Interact 9 - Lauren Hynde

[foehn]

that was my point...

And I don't mean to belabor it, but the continuation of the quote,
"... especiallly when singled-out and given an arbitrary, lop-sided importance," was supposed to suggest the context of semiotics receiving undue attention in the intentional creation of a poem.

It wasn't a statement meant to inflame.

As the symbolic nature of language is fundamental to its existence, I think its role in poetics perhaps ought to be more one of a basic sensitivity to how the language is "working" -- rather than as a focal point so large as to obscure other elements of poetics.

It does make for some interesting questions. I'll stand by my statement, though. I'm sure alliteration is considered and consciously worked into encyclopedia articles, too, but too tight a focus on that could ruin an article.

Cheers? I hope?

 

[CharleyH]

However, I would argue strongly that semiotics has about as much to do with poetry as alliteration has to do with encyclopedias, especiallly when singled-out and given an arbitrary, lop-sided importance. It has been demonstrated amply in modern times that in order to remain relevant to any audience or readership, poetry must paint from a large pallette.

In order to remain relevant to the largest common denominator, to the mass appeal . . . actually not even, and I could go into a whole pop culture discourse, but it is not relevant.

I am interested to hear your argument though. I have quoted Hamilton in my sig line because it has particular relevance to the nature of semiotics. Semiotics is the study of signs, and language is a system of signs. If we did not look at this, would we be able to communicate at all?

Poets, I believe, more than any other type of writer, use word choices with much more precision and care, much more frequently, and succinctly. There is no need to argue about the value of semiotics, because its value has been aptly proven in discovering the richness of any text, of its language, of its rhythm, metre, rhyme or metaphor.

How much a reader would miss of this seemingly simple, brief outtake from Samuel Coleridge's Kubla Khan:

In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
A stately pleasure dome decree:
Where Alph the sacred river ran
through caverns measureless to man

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Re: that was my point...

And I don't mean to belabor it, but the continuation of the quote,
"... especiallly when singled-out and given an arbitrary, lop-sided importance," was supposed to suggest the context of semiotics receiving undue attention in the intentional creation of a poem.

As the symbolic nature of language is fundamental to its existence, I think its role in poetics perhaps ought to be more one of a basic sensitivity to how the language is "working" -- rather than as a focal point so large as to obscure other elements of poetics.

No. If you were to say it about prose, most people would probably let it slide. The language of poetry, though, is fundamentally marked by its precision. Every word needs to serve a purpose and justify its existence.

I think you're confusing semiotics with kabbalism (or with Byzantine obscurantism )

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Poets, I believe, more than any other type of writer, use word choices with much more precision and care, much more frequently, and succinctly. There is no need to argue about the value of semiotics, because its value has been aptly proven in discovering the richness of any text, of its language, of its rhythm, metre, rhyme or metaphor.

What she said.

 

[twelveoone]

Without semiotics, you cannot choose one word over the next, you cannot have metaphors or images, you lose all touch with the fundaments of language. All systems of communication collapse.

To say that poetry doesn't have to do with semiotics is the equivalent of saying that math doesn't have to do with numbers.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=semiotics

The theory and study of ...

Without sociology, society doesn't exist?

 

[twelveoone]

In order to remain relevant to the largest common denominator, to the mass appeal . . . actually not even, and I could go into a whole pop culture discourse, but it is not relevant.

I am interested to hear your argument though. I have quoted Hamilton in my sig line because it has particular relevance to the nature of semiotics. Semiotics is the study of signs, and language is a system of signs. If we did not look at this, would we be able to communicate at all?

Poets, I believe, more than any other type of writer, use word choices with much more precision and care, much more frequently, and succinctly. There is no need to argue about the value of semiotics, because its value has been aptly proven in discovering the richness of any text, of its language, of its rhythm, metre, rhyme or metaphor.

How much a reader would miss of this seemingly simple, brief outtake from Samuel Coleridge's Kubla Khan:

In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
A stately pleasure dome decree:
Where Alph the sacred river ran
through caverns measureless to man

I would like to hear more.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=semiotics

The theory and study of ...

Without sociology, society doesn't exist?

You must be related to Pure.

Even if you do not know what semiotics means, you cannot write poetry without using its principles.

 

[twelveoone]

You must be related to Pure.

Even if you do not know what semiotics means, you cannot write poetry without using its principles.

I do not know Pure.

Is the same as saying, even if I do not know what psychology means, I cannot think or act without using its principles.

The principles of psycholgy are theories and derived from studies on acting and thinking.The theories change and are discarded. How often is Freud used anymore?

What I am asking, now, is give us examples, i.e. I wrote this, this was my intent, because of this semiotic principle.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

I did, repeatedly. For example:

Balusters and ogees (together with arches, bridges, cathedrals, stairways...) form a body of architectural concepts (as opposed to the more bucolic set formed by gardens, lagoons and terraces-de-lis earlier in the poem) that is an important part of both the sophistication of the eastern cultures they found and the estrangement they represented.

On a strictly literal level, I could have opted for "handrails" or "banisters", but the word "baluster" is, in itself and in its sound, baroque and unfamiliar, and therefore a much more apt choice to represent a baroque and unfamiliar element of a baroque and unfamiliar culture.

 

[twelveoone]

I did, repeatedly. For example:

yes, they are quite valid reasons, I agree with the choices.
The part I am having problems with is "semiotics", previously I have not heard it being used for the construction of poetry. This I am interested in.

 

[twelveoone]

You must be related to Pure.

I also do not get this, looks like an inside joke.

 

[CharleyH]

I would like to hear more.

What would you like to hear more of (where is batting eyelash icon?)

These first four lines of Kubla Khan are very simple, and in keeping with our discussion of Lauren's poetry, this is a very popular poem, one that is taught in high school, college, University.

Now, one could read over it, and get to the rest of the poem, but without, as a reader, actually exploring it, finding out what is Xanadu? A bad musical with John Travolta . . . (straight face) ?

Alph? Is it likened to the river Styx? Or is likened to the Rhine?

Without EXAMINING the references, does this a good poem make? Is it rich, or does it just feel? Some poems are made to feel, some are made to think, or to think and feel.

OR are we just all going to complain that it does not make sense to have refs that no one understands?

Well, as I have stated, I love a challenge, and how much richer my experience for exploring references thru semiotics, for seeing and not merely looking, (perhaps over-looking) the richness of just . . .

these four lines.

 

[Liar]

You must be related to Pure.

Even if you do not know what semiotics means, you cannot write poetry without using its principles.

That seems to me like a backwards reasoning. Isn't semiotics a specific study of communication? One of many topoi from which to approach the analysing of language? I guess it's a matter of a philosophy when you dig down to the heart of it all. Does a nightengale that just happens to hit a C use musical theory?

There's not a language existing (except maybe Esperanto and Vulcan) that isn't built entirely on symbolism. Onomapoetics, dead metaphors, transfered metonymies, semantic root systems and semiotic dittos are embedded in every grunt you can spell. So yeah, everything I do that has to do with language is semiotic, rhetoric, didactic, grammatic and rhythmic. But aren't those just post constructions? Is physics our attempt to explain the universe, or is it the universe?

And did I just get way too deep for my own good?

#L

 

[twelveoone]

What would you like to hear more of (where is batting eyelash icon?)

These first four lines of Kubla Khan are very simple, and in keeping with our discussion of Lauren's poetry, this is a very popular poem, one that is taught in high school, college, University.

Now, one could read over it, and get to the rest of the poem, but without, as a reader, actually exploring it, finding out what is Xanadu? A bad musical with John Travolta . . . (straight face) ?

Alph? Is it likened to the river Styx? Or is likened to the Rhine?

Without EXAMINING the references, does this a good poem make? Is it rich, or does it just feel? Some poems are made to feel, some are made to think, or to think and feel.

OR are we just all going to complain that it does not make sense to have refs that no one understands?

Well, as I have stated, I love a challenge, and how much richer my experience for exploring references thru semiotics, for seeing and not merely looking, (perhaps over-looking) the richness of just . . .

these four lines.

I wish to hear whatever you say you have my rapt attention (he says leaning forward) but what you have just described is research into what the references are, BTW good double edged meaning (over-looking) there. Attempting to see...
Now, I admit, I know little, and I'm sure I'll be corrected if I am wrong, but isn't the primary utility of semiotics is in advertising. As once was Freud.
I have noted that it has been used for literary critism with varying results.
I have not heard of it being used for literary constructions until now.
I wish to hear more.
( and Damn, I always thought Alph was that fuzzy little alien that had his own TV show)

 

[LouXIV]

Definitely an in-joke...... Ciao for now.