..., I...."). We had many threads on this forum about "I this..., I that..., I usually..., I always..., when I was not experienced..., but now I know...". (Even one such thread is one too many).

Thus this time let's modify your request. Let the audience present (specific) examples from their (or of anybody) poems of their (or of anybody) originality. That's all we need on a poetic forum.

Regards,

Hi Senna I disagree with your final premise. If all we need on a feedback and discussion forum are poems from people, then the name would be vanity poetry posting forum.

We write verse, therefore we poet.

 

[hmmnmm]

It isn't that anyone's output (whether poetry or song or anything) doesn't bear marks prominent or faint of elsewhere influence, but if those influences (the familiar) can mix together in new or unexpected (original) combos so they truly become ours... it's been pointed out to me on occasion that such and such song of mine sounds a little like something else. I had to stop and think for a moment, run that song (no, not a Carpenters song) through my mind, and realize that influence must have been back there somewhere, but it wasn't a conscious influence when I made the song. Yet the song that I played for them was definitely my original construction.

 

[mojo_cat]

Confession: I used a line of Oscar Wilde's in one of my songs because it was better than anything I could come up with, and no one has ever noticed, and I feel a little bad about it every time I listen to the song.

/neurosis

 

[hmmnmm]

Confession: I used a line of Oscar Wilde's in one of my songs because it was better than anything I could come up with, and no one has ever noticed, and I feel a little bad about it every time I listen to the song.

/neurosis

If you emailed him about this he'd likely be deeply flattered.

 

[mojo_cat]

If you emailed him about this he'd likely be deeply flattered.

"oscar@bearsingaol.com"

 

[unpredictablebijou]

Liar, you questions, "how original are you?" and the rest, induce the audience to think and talk about themselves ( "I am this... but I am not that, I am almost..., I..., I..., I...."). We had many threads on this forum about "I this..., I that..., I usually..., I always..., when I was not experienced..., but now I know...". (Even one such thread is one too many).

Thus this time let's modify your request. Let the audience present (specific) examples from their (or of anybody) poems of their (or of anybody) originality. That's all we need on a poetic forum.

Regards,

From what I've seen happen in the PF&D area, I believe both are valid in a forum like this.

Let's pretend that we have new poets arriving here who are interested in both getting feedback on the things they've written and also talking to other poets, perhaps more "experienced" ones, about the process of writing. (hey, it could happen...)

Even simple pieces of dialogue I've seen here - someone brand new saying, "gosh you all have such an easy time writing and it's hard for me, so I must not be a good poet" and a more experienced person responding that it's hard for them too, even if it "looks easy" once you post a late draft, can be very helpful for people learning.

Writers tend to be weird and idiosyncratic, and sometimes feel like they're the only person who writes in a particular way. I used to think it was too strange and alienating that I find I can only write in crowded public places, with coffee and background noise, and using a spiral notebook and a Pilot Precise pen. Then I learned that Kurt Vonnegut could only write when he was in his office and using a yellow legal pad, and that he had to have six perfectly sharpened new #2 pencils nearby.

Somehow, knowing that someone whose work I admire was just as eccentric as I am about method made me feel better. It gave me permission to honor my individual process, and consequently my writing improved.

That said, it's an undeniable part of the human nature to want to begin sentences with "I", and ideally those dialogues lead to increased understanding between individual points of view and varying techniques.

Earlier in this thread wildsweetone recommended some lovely exercises, and I'll bet a number of people, even "experienced" writers, are trying them and finding themselves growing more flexible and skillful as a result. Had she started her sentences with "I often do this," or "I find it helpful to..." those exercises would be no less helpful.

Posting poems is also valuable, of course, and we do that too. In both cases, we are all teaching each other, and that's why we talk to each other about poetry in the first place. It's not a sermon, it's a dialogue, at least ideally.

The only time those dialogues break down is when someone decides to tell others what to do with this board, or how to write, or what policies to hold. If it's an exchange of ideas and perceptions, then there's an acknowledgment that varying techniques are valid even if they conflict.

so anyway, I wonder what we'd see if folks posted the most "original" work they believe they've ever done? I remember a thread a few months back in which the question was, "what's your favorite piece from your own work, regardless of whether it has been recognized by anyone else; what's the unnoticed jewel in your collection?" or something to that effect. Many of the pieces posted, as I remember, were pretty innovative. Obscure, perhaps highly personal, but at the very least "original" as well as, for the most part, effective on one level or another.

just some thoughts.

bj

 

[Senna Jawa]

There is nothing new, that is true.

Is it?!

Regards,

 

[Senna Jawa]

Even simple pieces of dialogue [...] can be very helpful for people learning.

Yin & yang.

Isolated "me" pieces may be ok. But I am looking at our forum from the perspective of over five years. The atmosphere of "when I have a writer's block..." and "my inspiration..." and "in my experience poems..." is detrimental to the artistic level of the participants of this forum. And so is wasting time on praising poor poems which are not even any pieces of art, which are just half-cooked failed exercises. Wrong attitude prevents participants from working on their art.

In art you have to be infinitely confident, but at the same time you have to be infinitely modest--you should not be conscious of your own existing. Brain is a flexible thing. It learns everything. When exposed to the good stuff and to the good habits, its learning is its great advantage. But threads "me this, me that" damage the brain of the participants. You can't have it both ways. Art requires discipline. And an important part of the discipline is to say NO to any junk. It's fun to goof, etc. but certain kinds of goofing seriously harm your artistic potential.

We had a bunch of threads where participants where talking about poetry and poetic experiences and "poetic life" like everybody was Nobel prize winner, giving a press interview. And time was going by, and no good poems were discussed. Thus it was more than a waste of time. It was harmful. And talking about oneself in negative, critical and "objective" terms, or putting oneself down for jokes, is still immodest and unhealthy. Sure, John Kennedy was good at it. And it looked modest. But was it? Certainly not. But yes, he was good . Whenever we talk about ourselves, it's not modest, period. It doesn't matter that we are oh-so-self-critical. It's immodest all the same.

Posting poems is also valuable, [...]

Posting en mass, with shallow comments only, without getting into the artistic issues, is meaningless. And not seeing dramatic differences between poems, praising poor and strong poems alike, is harmful. Indeed, it tells authors that everything goes, that nothing really matters except for social graces.

The only time those dialogues break down is when someone decides to tell others what to do with this board, or how to write, or what policies to hold.

This statement was uncalled for (and it's not even remotely connected to the originality theme or any meritorious discussion).

Indeed, only moderators have the power of "telling". Otherwise there is no such thing here as deciding for others.

so anyway, I wonder what we'd see if folks posted the most "original" work they believe they've ever done?

Or crisp fragments. And the understanding should be that others may show the piece or the presented element is unoriginal, or artistically poor after all. It should always be risk and a 2-way street.

I remember a thread a few months back in which the question was, "what's your favorite piece from your own work

I've initiated "show off yourself" threads over the years on several forums, including this one (possibly more than once). The offerings were requested to be specific. The exact strength of a phrase, or a well defined aspect of the poem was supposed to be stated. The assumption of those threads was always, that what the author presents as an achievement can be possibly shown as a weakness, even as a glaring weakness. This has happened on one of the forums. It took a fourfold iteration back and force before author finally agreed that what he considered to be a strong point was bad. Since then he made true progress.

In this kind of show offs one should strive at crisp, convincing raisins and pearls only .

Best regards,

 

[mojo_cat]

Is it?!

Regards,

hahahaha

oh Senna, I've missed your contrariness so. Good points from both of you but it is great to see you haven't changed a bit

 

[unpredictablebijou]

Yin & yang.

Isolated "me" pieces may be ok. But I am looking at our forum from the perspective of over five years. The atmosphere of "when I have a writer's block..." and "my inspiration..." and "in my experience poems..." is detrimental to the artistic level of the participants of this forum. And so is wasting time on praising poor poems which are not even any pieces of art, which are just half-cooked failed exercises. Wrong attitude prevents participants from working on their art.

In art you have to be infinitely confident, but at the same time you have to be infinitely modest--you should not be conscious of your own existing. Brain is a flexible thing. It learns everything. When exposed to the good stuff and to the good habits, its learning is its great advantage. But threads "me this, me that" damage the brain of the participants. You can't have it both ways. Art requires discipline. And an important part of the discipline is to say NO to any junk. It's fun to goof, etc. but certain kinds of goofing seriously harm your artistic potential.

We had a bunch of threads where participants where talking about poetry and poetic experiences and "poetic life" like everybody was Nobel prize winner, giving a press interview. And time was going by, and no good poems were discussed. Thus it was more than a waste of time. It was harmful. And talking about oneself in negative, critical and "objective" terms, or putting oneself down for jokes, is still immodest and unhealthy. Sure, John Kennedy was good at it. And it looked modest. But was it? Certainly not. But yes, he was good . Whenever we talk about ourselves, it's not modest, period. It doesn't matter that we are oh-so-self-critical. It's immodest all the same.



Posting en mass, with shallow comments only, without getting into the artistic issues, is meaningless. And not seeing dramatic differences between poems, praising poor and strong poems alike, is harmful. Indeed, it tells authors that everything goes, that nothing really matters except for social graces.

This statement was uncalled for (and it's not even remotely connected to the originality theme or any meritorious discussion).

Indeed, only moderators have the power of "telling". Otherwise there is no such thing here as deciding for others.

Or crisp fragments. And the understanding should be that others may show the piece or the presented element is unoriginal, or artistically poor after all. It should always be risk and a 2-way street.

I've initiated "show off yourself" threads over the years on several forums, including this one (possibly more than once). The offerings were requested to be specific. The exact strength of a phrase, or a well defined aspect of the poem was supposed to be stated. The assumption of those threads was always, that what the author presents as an achievement can be possibly shown as a weakness, even as a glaring weakness. This has happened on one of the forums. It took a fourfold iteration back and force before author finally agreed that what he considered to be a strong point was bad. Since then he made true progress.

In this kind of show offs one should strive at crisp, convincing raisins and pearls only .

Best regards,

Well, darlin', we disagree on a number of points, but that's okay, that's what a little village like this is really for - everyone exchanging points of view.

The business about being told what policies I should hold or how I should participate was not directed specifically at you. However, that's always been where I draw the line, here or anywhere. If I'm in the mood to be bossed around and told what to do, I hire someone.... *grin* Anywhere else, it tends to honk me off.

I also really enjoy encouraging people to keep writing, and if it means posting a simple "that was great and I liked it" for someone's piece, well, I still see validity in that, particularly for new writers. It does in fact give valuable information, of a sort.

With very few exceptions, I notice that posting comments on submitted pieces falls into two basic categories, the congratulatory and the snitty personal attack. I do find the reviewers are better about giving actual feedback, but I'm not one to say that I dislike just hearing that someone liked a piece, without forcing them to defend their opinion. Maybe it's just visceral, that I like something. Maybe I can't say exactly why. I still have a right to say that I liked it.

Off topic. so let's get back on:

how often do the writers in here feel like their own writing has been strongly influenced by another poet, and how do you draw the line between, say, homage, inspiration, allusion, or just plain stealin'?

bijou

 

[hmmnmm]

Abundant apologies if I've stepped on someone's turf or been a detrimental influence.

 

[unpredictablebijou]

Abundant apologies if I've stepped on someone's turf or been a detrimental influence.

I can't see how. It's all about exchanging ideas. That's a good thing.

blessings,
bj

 

[AChild]

Who Me?

What the fuck have I wandered into?
So many split hairs, those subatomic structures are screaming rape.
Who owns this key board?
It's rolled in a ball and covered with Jizz. Where was I?

Original.
The mystics in their temples scoff and point to heaven as the only original artist. I wish I could be so pious and speak like that. But such praise to higher powers would surely negate my own divinity.
In real life I am a cook. I take the ingredients that were around before the time of my great-greats and make them up how I see fit. Nothing in the ingredients is new factually extintion and social edicate have taken a lot of stuff off my menu. How would you like to try my recipe for Doo-Doo Bird L'range?

So where does the creation lie?
Were do we grab our part of the spark that will transform our styles and ideas into a milestone on the way to perfect art. It has to be in interpretation and presentation, look at the French Laundry for god sakes. Blogging is an example of something Original; never before have so many people "published" such trivial crap.
But in the contrast of the French Laundry and Blogging we see that originality doesn't conotate greatness. It simply holds a place for you in history as the first to be out their on that limb.

I think that I try to be original and I fail at it most of the time. I think when your really into it and don't notice or care about the audience is the only time your come off as original. Even then you don't even notice. It may be that poem your afraid to let see that light of day that is your most unique. Afraid that no one will understand how you mixed the element.

Well there is my one cent. I've got to get back to my soup pot and swirl some more elements.

 

[Angeline]

There is no conflict between originality and relating to the art of the past or of the peers. Including elements of the work of others (in a clear way, with giving them the whole credit) is a way to honor others. One may play on the "to be or not to be" phrase, or on "I think hence I am", etc. One may also adopt certain artistic devices of others in a creative way. It's possible to do all these things and still be highly original.

Consider my post to be just a formal point.

Yes. That's what I was thinking in my post. Sometimes when I'm writing about some universal experience (which is what poetry is, I suppose), I'm reminded of what other writers have said about this experience. If what I'm reminded of is meaningful to me and relevant to what I want to say, I might work it into my poem. To me, it's a way of honoring the writer and the idea. To approach this idea that has been stated before in the context of the new thing I'm writing may, in fact, be original. But to put the notion "original" in a vacumn and say this is my ideal, my goal is like doing the same with "being poetic." If I try to be "poetic" or "original," I miss the mark. When I convey something accurately, then my writing is authentic and possibly poetic without trying. "Trying" usually wrecks it, in my experience.

Oh. And I want to add that not "trying" is the hardest thing for me to do as a poet. I think it's related to my education, and it's hard to unlearn what we've been inculcated with, but I know when I break away from "trying" is when I get it right.

 

[Senna Jawa]

I also really enjoy encouraging people to keep writing, and if it means posting a simple "that was great and I liked it" for someone's piece, well, I still see validity in that, particularly for new writers. It does in fact give valuable information, of a sort.

[...] I'm not one to say that I dislike just hearing that someone liked a piece, without forcing them to defend their opinion. Maybe it's just visceral, that I like something. Maybe I can't say exactly why. I still have a right to say that I liked it.

In the early Internet time, on rec.arts.poems, I was, symbolically speaking, giving more points for the positive critical remarks than for the negative ones, because the positive comments are more difficult. I still feel this way. But all this with the understanding that the comments are substantiated.

Simple "I like your poem" is fine if the poem in question does not have major problems. If it does, than such a positive statement reinforces the bad author's habits and his/her lack of judgment.

A positive concrete remark, like "I liked line 8", is much better. Then the author and participants learn. The author (and/or some participants) perhaps thought that lines 3-4 and 12-15 were the stars of the show. Now they are made to reevaluate their rating. (Occasionally they would ask: isn't it lines 3-4 or 12-15 which are the most impressive? And the commentator may say: no, I still like 8 the best).

Off topic. so let's get back on:

how often do the writers in here feel like their own writing has been strongly influenced by another poet, and how do you draw the line between, say, homage, inspiration, allusion, or just plain stealin'?

bijou

I've written a long answer, but it doesn't feel right to do so. Thus let me just say that the influence of poems by others on mine is very marginal. On the other hand, it feels good to have my feelings and views confirmed by the poems from past (and by the new ones too). Of course I got juxtaposition explicitly from the oriental and folk poetry, and kennings (after long and hard thinking) from Skalds.

Best regards,

 

[Liar]

Sorry for dropping out of the thread for a while. Three consecutive deadlines hit me like a freight train.

Liar, you questions, "how original are you?" and the rest, induce the audience to think and talk about themselves ( "I am this... but I am not that, I am almost..., I..., I..., I...."). We had many threads on this forum about "I this..., I that..., I usually..., I always..., when I was not experienced..., but now I know...". (Even one such thread is one too many).

No it's not.

I started this thread because I was interrested in other peoples' writing processes. You may not find that relevant. I do. Hearing how other people think and what metods and routines they use when creating poems makes me question my own and try new approaches that might improve my writing.

So yes, "I..., I..., I...." is exacty what I want to hear. It's ok, you don't have to read it if you don't want to.

Looking at the finished products, the poems, and discussing the originality of those has value too. But that's another topic.

Google on horrizonm. You get nothing. Use it and you're original. It is enough to make a silly typo or two to be original. Often intentional originality, when it becomes a goal on its own, is that shallow and silly.

Originality has value only when it is profound, when it is based on deep insight. Originality is just a bonus of deep insight (when you see what others don't, and it counts). Originality is a side effect.

Good point that bears repeatin'. Many people seems to confuse originality with obfuscation.
But being weird and incomprehensible is hardly original in this day and age.

 

[champagne1982]

Good point that bears repeatin'. Many people seems to confuse originality with obfuscation.
But being weird and incomprehensible is hardly original in this day and age.

I have to agree that blurring horizons in a snowfall of thesaurian adjectives is as annoying as it is unoriginal, especially when the poet is unaware of the malapropisms he's creating. That would be comedic if it weren't so tragically true.

 

[hmmnmm]

Something happened today that may illustrate both ideas of originality and influence. I was involved with this incident but the matter goes far above and away to something far more important.

I recently signed up for a myspace account and it's been amazing the old acquaintances I've been reconnecting with one by one - old buddies I haven't seen in five or ten years. One of them is in a far east country; I was complimenting him on the pictures, he was telling what it was like there, we marveled at the way time slips away, so on...

During our exchange he said something - a phrase - and I don't think he was trying to be original or even poetic, and who knows that it he didn't pick it up from someone else - but it was a beautiful phrase. It packed a treasure of meaning, at least to me. It reawakened me to ideas and ways of being that I'd forgotten. So I made a note of that phrase. It's still with me, and I hope it will influence everything that I do, from this point on - whether poetic or otherwise - and I gladly point to the source of influence.

In other words, I didn't think of the phrase and there's no profit to speculate whether I ever would've thought of it. It doesn't matter. It was a gift, unexpected, a mere phrase amid a passing comment from an old friend.

 

[hmmnmm]

Of all things, it happened again today. A different person, a different phrase. A univeral truth spoken without adornment yet in a way I'd never heard. Profound in its simplicity and its influence; an immediate stimulant of the mind and the soul, a reminder of ideals forgotten. It was wonderful.

 

[twelveoone]

i think originality is, above all else, the quality that can make a poem stand out, so i try to be as original as i can possibly be.

my success rate at it is spotty, i think.



yes, to all of those.




i do think about them. i try to achieve 4 things in my writing, in this order of importance (i think):

1. originality of expression
2. clarity of expression
3. ease of expression
4. economy of expression.


thought-provoking thread, Liar. kudos.

yeh, I wish I had your spotty record...

I would add a fifth, I'm not even sure you realize you do it. Your poetry has a tendency to "sing" . I'm sorry I don't have a better word for it. But it is damned difficult to pull it off without rhyme, or repeated words. You do so. Dylan Thomas has the same quality (seems to me) but uses a different technique. Maybe; I haven't quite figured it out.

 

[twelveoone]

Great Du Fu has creatively absorbed all styles of the Chinese poetry before him (and has created new ones too), while he is among the most original poets of all time.

And I remind you, you have never read him. Even the modern Chinese, really haven't read him, it would be like me in my throughly fucked-up modern English reading Chaucer. No even worse, because I guess two of the tones are gone. I think Du Fu spoke something close to Wu, not Mandarin. You can research this, find a Southerner to help you out.

read here means out loud.

besides being original does have direct inverse relationship with how much has preceded you, doesn't it?

Out of respect to you, you do have a rather original outlook as to what constitutes poetic. And I've used it, or if you prefer to think so, abused it. So for what it's worth, thanks.

 

[TheRainMan]

. . . poetry has a tendency to "sing" . . . Dylan Thomas has the same quality . . .

monosyllabism.


Light Breaks Where No Sun Shines by Dylan Thomas


Light breaks where no sun shines;
Where no sea runs, the waters of the heart
Push in their tides;
And, broken ghosts with glow worms in their heads,
The things of light
File through the flesh where no flesh decks the bones.

A candle in the thighs
Warms youth and seed and burns the seeds of age;
Where no seed stirs,
The fruit of man unwrinkles in the stars,
Bright as a fig;
Where no wax is, the candle shows its hairs.

Dawn breaks behind the eyes;
From poles of skull and toe the windy blood
Slides like a sea;
Nor fenced, nor staked, the gushers of the sky
Spout to the rod
Divining in a smile the oil of tears.

Night in the sockets rounds,
Like some pitch moon, the limit of the globes;
Day lights the bone;
Where no cold is, the skinning gales unpin
The winter's robes;
The film of spring is hanging from the lids.

Light breaks on secret lots,
On tips of thought where thoughts smell in the rain;
When logics die,
The secret of the soil grow through the eye,
And blood jumps in the sun;
Above the waste allotments the dawn halts.


. . . a quick tally. 207 words. 191 of them have one syllable

= music.

 

[champagne1982]

monosyllabism.

Light Breaks Where No Sun Shines by Dylan Thomas
. . . a quick tally. 207 words. 191 of them have one syllable

= music.

Yes, one beat per word allows the reader to create the iambs and trochees with minimal guidance by the poet with punctuation and line breaks. I strive toward this.

 

[Senna Jawa]

monosyllabism.


Light Breaks Where No Sun Shines by Dylan Thomas

What a dirty X-rated porno poem! Oh, it's Literotica! Dylan, welcome, you came to the right place, Thomas.