short poems -- discussion

[Senna Jawa]

Re: Re: Re: how and why I read a poem

WE & SP, scientists should study this example of incredible, ubelievable, exceptional, outstanding ESP.

(BTW, how does the agreement between the two of you affect the view of the poem artistically; I am talking of course about the original WE's version)?

Best regards,

WE & SP, I must say that for the sake of fun I have overstated my case. (And so did Smithpeter by providing the cause of the "murder" from the poem, but never mind).

Indeed, WE's poem always awake gains when intepreted as a voice from the other world or simply from the grave. Usage of "we" in the 2nd stanza is at odds with this interpretation. It intorduces a logical complication which is an obstacle. On one hand we have the death of the narrator ("final night"). On the other hand, suddenly two people r not preoccupied with sleep. I understand Eve's logic but it's not good for the poem. It equalizes death and notr sleeping with another person. This is misleading and makes death a little cheaper. It is hard for a reader like me to believe that that's what the author has uintended, hence there is a problem with the whole murder interpretation.

Despite this hole, this interpretation is still to the artistic advantage of the poem, so I want to buy it.

The edited version is freed from this logical complications. On the other hand somehow it doesn't feel like such an ultimate, death poem. Such an interpretation is admissible but the poem feels more about life than about the death. The poem seems to be about how we feel when we miss something.

Let me mention that there is a beautiful-beautiful and deeply moving poem by Primo Levi, a survivor of the German concentration camp in Auschwitz. Committed suicide. His poem has a form of a request from a young Yugoslav partisan (antiGerman WWII guerilla fighter) , from his grave, who was sentenced and killed by his fellow partisans. This is Poetry at its greatest.

Best reegards,

 

[WickedEve]

Re: Re: Enlightenment

Would U narrow down your q. to what U really want to know, or say more about your q.?

Regards,

I think he's question is a simple one. What qualifies as a short poem? I was curious about that also. I know haiku is short. So on the short poems link lists do you want poems that are the size of haiku? Maybe no more than 2-3 lines longer than haiku is acceptable? It may help to have some basic guidelines listed on that thread.

 

[WickedEve]

Re: Re: Re: Re: how and why I read a poem

WE & SP, I must say that for the sake of fun I have overstated my case. (And so did Smithpeter by providing the cause of the "murder" from the poem, but never mind).

Indeed, WE's poem always awake gains when intepreted as a voice from the other world or simply from the grave. Usage of "we" in the 2nd stanza is at odds with this interpretation. It intorduces a logical complication which is an obstacle. On one hand we have the death of the narrator ("final night"). On the other hand, suddenly two people r not preoccupied with sleep. I understand Eve's logic but it's not good for the poem. It equalizes death and notr sleeping with another person. This is misleading and makes death a little cheaper. It is hard for a reader like me to believe that that's what the author has uintended, hence there is a problem with the whole murder interpretation.

Despite this hole, this interpretation is still to the artistic advantage of the poem, so I want to buy it.

The edited version is freed from this logical complications. On the other hand somehow it doesn't feel like such an ultimate, death poem. Such an interpretation is admissible but the poem feels more about life than about the death. The poem seems to be about how we feel when we miss something.

Let me mention that there is a beautiful-beautiful and deeply moving poem by Primo Levi, a survivor of the German concentration camp in Auschwitz. Committed suicide. His poem has a form of a request from a young Yugoslav partisan (antiGerman WWII guerilla fighter) , from his grave, who was sentenced and killed by his fellow partisans. This is Poetry at its greatest.

Best reegards,

Senna Jawa, sp was kidding about death and murder. He said: "These are the words of a dead woman/wife.
She was killed by her despised husband probably because of something like getting roses from a secret admirer or because she dumped him at a bus station. Again." The reference to roses from a secret admirer is from my poem From a Secret Admirer. And "dumped him at a bus station" is a reference to Disposing of Little Men.

 

[Sweetwood]

What's short?

quote:

Originally posted by Sweetwood
Would someone please shed some light on what qualifies for a
"short" poem.

I would appreciate clarification.

Sweetwood


Would U narrow down your q. to what U really want to know, or say more about
your q.?

Regards,.

If you consider Rilke's Duinese Elegies, a 50 line poem would be short. Shorts are short.

SJ to be precise: does a 26.5 word poem, that comprises 8 lines and has no punctuation as short?

Sweetasswise

 

[Sweetwood]

Does this qualify

Serious lack
of conventional humor
paired with
ascerbic wit

makes me cringe at times
when reading his words
swallowing half of them

S rather than SJ

8 lines, 26 words .5 words swallowed

would this qualify as short?

Sweetkaaaaazing

 

[Senna Jawa]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: how and why I read a poem

The reference to roses from a secret admirer is from my poem From a Secret Admirer. And "dumped him at a bus station" is a reference to Disposing of Little Men.

Oh, SP had two aces in his sleeves. It was still a very good brain storming session. It forced me to look seriously at an option which earlier I dismissed. My appreciation of the poem "always awake" has gained.

Best regards,

 

[Senna Jawa]

Re: Does this qualify

Serious lack
of conventional humor
paired with
ascerbic wit

makes me cringe at times
when reading his words
swallowing half of them

S rather than SJ

8 lines, 26 words .5 words swallowed

would this qualify as short?

Sweetkaaaaazing

Sweetwood, your text has 8 lines, which r not long. U have

        3+7+2+4 + 5+5+6 + 6

syllables, for a total of 38.

For the purpose of the "short poems (link list)" thread I liberally allowed in another thread 8 regular lines or up to 12 short lines (they would have to be short-short). To make it crisp, we can say that for the purpose of our thread up to 80 syllables is ok but definitely not more. 80 is already a lot.

Thus if your text were a poem it would classify as a short poem for the purpose of our discussions on Literotica.

I didn't realize that my 8 regular lines or up to 12 short lines "rule" got buried in the prolific humor output on this board. I thought that U may be interested in a general discussion of short forms. That would be quite interesting. On one hand there r formal measures, on the other -- conceptual ones. When U compare the two in the context of a poem U get an indication about the poem's poetic quality. Such a comparison works surprisingly well (but far from always).

Best regards,

 

[Sweetwood]

If my poem was a poem it would be poetic

Senna Jawa espoused:

Thus if your text were a poem it would classify as a short poem for the purpose of our discussions on Literotica.

The difficulty with these words are that they are NOT a poem but a satire. Or, in short, poetic cabaret. Note the mention of humor, ascerbic wit, and swallowing. That should have hinted at satirical content with poetic coloring. That is especially true for "swallowing".

I thought that U may be interested in a general discussion of short forms. That would be quite interesting. On one hand there r formal measures, on the other -- conceptual ones. When U compare the two in the context of a poem U get an indication about the poem's poetic quality. Such a comparison works surprisingly well (but far from always).

I am truly interested in a discussion on short forms. The interaction between the formal and conceptual measures, the rise of conflicting emotions in the field of tension thus created is astonishing to the discerning mind. It is not just simply the comparison in the context. The escalation of their methodological structure within the framework of their linguistic expression, clearly alights the poetic quality. Consequently, the shorter, the better.

I am in complete agreement with you that in fact the best poem would be one WITHOUT WORDS at all. Thus the existential significance of the reader just thinking a poem, short and to the point would be most satisfying, don't you think. We could appreciate poetry to it's fullest, without ever being dissatisfied. It would also do wonders for the poets.

Hail to the short poems discussion on formal and conceptual measures. And, SJ, let's not forget the contextual texture of a piece. But I leave that up to you.

Piece

Sweetwood

 

[Guest]

I just wanted to say, Sweetwood, that the no word poem hidden next to the frog was the best poem I ever unread. It had wonderful rhythm and it was easy to dance to. The depth of meaning in the line "" was incredible. I laughed. I cried. I shit my pants. Then I came all over my shoes.

What a poem!

k-dog

 

[Sweetwood]

Thank you Karmadog for the praise

Karma Dog Gushed:

I just wanted to say, Sweetwood, that the no word poem hidden next to the frog was the best poem I ever unread. It had wonderful rhythm and it was easy to dance to. The depth of meaning in the line "" was incredible. I laughed. I cried. I shit my pants. Then I came all over my shoes.

Oh Karmadog, I am so grateful for your wonderful espousation of this poem. It took me since my early years to write, it raised emotional turmoil in my bosom, and surpassed in satisfaction even the best of times in my life. The haunting memories, the heartwrenching inner struggles, all. And you, you my dear old friend immediately recognized it. Ahhhhhhhh, bless you.

In eternal wordless memory

Your Soulcaptain

Sweetwood

 

[Senna Jawa]

Re: If my poem was a poem it would be poetic

The interaction between the formal and conceptual measures, the rise of conflicting emotions in the field of tension thus created is astonishing to the discerning mind. It is not just simply the comparison in the context. The escalation of their methodological structure within the framework of their linguistic expression, clearly alights the poetic quality.
Piece

Sweetwood

It's nice that U'r at peace with yourself and so content, so satisfied with yourself. U deserve it, U work so hard.

Sweetwood, I am glad that the non-alcoholic beverage of my modest words serves U as your champagne so well and for so long. U got wonderful milage.

Regards,

 

[Senna Jawa]

"Bedroom Hurricane" by Wicked Eve

Bedroom Hurricane is a technically well written, joyous plaything, which prepares and ends in an easy (and cliched) word play. Is it poetry? To many people it is. On the other hand this is what Harold G. Henderson wrote about an early prehaiku in his "An Introduction to Haiku":

Sokan's verses are apt to be clever conceits like:


    If to the moon
      one puts a handle--what
        a splendid fan!


This sort of thing is hardly real haiku--or real poetry--even though it does suggest the perfect fullness of the moon, the pleasure of looking at it so that it seems attached to a tree branch, and the cool of a summer night after a hot day. The reason that it is "not haiku" is that it is not even meant to express pr evoke any real emotion."

Best regards,

 

[Sweetwood]

real poetry

The question "what is poetry? has come up often in many of the posts on this board. In critiques of work, in discussions about forms of poetry etc. it has raised it's head in many different ways, often just simply by the assumptions the commentator carries with her/him.

The conventional definition of poetry is: a poet's work or art. According to this definition we need to make an baseline assumption in order to classify a piece as poetry: we need to assume that the author is a poet. In the alternative we need to assume that a piece is art, that is, the product of human creative activity.

In this context art is the elevation of a context beyond nature. For all of us speech and language is nature. What elevates language beyond nature is the creative process by which the human mind transforms the language. With poetry as opposed to prose, there is the element of form and structure. Word count, meter, rhythm, rhyme, or freeform are such formal or structural elements. Poetry seeks to create an image which evokes an emotional or intellectual response in the reader.


As a result, I believe that any piece that evokes such a response in at least one other person besides the author must be classified as poetry.

What a piece of poetry says to reader is an entirely different question. It is really the question of "Is this good poetry?' or has the process yielded a transformation of language that has elevated it to art. Does the poem speak to the reader in some way.

Senna Jawa wrote:

Bedroom Hurricane is a technically well written, joyous plaything, which prepares and ends in an easy (and cliched) word play. Is it poetry? To many people it is.

The above quote makes a number of assumptions. What it says to me is this: The piece is a plaything (like a toy easily discarded). It is composed of word play, cliched word play that is. Sj says that the process of creation is not genuine because the author has used well worn, not newly created forms of expression. He then asks the question if it is poetry? This is a valid question and would have deserved a genuine answer.

Unfortunately, the question was not asked with genuine interest, because in his answer, he indicates, that anyone who believes this piece to be poetry is an idiot. He does so by not actually saying that he doesn't believe it is, but rather by suggesting that the classification of this poem by the reader as poetry is the product of ignorance. The use of the Henderson quote makes this clear.

In view of the fact, that calling someone an idiot , however subtle that namecalling may be, is the worst form of laying someone on ice, I needed to make these comments. Everyone here deserves respect, and oh, humor.

Sweetwood

 

[WickedEve]

Thank you for the comments on bedroom hurricane. It's cute. I played with words. I do that occasionally.
S.J. you may want to tackle one of my other poems. The ones you've chosen so far are... well, why don't you try Crazy Criminal Love, Disposing of Little Men, Incredible Edible Male, Tender Torment. Actually, the link to these are in my sigline. These short poems may be more interesting to talk about. I'm afraid that Bedroom Hurricane and Bitter Winter made for rather boring topics to discuss.
Once again, I appreciate all this feedback!

 

[Senna Jawa]

Re: real poetry

The conventional definition of poetry is: a poet's work or art.

Conventional? That's news to me. Then, who is a poet? The one who writes poems. That's even more conventional. We get a circle.

But ok, your "conventional" definition is harmless, when interpreted properly. It means that, according to your definition, one is not a poet all the time, only when writing poems. When Bukowski, in general a talented poet, wrote his piece of junk, then at that time he simply was no poet. Conclusion: your definition, while harmless, buys nothing, is useless.

When interpreted in a wrong way, your definition is harmful. Texts should be judged on their own merit and not on the merit of their authors. When X and Y write the same text at the same time and under similar circumstances, then their text has the same artistic value (possibly none), regardless of the signature under the text.

Senna Jawa wrote: [...]The above quote makes a number of assumptions. What it says to me is this: The piece is a plaything (like a toy easily discarded).

Sweetwood, I didn't make an assumption. I made a claim. Indeed, I claimed that while "Bedroom Hurricane" is well written, it is a plaything. I didn't say it earlier but I have no problem stating that it can be easily discarded. If I had to choose a few poems to keep me company on a desolated island then I might select a poem like Eve's "always awake" and some other poems by her but certainly I could live without "Bedroom Hurricane", I wouldn't miss it.

Next U deform what I have written. Funny, because my words r available for everybody on this board. (SW, if U have comprehension problems then ask instead of making a wrong impression. I'll be glad to explain). Despite your claim I didn't write: "It is composed of word play, cliched word play that is.". I've written that the composition of the poem is such that it prepares and culminates in a cliched word play (at the end of the poem). Indeed, the rain metaphor of ejaculation is cliched (trite) hence easy.

Then U let your imagination free. My modest words again act on U like champagne, except that your humor is sour:

:Sj [...] then asks the question if it is poetry? This is a valid question and would have deserved a genuine answer.

Unfortunately, the question was not asked with genuine interest, because in his answer, he indicates, that anyone who believes this piece to be poetry is an idiot.

Don't be silly. When U get better we might still have a conversation. I am looking forward.

Regards,

 

[WickedEve]

Is there any chance that the two of you will put on some tight, very short, shorts, and get into a ring?

 

[Sweetwife]

If you buy the popcorn, I'll buy the beer Eve.

Sweetwife

 

[Senna Jawa]

before U silence me on this board, know that...

Is there any chance that the two of you will put on some tight, very short, shorts, and get into a ring?

Eve, an automatic, symmetric "justice" is wrong, it is no justice. I understand that your intention is good, but this knee reflex of making an impression that both sides r equally right and equally wrong is wrong. Your joke is highly unfair to me. In this case the whole guilt is on the SW's part and none on mine. I write about poetry and about poems. One may like it, one may dislike it, one may even feel uneasy. And still, I write strictly about poems (until finally I am provoked, almost forced into a distraction). I am interested strictly in poetry. But more than one, otherwise nice person on this board made remarks which had personal implications. Their wording might use proper dictionary but such remarks r highly improper nonetheless. I will mention the mildest case, with the understanding that it is really nothing important. That's why I selected this one. For the sake of illustration only.

Karmadog has initiated several great threads, and in particular one about poems by poets outside Literotica. I have stated my opinion abot B. and about some of his poems. One may like it, one may dislike it. Fine. But then KD writes someting about "win" (his quote marks). By this he implies, whether he understood it or not, that I was not simply searching for the poetic truth. Instead, his statement imples that suppossedly my goal was "winning" an argument. That's false! That was NOT my goal at all. I am perfectly happy when someone rationally convinces me to change my mind about an issue. Then I learn! Then I am grateful to the other person. I am not collecting any discussion points. It's ridiculous to make this kind of an accusation.

Once again, all this was extremely mild, the other cases were worse. KD possibly thought more about himself than about me. Possibly he has expressed his own insecurity. But why?! There is no reason to remember that we exist(!) when we discuss poems. Only poems exist, only poetry.

Please, avoid any assumptions one about another. We do not know each other. Let's stick to what we write here, on the board. And in our poems. Do not extrapolate. Possibly something was typical in your experience, in your life. But it has nothing to do with me. Don't play any probabilistic games of associations.

It is important. Nobody should have to feel here like explaining Eirself. I am certainly not going to tell you about myself in order to contradict certain remarks addressed to me, which bordered on insinuation. Nobody should be put in a situation requiring any explanations.

Let me emphasize that I don't feel any grudges. This is all virtual, this is all about poems. True, I may avoid (virtual) contacts with someone who takes too many liberties. That's all. And if I feel that there is hostility directed at me or that I am widely ignored on this board, I will not bother you with my presence. No problem. (I am on Internet poetic lists for over twelve years. Nothing can affect me or surprise ).

Regards,

 

[WickedEve]

"Your joke is highly unfair to me." Oh, SJ. I'm not really joking about you two fighting. I was joking about seeing you two in tight shorts. lol

 

[WickedEve]

I sent you a quick PM, SJ. And I may as well say it here also. It was wrong for me to try to lighten the mood. If you are offended, no one has the right to try to (lamely) smooth things over. It's up to you two to argue it out and settle things yourselves.

 

[Senna Jawa]

I sent you a quick PM, SJ. And I may as well say it here also. It was wrong for me to try to lighten the mood. If you are offended, no one has the right to try to (lamely) smooth things over. It's up to you two to argue it out and settle things yourselves.

Eve, there is nothing to settle, nothing to argue about. I cannot be offended, that's impossible. I can be only made feel that I am not welcome, that I have nothing to do here. If that's not your intention then let's forget it. The same goes for anybody who prefers to stick to poetry.

Please everybody, once again, refrain from personal comments. (Don't tell me and the board how suppossedly I feel or what I say or what I think or what is on my mind. I am NOT the topic for this board. Poetry is. And poems. Just accept that I as such do not exist here, period. No more about me -- only my views about poems have right to exist here.

Regards,

 

[WickedEve]

Then go back to talking about poetry.
I'll be around later.
You guys have good day.

 

[Sweetwood]

For better or worse

Senna Jawa opined about me:

Don't be silly. When U get better we might still have a conversation

Enough said!

Sweetwood

 

[Ancient117331]

"Thinking About Nothings..."

"Thinking About Nothings..."

I could have -
but didn't...
die, live, cry, laugh -
and so many, many more.

I should have.

Chris Twyford
Ancient117331

 

[Ancient117331]

"Quietly She Cried..."

"Quietly She Cried..."

Quietly she cried...
wishing so hard she could die,
but finding morning.

The sun rose again -
its light shone again... tears,
mine - hers - all of ours.

We say our goodbyes
as best we can - when we can...
sometimes we just can't.

Chris Twyford
Ancient117331