Illustrated Poetry

[PatCarrington]

Hehe, I thought about tossing in a post or two there, but Lauren pretty much spoke my mind, so I didn't hafta.

But I think that a good illustrated poem can in fact open up for more intepretation than just the text would had. It's like combinatory topoi, the art of tickling the imagination by combining elelments that usually are not combined. This may sound like neo-aristotelian mumbo jumbo, but I think that you can look at an illustration in two ways: Either you see it as a filter, narrowing the scope of possible intepretations. This seems to be Pat's and 12's view for instance.

Mine is different. I don't see graphical elements (unless very obviously decorative ones) as that, but instead as the next dimension. An Y axis to the text's X axis, all of a sudden giving the piece of art a whole area of possible intepretations. Every possible intepretation of the text is A. Every possible intepretation of the image is B Every possible intepretation of them combined is then naturally AxB. A good illustration will open up for ways of seeing the poem that wasn't there without it.

i absolutely understand that this is the argument on 'the other side'.

it just doesn't work that way with me. my scope is indeed 'narrowed' by being shown what to see.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

i don't understand the point of a visual metaphor for a theme that is already there in words. if the theme is already in the poem, wouldn't it make the photo redundant? if it isn't, why not put it there?

Read Liar's post above. In the case in point, I believe the photograph opens new possibilities of subjective interpretation that go much beyond what is being said.

 

[PatCarrington]

A photograph is 'still, locked'?

To me that sounds like you haven't managed to open your soul to the possibilities that surround you...

you do not offend...you are one of the gentlest people i have encountered here.

isn't that the "nature" of photography? to capture the moment, the second, the stillness that our constant motion misses?

 

[PatCarrington]

Read Liar's post above.

i did, and answered it.

to me, inside the workings of my mind as it deals with art, it is flawed logic, but logic that i nevertheless understand.

hey, you....let's go fishing. i hear they have great cod off the Iberian coast.

 

[Liar]

i absolutely understand that this is the argument on 'the other side'.

it just doesn't work that way with me. my scope is indeed 'narrowed' by being shown what to see.

This could be a dead metaphor thingy. You talk about "what to see" as the goal of reading the poem, and that then the picture makes that desicion for you. Perfectly understandable, if that's the perspective..

I don't think I look for what to see, but what to...I dunno...think? I rarely get visuals from poems. Not even descriptive ones.




Cod? Naah, I'd rather fish something that I'd actually want to eat. Not big on fishing for sports, me.

 

[wildsweetone]

you do not offend...you are one of the gentlest people i have encountered here.

isn't that the "nature" of photography? to capture the moment, the second, the stillness that our constant motion misses?

Yes I think it is the 'nature' of a photographer to capture that moment in time. (I just generalised *rolling eyes* However, I'd suggest to you that it is the nature of an illustrating poet to take that moment and squeeze beyond the visualisation.

A photograph is limiting, but enhance it with words and you can have something that will near the edge of perfection. Isn't that what we all strive for but in our own ways?

 

[PatCarrington]

I don't think I look for what to see, but what to...I dunno...think? I rarely get visuals from poems. Not even descriptive ones.

i think i'm using the word "see" (because a photograph is visual) to also mean being told what to "think", and even what to "feel".

figurative illustration just feels dictatorial to me, whereas i look for poetry to supply a certain freedom.

 

[wildsweetone]

i think i'm using the word "see" (because a photograph is visual) to also mean being told what to "think", and even what to "feel".

figurative illustration just feels dictatorial to me, whereas i look for poetry to supply a certain freedom.

Do you feel the same about concrete poetry? Poetry that uses the white space to it's 'advantage'?

 

[PatCarrington]

Do you feel the same about concrete poetry? Poetry that uses the white space to it's 'advantage'?

somewhat, but to a much lesser extent.

i think the worst poem i ever saw was a love poem that was shaped like a heart.

i think it is very hard to 'shape' poetry without it looking like gimmick.


....and WSO, if you feel that combining poetry and photo brings you closer to perfection, then that is what you should do.

 

[The_Fool]

Interesting thread.

When a photographer publishes a photograph, he is graphically offering a vision of what he sees. Not what he interprets, although there can be some of that with technique or with a suggestive title. Primarily he leaves it up to the viewer to interpret.

When I write poetry, I offer a description, some form of interpretation, but no distinct vision, allowing the reader to interpret and color my words based on background, experiences and timing. My goal is to offer the outline and the reader to provide the color. This means my writing means about the same thing to everyone but exactly the same thing to no one. I want this to happen since I want the reader to "own" his interpretation of my poem.

To me it takes great skill to marry some form of illustration along with poetry that leaves room for interpretation. For some that may not be important, since they want to define their vision clearly for the reader through visual and written techniques combined. I think there are several writers here that marry the two forms together and create something completely new and refreshing. I don't think I am ready for that, yet.

Depends on what you want to do and where you want to go. I suppose the same thing could be said about structure poetry. Forcing words into a strict mold is painful to some.

Okay, back to being foolish….or maybe I never stopped.

 

[Angeline]

In my humble opinion, this thread is too much about each side trying to convince the other that its way is the right one. I think Ishtat got it spot on when he said something to the effect of it being clear that some people respond to the combination of text and graphic and some don't. Some see it as limiting and some see it as a possibility to take "poetry" in another--still poetic--direction.

And so what? You like illustrated poems? Create them or just enjoy them. You don't? Go read the ones that are just words and enjoy them or critique them or whatever you want to do to get what you need to get from the experience.

I happen to like illustrated poems when they're good--and some people here create very good illustrated poems. I still think that one by Linbido is absolutely brilliant as is Lauren's Hear My Name, which isn't even really an illustrated poem, but something else entirely. You don't agree with me? Fine but guess what? Your best argument isn't going to convince me that you're right and I'm wrong--only that our tastes and perceptions of what can constitute "poetry" are different. That's ok. There's a whole spectrum of "art" and we're not all at the same point on it. Doesn't matter. I like you all anyway.

 

[ishtat]

In my humble opinion, this thread is too much about each side trying to convince the other that its way is the right one. I think Ishtat got it spot on when he said something to the effect of it being clear that some people respond to the combination of text and graphic and some don't. Some see it as limiting and some see it as a possibility to take "poetry" in another--still poetic--direction.

And so what? You like illustrated poems? Create them or just enjoy them. You don't? Go read the ones that are just words and enjoy them or critique them or whatever you want to do to get what you need to get from the experience.

I happen to like illustrated poems when they're good--and some people here create very good illustrated poems. I still think that one by Linbido is absolutely brilliant as is Lauren's Hear My Name, which isn't even really an illustrated poem, but something else entirely. You don't agree with me? Fine but guess what? Your best argument isn't going to convince me that you're right and I'm wrong--only that our tastes and perceptions of what can constitute "poetry" are different. That's ok. There's a whole spectrum of "art" and we're not all at the same point on it. Doesn't matter. I like you all anyway.

Never admit to being humble especially if you are going to agree with me in the next sentence!!

I have now sorted out a difference between Pat Carringtons view and my own. He appears to have a conscious, post (or during) view that the image limits his interpretation of the words. My problem is akin to radio static. With an image and words in front of me I have to remove one to make sense of the other. Al Gharb brought this home to me because the Poetry and the Image have both separate and complimentary purpose and merit but to appreciate either I have to remove the other from my immediate senses - a problem of perception in the technical sense.

My conclusion is that this exeplifies that our various minds can work quite differently on the unconscious level and this effects the outcomes we rationalise.

Finally Ange, given your well known interest in music especially jazz what are your thoughts on illustrated poetry with music .

 

[wildsweetone]

somewhat, but to a much lesser extent.

i think the worst poem i ever saw was a love poem that was shaped like a heart.

i think it is very hard to 'shape' poetry without it looking like gimmick.


....and WSO, if you feel that combining poetry and photo brings you closer to perfection, then that is what you should do.

I agree on your 'looking like a gimmick' comment. I don't think I've ever written a 'shape' poem. The thought just makes me cringe. lol I nearly did it with Still Pond - if I'd split the last line it would have look like a splattered moth against a windscreen, or a butterfly, depending on your point of view I guess. I saw it afterwards and left it be.

As for getting closer to perfection. I think we all aim for that. But for me, it's more a matter of trying all manner of things and seeing what I enjoy the most and what I'm good and bad at. Can't improve if I don't know what needs improvement.

As for Ange's comments, I agree there too. We're all different, unique people with different, unique experiences that have shaped us. Therefore, it stands to reason we will all look at 'art', 'poetry', 'images' etc, in different ways. And you know what, none of it is wrong. That's the beauty and I believe that's as it's meant to be.

 

[twelveoone]

i think i'm using the word "see" (because a photograph is visual) to also mean being told what to "think", and even what to "feel".

figurative illustration just feels dictatorial to me, whereas i look for poetry to supply a certain freedom.

Hence the two posters I posted, reduced to its simplest levels.
"show don't tell"
"a picture is worth a 1,000 words"
the introduction of the picture begins to tell me a little too much, ambiguity is lost.
or is used to camofllauge weak words.

 

[twelveoone]

1201, If I am right, neither you, Pat Carrington nor me could do such a comparason fairly. The reason I believe, is that the way our minds work we simply do not have the mental receptors (perception) necessary to appreciate words and pictures simultaneously. Angeline, Lauren, Neo, Liar & WSO clearly do . However, even the illustrating poets apreciate the problems with superimposed words and images and Lauren made the point that she sought a "comfort zone" where both image and words can be appreciated. What Lauren cannot know from her own experience is that this comfort zone doesn't exist for a significant minority.

Incidentally it was Laurens' Al Gharb series which inspired this thread. I was re reading the earlier poems and my wife spotted the fact that I looked at each of the images then scrolled them out of vision whilst I read the poems. Why? etc.

We all know that different readers appreciate the same poem in different ways but I think that illustrated poetry is uniquely problematic in that for some of us there is a perception problem which ensures that this kind of work tends to be rejected before any critical consideration of it can be made

Your observation is interesting, your conclusion is suspect. Jumping from a set of
observations I made, I could come up with with a conclusion that they may be "criitical thinking" impaired. Liar came up with the only thing of interest here, supposing the picture adds something ironic.

 

[twelveoone]

But E.E. Cummings used words as graphic elements as well, i.e., he wrote illustrated poems.

I think you suffer from the same problem as 1201. Your view is entirely valid when applied to some figurative illustration (illustration in the strictest of senses), but you forget about graphic poetry where image and verb draw from each other to create meaning that goes beyond each separate entity's. Graphic art can be as much or in fact much more open to subjective interpretation than words.

Pero no convenceréis. Para convencer hay que persuadir. - Miguel de Unamuno

What problem does 1201 suffer from? Identify. The problem that I may not see the genius, a few others and yourself see in yourself. I question? Tell me the answer, in clear English.

Open my eyes with persuasion.

Darling Ezra used words as graphic elements as well... to become the least read of the Modernists.

 

[twelveoone]

by the Still Pond silence is unheard
for the sound of cicadas permeates
placid air
fantails flit
from branch to branch
capturing prey on the wing
and the sun burnishes wet boulders








the illustration without words:
Still Pond Photo
(tolyk sent me an enhanced version of this photo - the colours are brighter)

Thank You WSO, the effect I get is pretty much a pretty picture with pretty words, it destroys the effect of:
"by the Still Pond silence is unheard"
probably the most reaching line in here.
does nothing for:
for the sound of cicadas permeates
fantails flit
from branch to branch
capturing prey on the wing
amplifies:
placid air (weak line, possibly made stronger by contradiction of action above)
and the sun burnishes wet boulders (amplies this but is it needed)

But consider the source, from someone supposely challedged.

All consider this: in the movies, did you ever notice that most of the times, the best lines are uttered in scences when the action is static.

The worst bands are always the loudest, with no understanding of dynamic range.

I have yet to hear a convincing argument about the addition of pictures to poetry, outside that it is fun.
What I have heard:
I am defective, in that I can not absorb as much information as the next person.
It has been implied that I suffer from lack of imagination and/or maybe visually impaired.

I find this all doubly funny, because Tara Blackwood, certainly one of the better poets to ever grace these pages, used to refer to me as "Jackson Pollock". I knew enough about art, and was intellectually astute enough to realize, she wasn't complimenting me.

 

[Angeline]

Never admit to being humble especially if you are going to agree with me in the next sentence!!

I have now sorted out a difference between Pat Carringtons view and my own. He appears to have a conscious, post (or during) view that the image limits his interpretation of the words. My problem is akin to radio static. With an image and words in front of me I have to remove one to make sense of the other. Al Gharb brought this home to me because the Poetry and the Image have both separate and complimentary purpose and merit but to appreciate either I have to remove the other from my immediate senses - a problem of perception in the technical sense.

My conclusion is that this exeplifies that our various minds can work quite differently on the unconscious level and this effects the outcomes we rationalise.

Finally Ange, given your well known interest in music especially jazz what are your thoughts on illustrated poetry with music .

Go look at that link to Born Magazine that I posted at the beginning of this thread and you'll see what I think about adding music to the mix. To me, it's digital peformance art--maybe not to everyone's taste, but I find it fascinating. I guess if you extend the concept of mixing these elements far enough, you get----film. What a concept, lol.

And you know the early beat poets used to read in front of jazz musicians. I could be wrong, but Kenneth Rexroth, I think was one who did this. Ginsburg incorporated music and chanting into his poetry. Why not? It's just evolution and the best of it will survive.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Pero no convenceréis. Para convencer hay que persuadir. - Miguel de Unamuno

What problem does 1201 suffer from? Identify. The problem that I may not see the genius, a few others and yourself see in yourself. I question? Tell me the answer, in clear English.

In clear English, just this once: What the fuck is wrong with you, anyway? Is there some medical condition we should all be aware of, or did you just decide to pick on me for some special reason of your own?

The problem you suffer from, as I told you before and explicitly again on the very excerpt you quoted, is that your view is entirely valid only when applied to some figurative illustration in the strictest sense. It doesn't hold water for all graphic art.

Darling Ezra used words as graphic elements as well... to become the least read of the Modernists.

LOL - Least read by whom? By you? Whether you like it or not, and everyone knows you don't, Ezra was one of the two major poets of the modernist movement, together with T. S. Eliot.

Thanks for that remark, though. It explains a lot to me about your condition.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

In my humble opinion, this thread is too much about each side trying to convince the other that its way is the right one. I think Ishtat got it spot on when he said something to the effect of it being clear that some people respond to the combination of text and graphic and some don't. Some see it as limiting and some see it as a possibility to take "poetry" in another--still poetic--direction.

And so what? You like illustrated poems? Create them or just enjoy them. You don't? Go read the ones that are just words and enjoy them or critique them or whatever you want to do to get what you need to get from the experience.

I happen to like illustrated poems when they're good--and some people here create very good illustrated poems. I still think that one by Linbido is absolutely brilliant as is Lauren's Hear My Name, which isn't even really an illustrated poem, but something else entirely. You don't agree with me? Fine but guess what? Your best argument isn't going to convince me that you're right and I'm wrong--only that our tastes and perceptions of what can constitute "poetry" are different. That's ok. There's a whole spectrum of "art" and we're not all at the same point on it. Doesn't matter. I like you all anyway.

Amen.

 

[Liar]

In my humble opinion, this thread is too much about each side trying to convince the other that its way is the right one. I think Ishtat got it spot on when he said something to the effect of it being clear that some people respond to the combination of text and graphic and some don't. Some see it as limiting and some see it as a possibility to take "poetry" in another--still poetic--direction.

And so what? You like illustrated poems? Create them or just enjoy them. You don't? Go read the ones that are just words and enjoy them or critique them or whatever you want to do to get what you need to get from the experience.

No need to try to calm down the flaming, luv. Cuz there is none going on. (ok, at least not from me)

All I've been doing is trying to figure out the point of view of certain people. Because gosh, other people's perspectives interrest me. The only way to do that that I know of is to throw questions and pry answers that I can relate to out of them. And show them my POV as detailed and hopefully graspable as I can, in the hope that they then do tha same back to me. I've debated enough in my life to know that the goal is almost never to convince the other side. And in a matter like this? Naah.

I'm a curios fella, and when I encounter things I don't understand, I try to figure them out. Not agreeing with them, but understanding. And hopefully make them understand me.

Which I kind of have now, I feel.

 

[PatCarrington]

No need to try to calm down the flaming, luv. Cuz there is none going on. (ok, at least not from me)

All I've been doing is trying to figure out the point of view of certain people. Because gosh, other people's perspectives interrest me. The only way to do that that I know of is to throw questions and pry answers that I can relate to out of them. And show them my POV as detailed and hopefully graspable as I can, in the hope that they then do tha same back to me. I've debated enough in my life to know that the goal is almost never to convince the other side. And in a matter like this? Naah.

I'm a curios fella, and when I encounter things I don't understand, I try to figure them out. Not agreeing with them, but understanding. And hopefully make them understand me.

Which I kind of have now, I feel.

and i'll give THIS one a big AMEN as well.

healthy debate is not synonomous with 'argument', and understanding opposite POV's is certainly one of my reasons to engage in discussion.

Liar feels he has done that....so do i.

 

[Liar]

Liar came up with the only thing of interest here, supposing the picture adds something ironic.

That was still just one little example of many many different things that a picture imo can add. Just wanting to make that clear, so I'm not credited for it out of it's proper context.

funk on, folks
#L

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Cuz there is none going on. (ok, at least not from me)

I was trying to discuss the subject calmly, with the same perspective and curiosity as you, and I think Pat understood that.

I'm sorry, for the outburst, but I had to respond to that individual's provocation...

 

[PatCarrington]

I was trying to discuss the subject calmly, with the same perspective and curiosity as you, and I think Pat understood that.

of course i did.