I refuse to dumb down my poetry

[annaswirls]

Aha. Those.

Well, I have never understood why heart and brain should contradict. A poem comes from the heart, yes. But at least in my case that's not enough. If it doen't pass through the brain on the way out, it will read like complete crap. And I don't mean crap in the sense of unpoetic and trite. I mean crap like totally incomprehensible gibberish.

You know, it's like with dreams. They make perfect sense when you dream them, but when you wake up and somtimes are able to remember what you just dreamt, it's just a bizarre mess, impossible to retell without simplifying and fosusing in post production. That's what my constructing brain does.

wow. where are "those" people? Just interested, I didn't know there was a club! I wonder if we have a secret handshake or something. I guess we are all to scatterbrained to get anything organized.

but I Am with you Liar, it takes both, in all forms of artistic endeavors.



oh I had the craziest dream last night about high school


there was broken glass
like all good get me the hell out of here
dreams
and poems and...

rich boys denied their stuffing and
poor boys hiding inside sleeping bags
as an invitation, mother approves of neither


I quit
I do not care
that I do not own
turtle necks of every color with vests and socks to match
black
black
black

makes it easier in the morning

she laughs at my attempts
to pick up the shards on my way out,
you decide my fate?

I quit, tell me again
how I ruined everything everything
I throw the glass back at you


~


this thread has been quite informative!

and I have recently taken to editing the hell out of my poetry. I have always edited but I have rarely bought my poems sweaters with matching socks. They look so cute!




~anna in identity crisis

 

[WickedEve]

It takes heart and brain to write a poem. I think it is easier and more effective if the heart comes in the writing, as it is more difficult to use the heart when editing, and both are necessary

Let the heart have its way. Then read the poem and realize that some of the heart needs to be removed or altered to make it more than one of those "Gramur don't count when it's from the heart!" kind of poems. And it's not just grammar and punctuation that has to be edited. You think my poems are confusing now? You should see them before a revision. I read my poetry and think about what I wanted to say, and then I try to see if it's being said in the poem I just wrote. Then you have to take what your heart spewed out and work on line breaks, metaphors, word choices, and everything else. It's a delightful chore.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Re: Explaining v Justifying

I think that Wickedeve's explanation for "Dumb & Confused" was helpful .D & C's comment was the kind of thing that I might have said when I first started reading this site 3/4 months ago. If you haven't read any poetry for a long time (like me 30 years) it takes a lot of reading of a lot of poetry to begin to get ones brain into gear. So, from time to time a poet may be asked to explain something; but that should not be seen as justification. Wickedeve doesn't need to justify anything .She will however I think be asked for guidance more often than most simply because she pushes boundaries others prefer not to approach.

That's very well put.

 

[foehn]

*sigh* i'll bite, too

I think we should have a new poem challenge
must rhyme
must use at least 5 of the following words

cock
squish
oil
pussy

um okay that is all I can think of

must contain 1 cliche...

Champagne's effort was a good one, but the rhyme and meter weren't nearly sucky enough. I wanted to try to improve on that:

We join our lips. I feel them squish
In heavenly delight.
I want so bad to have my wish
In all this soft moon light.

Our hearts a-thump, I must now spoil
The music by Debussy:
I stroke my cock with vegetable oil
While licking on your pussy.

~
I don't have any poems on the top list yet. Maybe this one could get me a spot?

Oh... and regarding "constructing" ... there are various versions of a somewhat famous quote by Robert Frost at a Breadloaf Writers' Conference: asked by a woman, `Surely when you write one of your lovely poems, you are not thinking of technical tricks?' Frost replied, `I revel in them!'

Lots of thought-provoking comments in this thread.

Cheers...

 

[Tathagata]

Re: *sigh* i'll bite, too

Oh... and regarding "constructing" ... there are various versions of a somewhat famous quote by Robert Frost at a Breadloaf Writers' Conference: asked by a woman, `Surely when you write one of your lovely poems, you are not thinking of technical tricks?' Frost replied, `I revel in them!'

Lots of thought-provoking comments in this thread.

Cheers...

he really was a crotchety old man
I liked him alot

 

[Lauren Hynde]

As one of those people who think that poetry can be over edited until it loses all flavor-- I just wanted to say,

Hello! My name is Anna, I find it interesting that you are so surprised that we exist, by the ton even!

There are also people who think that art is not art unless it is a portrait or landscape that you can match up with a photograph.

It takes heart and brain to write a poem. I think it is easier and more effective if the heart comes in the writing, as it is more difficult to use the heart when editing, and both are necessary

Anna, take a deep breath and read my post again.

I never said poetry was purely a cerebral construct, nor that it wasn't possible to edit the poetry out of anything you write. But what are you doing when you say that "it takes heart and brain to write a poem" if not agreeing with me? "I have recently taken to editing the hell out of my poetry."

The people I was referring to, the "problem" that in my opinion deserves more attention than the "vague" debate, are not only the ones that use spontaneity as an excuse, but also those who are so enthralled by caffeine induced stream-of-consciousness writing that they think anything else is too structured.

And before you misinterpret me again, no, I'm not saying there's something wrong with caffeine induced stream-of-consciousness writing.

 

[Tathagata]

And before you misinterpret me again, no, I'm not saying there's something wrong with caffeine induced stream-of-consciousness writing.

Now if you said alcohol induced stream of consciousness.....
I might be offended...if I was sober enough to understand it

 

[annaswirls]

Anna, take a deep breath and read my post again.

I never said poetry was purely a cerebral construct, nor that it wasn't possible to edit the poetry out of anything you write. But what are you doing when you say that "it takes heart and brain to write a poem" if not agreeing with me? "I have recently taken to editing the hell out of my poetry."

The people I was referring to, the "problem" that in my opinion deserves more attention than the "vague" debate, are not only the ones that use spontaneity as an excuse, but also those who are so enthralled by caffeine induced stream-of-consciousness writing that they think anything else is too structured.

And before you misinterpret me again, no, I'm not saying there's something wrong with caffeine induced stream-of-consciousness writing.

Lauren, I do not dare get into some kind of debate with you, I have never seen anyone win.

I will just say that I did not misinterpret you. I never thought for one moment that you had said poetry was a purely cerebral exercize.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Lauren Hynde
No, these are usually people that complain about stories and poems being edited because "it kills the spontaneity", and writing should come from the heart, not the brain. I kid you not! There are tons of people complaining about that!


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


That was all I was reponding to from you. The rest was just me voicing my opinion too, not arguing with yours, and not saying that others opinions were wrong or somehow less worthy.

having said that, people really use spontanaity as an excuse for spelling errors? hmm that is bizarre. I mean spontaneity might be an excuse for having your butt stuck on a frozen street lamp...

I have made about 4 or 5 spelling errors in this post but that is because I am not going to go paste this into word to spell check.




as for grammatical structure in a poem, well that, I think, is negotiable.


I am off to go get some caffeine.



~anna

 

[Liar]

As one of those people who think that poetry can be over edited until it loses all flavor-- I just wanted to say,

Hello! My name is Anna, I find it interesting that you are so surprised that we exist, by the ton even!

Anna sweet thing, you are definitely not "one of those".

You said it yourself, in the same post:
It takes heart and brain to write a poem.

Exactly my point.

Besides, the "brain" part can be just as spontaneous as the heart part. For some people with enough of a writing habit, 99% of the constructiong can be done pretty much in the course of the initial writing flow. On a rare good day that is for instance me. Sometimes a clever structure and poetry construct just blasts itself out onto a page. I've seen alot of your own stuff in the Passion thread that shows the same thing.

 

[Liar]

as for grammatical structure in a poem, well that, I think, is negotiable.

One rule, and only one rule apply IMO. As long as you know what you're doing, mess with anything you want. If you deliberately mess with grammar, because it's what you want with the poem, then do.

I read a great poem here a while ago that jumped between verb tenses as if they were trampolines. It gave the poem a very cool hectic and slightly delirious feeling that went well with the theme. I'll see if I can remember what poem that was...

 

[annaswirls]

Anna sweet thing, you are definitely not "one of those".

You said it yourself, in the same post:
It takes heart and brain to write a poem.

Exactly my point.

Besides, the "brain" part can be just as spontaneous as the heart part. For some people with enough of a writing habit, 99% of the constructiong can be done pretty much in the course of the initial writing flow. On a rare good day that is for instance me. Sometimes a clever structure and poetry construct just blasts itself out onto a page. I've seen alot of your own stuff in the Passion thread that shows the same thing.

okay I get the difference, it is tricky, but can you see how I feel like one of those people?

trying to get a visual: like the difference between an abstract artist who Can paint landscapes and portraits and decides not too... who messes with the "rules" of painting because he or she chooses too....

as opposed to my son who splatters paint all over the place jackson pollack style.

alright. I thought I was one of those people.

all right. I gotta go drive my too sick for school son to work with me (fun!) after dropping my non-sick son off at daycare

then I will get coffee.

oh and by the way, my brain is usually more scattered than my heart anyway and sometimes my heart has to do the editing.

Or my left foot.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Lauren Hynde
No, these are usually people that complain about stories and poems being edited because "it kills the spontaneity", and writing should come from the heart, not the brain. I kid you not! There are tons of people complaining about that!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That was all I was reponding to from you. The rest was just me voicing my opinion too, not arguing with yours, and not saying that others opinions were wrong or somehow less worthy.

Anna, if you ever edit your poetry, if you ever think about what you're writing, then you are not one of those people, and you may not be saying it, but i will: their opinions are wrong and less worthy.

Stream-of-consciousness freestyle is great and I would never argue against it, but to belittle everything else because it has a resemblance to structured thought? Bullshit. Poetry is wide enough an umbrela to take us all in.

Now, go write a poem for the contest. Only three days to go!

 

[annaswirls]

Anna, if you ever edit your poetry, if you ever think about what you're writing, then you are not one of those people, and you may not be saying it, but i will: their opinions are wrong and less worthy.

Stream-of-consciousness freestyle is great and I would never argue against it, but to belittle everything else because it has a resemblance to structured thought? Bullshit. Poetry is wide enough an umbrela to take us all in.

Now, go write a poem for the contest. Only three days to go!

okay pshew.

I thought I might have to go into quarrantiene heheeee or something


Liar says I am a neurotic editor as evidenced in all my cheating in the partner poem thing.

I dont think I am going to do the contest this time. I haven't written anything new in like a week. Maybe I will try to write like a cross between Maria and Pablo to throw people off heee heeee

 

[Lauren Hynde]

I dont think I am going to do the contest this time.

You have to! If we don't come up with a big batch of top-quality poems, we lose negotiation leverage when we try convincing Laurel to give us a prize like this every once in a while!

 

[foehn]

Poetry People

Poetry at 232.8 Celsius
ignites living poems--
a walking Purdah
or Portrait D'une Femme.

Keeper of Hope,
I sing Kashmiri
while pale hands love the snow.

I am the poem,
cocking my head in recognition
of uttered

Shalimar?

On those cool waters
where we used to dwell,
I say in sweet bitterness,
for warmth has lulled me
into the clear cold.

Me, Kashmiri Song,
a string of kited words,
pass falling winter on my rise
away from 451 degrees.

Shalimar is hard for me to pin down, but seems to be related to Indian Muslim architecture... 232.8 degrees C. is the temperature at which paper ignites and burns (and also, 451 degrees F.) Kashmiri is a delicate and evocative Indian love song. "Purdah" refers (ostensibly) to the veiling and seclusion of women, in relation to which this quote may not be obfuscatory: " ... Believers in Islam, see purdah as a very positive and respectful practice that actually liberates women. It is viewed as liberating because it brings about an aura of respect. Women are looked at as individuals who are judged not by their physical beauty but by their inner beauty and mind." "Portrait D'une Femme" was a poem by Ezra Pound. Various critiques can be found
here . I'm relatively sure it's not so, but "pale hands" could almost be an allusion to this poem.

Now that we have Googled, we're left with the rest of the poem.

One of the first things I look for is tone. A poem with disjointed tone never quite manages to work for me. "Tone" is somewhat difficult to define for me, but one can usually pretty easily distinguish between humor and sadness. This poem has unity of tone for me, a dreamy, dreary and mystical wistfulness.

Beyond this, however, the punctuation and grammar confuse me. I can handle the allusions and elusive references, but as a reader, I need some clarity in flow... which includes for me grammar (not "grammer"), punctuation, syntax and a smattering of semi-normal diction. This poem seems to me to be wanting in some of those areas in spots.

Take, for example, the last stanza. "Me" is the first word, and apparently the subject in the sentence structure, and yet, as an objective pronoun, it cannot be used as such without being considered substandard grammar. Transformational grammar has a lot to say about this last stanza, which could be made to be more grammatically acceptable with different punctuation(s).

"I say" in the next-to-last stanza seems to refer to nothing, as nothing is in quotation marks, and nothing has apparently been said. Or, something was said yet not revealed. Punctuation and syntax may be the only things at war here, but they are indeed at war. I cannot come to a clear understanding, and that bothers me.

In the first stanza, I have less problem with "guessing" that the temperature is that at which paper ignites (at which I succeeded, before 'googling'), than with understanding the juncture (relation, transition, whatever) between Purdah and Portrait D'une Femme.

I think that to share one's poems in a friendly manner, there needs to be some consideration to the reader's questions that an author might anticipate. I fully understand that many distinguished poets through the most recent generations have not shared my view on that, but that is my view; and I believe my view will eventually prevail.

It is wonderful to make a complicated and contorted literary construction, especially when some with whom the poet may share the poem are almost certain to understand. It's wonderful fun, and valid as art, in my opinion.

However, to expect accolades from a more general readership on a piece of writing that aspires to only assuage one's inner sense of artistic beauty, and hardly expects an intelligent, yet unknown reader to share in the joy of correspondence of shared meanings, is a pipe dream.

It's a valid and wonderful poem for the author and perhaps a few that are "in the know." For me to have shared in a recognition of a poem of exceptional meaning, it would have had to have been more fluid and available.

I'm not saying not to write "like that." What I'm attempting to get across is the idea that the audience you intend to share with should help to define the poem you write. In that perspective, there will likely be occasions when you don't want to "dumb down," and other occasions when you do.

Cheers.

 

[annaswirls]

You have to! If we don't come up with a big batch of top-quality poems, we lose negotiation leverage when we try convincing Laurel to give us a prize like this every once in a while!

does Pablo Neruda have any winter poems I can borrow?

 

[Liar]

You have to! If we don't come up with a big batch of top-quality poems, we lose negotiation leverage when we try convincing Laurel to give us a prize like this every once in a while!

When was the deadline now again?

 

[Lauren Hynde]

When was the deadline now again?

Pretend it's tonight.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

does Pablo Neruda have any winter poems I can borrow?

Maybe, but it won't get you an E.

 

[twelveoone]

Re: Re: I refuse to dumb down my poetry

Shalimar is hard for me to pin down, but seems to be related to Indian Muslim architecture... 232.8 degrees C. is the temperature at which paper ignites and burns (and also, 451 degrees F.) Kashmiri is a delicate and evocative Indian love song. "Purdah" refers (ostensibly) to the veiling and seclusion of women, in relation to which this quote may not be obfuscatory: " ... Believers in Islam, see purdah as a very positive and respectful practice that actually liberates women. It is viewed as liberating because it brings about an aura of respect. Women are looked at as individuals who are judged not by their physical beauty but by their inner beauty and mind." "Portrait D'une Femme" was a poem by Ezra Pound. Various critiques can be found
here . I'm relatively sure it's not so, but "pale hands" could almost be an allusion to this poem.

Now that we have Googled, we're left with the rest of the poem.

One of the first things I look for is tone. A poem with disjointed tone never quite manages to work for me. "Tone" is somewhat difficult to define for me, but one can usually pretty easily distinguish between humor and sadness. This poem has unity of tone for me, a dreamy, dreary and mystical wistfulness.

Beyond this, however, the punctuation and grammar confuse me. I can handle the allusions and elusive references, but as a reader, I need some clarity in flow... which includes for me grammar (not "grammer"), punctuation, syntax and a smattering of semi-normal diction. This poem seems to me to be wanting in some of those areas in spots.

Take, for example, the last stanza. "Me" is the first word, and apparently the subject in the sentence structure, and yet, as an objective pronoun, it cannot be used as such without being considered substandard grammar. Transformational grammar has a lot to say about this last stanza, which could be made to be more grammatically acceptable with different punctuation(s).

"I say" in the next-to-last stanza seems to refer to nothing, as nothing is in quotation marks, and nothing has apparently been said. Or, something was said yet not revealed. Punctuation and syntax may be the only things at war here, but they are indeed at war. I cannot come to a clear understanding, and that bothers me.

In the first stanza, I have less problem with "guessing" that the temperature is that at which paper ignites (at which I succeeded, before 'googling'), than with understanding the juncture (relation, transition, whatever) between Purdah and Portrait D'une Femme.

I think that to share one's poems in a friendly manner, there needs to be some consideration to the reader's questions that an author might anticipate. I fully understand that many distinguished poets through the most recent generations have not shared my view on that, but that is my view; and I believe my view will eventually prevail.

It is wonderful to make a complicated and contorted literary construction, especially when some with whom the poet may share the poem are almost certain to understand. It's wonderful fun, and valid as art, in my opinion.

However, to expect accolades from a more general readership on a piece of writing that aspires to only assuage one's inner sense of artistic beauty, and hardly expects an intelligent, yet unknown reader to share in the joy of correspondence of shared meanings, is a pipe dream.

It's a valid and wonderful poem for the author and perhaps a few that are "in the know." For me to have shared in a recognition of a poem of exceptional meaning, it would have had to have been more fluid and available.

I'm not saying not to write "like that." What I'm attempting to get across is the idea that the audience you intend to share with should help to define the poem you write. In that perspective, there will likely be occasions when you don't want to "dumb down," and other occasions when you do.

Cheers.

Hat's off, and deep bow.
On one point I disagree, flash point of paper mentioned twice, focus should be on that for an interpretation.
I realize, that what you did was more technical criticism, than an interpretation, and you did illustrate some of the problems as to setting the tone and meaning for you. Don't misunderstand, I think you did a fantastic job.

On a non-poem point:
"but one can usually pretty easily distinguish between humor and sadness."
Humour is the saving grace of sadness, bitterness, even seriousness. I suspect even in this Eve probably has put some.
This is what makes a handfull of people here so special to me, they are hitting my vein so to speak. It is a distictive flavour of theirs.
Most humour is non-linear thinking; most poetry is linear thinking, it is a difficult balance, you risk losing both sides."I don't get it" For the most part, WickedEve, annaswirls, maria2394, jd4goerge, champange1982 can pull it off, so I have quite a tendency to forgive...
I think in Interact #2, I pulled apart annaswirls "pork and poetry", funny in itself, but look at the technique she used.
My funny little piece of hell, is greatly enriched by them...

 

[foehn]

true...

Originally posted by twelveoone:
Humour is the saving grace of sadness, bitterness, even seriousness. I suspect even in this Eve probably has put some.

That's true, it really is. Reading your post, I thought immediately of "Anyone Lived in a Pretty How Town" by e.e. cummings -- where the lilting rhythm and the silliness of diction point convincingly at humor, yet the overall sense of the poem makes tears come to my eyes. More mundanely, Raymond (of TV fame) says his humor is drawn from his real life. "Isn't that sad?" he says. And yes, it is, but it's also horribly funny. The things that make us laugh or smile are not pleasant things, they are often the most horrible, having to do with unpleasant eructations, embarrassments, even death.

However, I'd pretty much insist on unity of tone for a poem, especially; the genre generally being so short. One can have a crosswind a-blowing, but dumb as I am, I need an overall unity of tone. That's one thing I felt our Lady accomplished superbly in her poem.

===

 

[twelveoone]

Re: true...

That's true, it really is. Reading your post, I thought immediately of "Anyone Lived in a Pretty How Town" by e.e. cummings -- where the lilting rhythm and the silliness of diction point convincingly at humor, yet the overall sense of the poem makes tears come to my eyes. More mundanely, Raymond (of TV fame) says his humor is drawn from his real life. "Isn't that sad?" he says. And yes, it is, but it's also horribly funny. The things that make us laugh or smile are not pleasant things, they are often the most horrible, having to do with unpleasant eructations, embarrassments, even death.

However, I'd pretty much insist on unity of tone for a poem, especially; the genre generally being so short. One can have a crosswind a-blowing, but dumb as I am, I need an overall unity of tone. That's one thing I felt our Lady accomplished superbly in her poem.

===

and again,
a deep bow, with a smile

 

[foehn]

Such eloquent gestures of respect are totally unnecessary.

Just throw money in the hat. I'll need it soon...