Why are many Literotica poems so vague?

[sack]

well then, the next logical progression is...

Let's say I don't understand a particular poem, but somewhere, somehow, one out of a thousand people does. I assume that means it's 999 individuals' problem and nothing is wrong with the poem? In other words, all poems are beyond criticism, people just don't get them?? I don't buy that. Lewis Carroll's prose has the qualities I wrote about earlier. There is logic among the whimsy and you can sense the story progressing, a definite beginning, middle, and end. At some point, a poet needs to take responsibility and realize his precious little baby needs a bath. Remember Andy Warhol and the Campbell Soup Can? That wasn't art and he knew it, he was just taking everyone on a raft ride down the river and the ever gullible public bought it. Does anyone like avant garde 20th Century classical music? Same principle......string some notes together at random, who cares if the pieces sounds good. Again, expertly written wordplay can be effective, but there reaches a point where the poem is so recondite (I call it "clever".....nothing destroys a good poem faster than cleverness!) that the structure falls apart from the hodgepodge of syllables. Which is why many people don't take poetry seriously. If anything goes, then it will, and you will have miscellaneous combinations of words chosen at random that people are scratching their heads to understand while the poet just kept grabbing scrabble tiles...!!

 

[Angeline]

Re: well then, the next logical progression is...

Let's say I don't understand a particular poem, but somewhere, somehow, one out of a thousand people does. I assume that means it's 999 individuals' problem and nothing is wrong with the poem? In other words, all poems are beyond criticism, people just don't get them?? I don't buy that. Lewis Carroll's prose has the qualities I wrote about earlier. There is logic among the whimsy and you can sense the story progressing, a definite beginning, middle, and end. At some point, a poet needs to take responsibility and realize his precious little baby needs a bath. Remember Andy Warhol and the Campbell Soup Can? That wasn't art and he knew it, he was just taking everyone on a raft ride down the river and the ever gullible public bought it. Does anyone like avant garde 20th Century classical music? Same principle......string some notes together at random, who cares if the pieces sounds good. Again, expertly written wordplay can be effective, but there reaches a point where the poem is so recondite (I call it "clever".....nothing destroys a good poem faster than cleverness!) that the structure falls apart from the hodgepodge of syllables. Which is why many people don't take poetry seriously. If anything goes, then it will, and you will have miscellaneous combinations of words chosen at random that people are scratching their heads to understand while the poet just kept grabbing scrabble tiles...!!

I'm listening to The Rite of Spring right now. Sounds pretty good.

 

[Angeline]

Oh and here's a poem that seems right for this thread.

Introduction to Poetry
Billy Collins

I ask them to take a poem
and hold it up to the light
like a color slide

or press an ear against its hive.

I say drop a mouse into a poem
and watch him probe his way out,

or walk inside the poem's room
and feel the walls for a light switch.

I want them to waterski
across the surface of a poem
waving at the author's name on the shore.

But all they want to do
is tie the poem to a chair with rope
and torture a confession out of it.

They begin beating it with a hose
to find out what it really means.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Oh and here's a poem that seems right for this thread.

Introduction to Poetry
Billy Collins

That makes it thirty-two times you posted this poem here, uh? I love it every time.

 

[sack]

not talking about Rite of Spring....

I was speaking of "serial" or aleatoric music, where pitches, progressions, etc. are determined by a throw of the dice. The whole work becomes merely a mathematical exercise loosely called "music". (Some of Boulez' work comes to mind!)


Sack

 

[WickedEve]

Re: Re: Re: Exactly, Mutt, exactly......

I remember a thread a while ago where Eve brought her poems up for discussion. I then sais that I often don't understand her poems. This is not because it's bad poetry, but because she uses references that are not in my world. Same thing with other poets now and then, here and elsewhere. I see that the lines are pretty and read well, but I don't understand quite what it's about, because the metaphors doesn't communicate.
#L

You need to enter my world (with slicker and galoshes) so you can finally get me.

 

[WickedEve]

That makes it thirty-two times you posted this poem here, uh? I love it every time.

Billy again? lol

 

[Liar]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Exactly, Mutt, exactly......

You need to enter my world (with slicker and galoshes) so you can finally get me.

Intriguing. And quire a bit scary.

 

[Angeline]

That makes it thirty-two times you posted this poem here, uh? I love it every time.

It makes a point. lol.

 

[Angeline]

Billy again? lol

You know Doug was the first one to post that poem here. (I just love invoking his name like he's on Mount Olympus. lol. Sorry dear Douglas...)

 

[sack]

Billy's poem.....

Very funny, but still dodges the question. If the poet or story writer can do anything he or she wants, on the pretext of "I didn't mean for anyone to analyze it THAT closely", then there is no need to comment or criticize any poem or story, and why vote? Everything's a "5" if you don't look too hard. Many of you probably don't know that I have released 2 CDs of classical music which have been professionally reviewed. Can you imagine if I told the reviewer "But sir, I didn't intend for anyone to listen to it THAT closely to determine I hit a wrong note!" If music is allowed to become "Muzac" than it always sounds just fine. So, are people saying that all poems sound OK after a superficial reading and that's all we writers need to strive for?


Sack

 

[WickedEve]

You know Doug was the first one to post that poem here. (I just love invoking his name like he's on Mount Olympus. lol. Sorry dear Douglas...)

I just had an image of you carrying poor billy around like he's a thunderbolt.
"Quick, Angeline! Over here and bring the billy with you!"
Then his poem really would make a... point.

 

[Angeline]

Re: Billy's poem.....

Very funny, but still dodges the question. If the poet or story writer can do anything he or she wants, on the pretext of "I didn't mean for anyone to analyze it THAT closely", then there is no need to comment or criticize any poem or story, and why vote? Everything's a "5" if you don't look too hard. Many of you probably don't know that I have released 2 CDs of classical music which have been professionally reviewed. Can you imagine if I told the reviewer "But sir, I didn't intend for anyone to listen to it THAT closely to determine I hit a wrong note!" If music is allowed to become "Muzac" than it always sounds just fine. So, are people saying that all poems sound OK after a superficial reading and that's all we writers need to strive for?


Sack

I'm not saying that at all. Go back and read my posts.

 

[Angeline]

I just had an image of you carrying poor billy around like he's a thunderbolt.
"Quick, Angeline! Over here and bring the billy with you!"
Then his poem really would make a... point.

I carry all poets around that way. My middle name is Prometheus. Angeline Prometheus Young (ie., Mrs. Lester Young).

 

[WickedEve]

I carry all poets around that way. My middle name is Prometheus. Angeline Prometheus Young (ie., Mrs. Lester Young).

I'm not the least bit surprised.

Hey, can a billy strike twice in the same poet?

 

[Tathagata]

Re: well then, the next logical progression is...

Let's say I don't understand a particular poem, but somewhere, somehow, one out of a thousand people does. I assume that means it's 999 individuals' problem and nothing is wrong with the poem? In other words, all poems are beyond criticism, people just don't get them?? I don't buy that. Lewis Carroll's prose has the qualities I wrote about earlier. There is logic among the whimsy and you can sense the story progressing, a definite beginning, middle, and end. At some point, a poet needs to take responsibility and realize his precious little baby needs a bath. Remember Andy Warhol and the Campbell Soup Can? That wasn't art and he knew it, he was just taking everyone on a raft ride down the river and the ever gullible public bought it. Does anyone like avant garde 20th Century classical music? Same principle......string some notes together at random, who cares if the pieces sounds good. Again, expertly written wordplay can be effective, but there reaches a point where the poem is so recondite (I call it "clever".....nothing destroys a good poem faster than cleverness!) that the structure falls apart from the hodgepodge of syllables. Which is why many people don't take poetry seriously. If anything goes, then it will, and you will have miscellaneous combinations of words chosen at random that people are scratching their heads to understand while the poet just kept grabbing scrabble tiles...!!

You keep using the words " problem" and " wrong"

Picasso drew people with two eyes on one side of a face
Gauguin used colors that didn't exist
there were people who didn't ( and don't) " get it?
Is it a problem?
Is it wrong?
If i listen to your music and I " got it" it doesn't mean I'm getting what you want me to get...
If I didn't understand it..is it a problem?? Is it wrong?
can I say you were just putting down random notes without taking me into consideration?

Poetry can be felt, just as music and painting can be
without over analyzing every word and looking for hidden meanings and symbolism.
If you spend your life trying to figure out what every word means and what ever poet means you'll be missing a lot of good poetry.

and as far as the scrabble tiles..there is something to be said for "intentional randomness"..think of John Cage , Robert Fripp, and Brian Eno all made music this way.
In that way each person gets out of the " poem" or " song" what they want.

 

[sack]

and an extension of the last post...

Of course, there's a lot of poetry, art and music that is nearly random or completely random. My question is: will it stand the test of time? Is it anything more than just a novelty that fades rather quickly? Come to think of it, I haven't heard much about Andy Warhol lately?


Sack

 

[Tathagata]

Re: and an extension of the last post...

Of course, there's a lot of poetry, art and music that is nearly random or completely random. My question is: will it stand the test of time? Is it anything more than just a novelty that fades rather quickly? Come to think of it, I haven't heard much about Andy Warhol lately?


Sack

which is why not every poet , or composer, or painter is famous.
If they appealed to everyone and everyone understood them...
everyone would be famous.

as for standing the test of time...what difference does that make??
you can only write from " here" who and what you are now, or "were" in some cases.

if it contains a truth or an " intangible" something that strikes a chord with people it will be remembered...

Nothing lasts forever
the same goes for paintings and music and poetry.

Didn't Warhol express the " 15 minutes of fame" theorem?
That seems to have stood the test of time.

 

[twelveoone]

Contract: a binding agreement between two or more persons or parties.

If I write something and you read it, isn't your expectation to understand what I've written? That contract. Ok, it's not "binding" in a legal sense, but if I haven't communicated to you, neither of us met our expectations.

What I mean is that in order to communicate, I need to apply correct grammar and usage and you need to understand it well enough receive my intended meaning. I can be metaphoric or use fantastical imagery (a la Lauren Hynde), but if I fail to make my ideas clear or connect them in a way that presents an overall picture, you have less of a chance to know what I mean.

And all Chomsky is saying is that you can manipulate language to make words that don't seem to go together fit in a grammatical order. That can be poetic. Poetry is usually better when you transcend cliche, make the reader see something in a new way by using unexpected turns of language. A whole poem of "colorless ideas sleep furiously" would not work as a poem (unless the title was something like "Nonsense," which would clue you, the reader, into what I was doing). Usually, one poetic line does not make a poem. It can, but it still has to say something a reader can understand.

I don't see that those two concepts--using proper grammar and what Chompsky proposes--are inconsistent. I do agree with Liar and Tath because poetry does have a different purpose than prose, and anyway each reader brings her own unique experiences to what she reads. That does shade understanding. But there's still a point at which a writer's inability to manipulate language in order to make clear what the poem is about is going to impede a reader's ability to understand or even appreciate it.

There's always the possibility that you won't appreciate what I write because it's not your taste or you're not ready to understand what I'm saying or whatever. There are people who look at a Jackson Pollack painting or hear John Cage and perceive genius and there are other people who upon doing so say "huh?" or worse. Still, communication (e.g., sentences or brush strokes or moments of film) is about making sense, even in "art"--deviation from that only works in the context of an overall piece of art that does, in my opinion.

And I forget what my poems started out to mean all the time--or they go in a direction other than what I expected when I started writing them. But they still need to make sense.

Well said.
I hope you see some of the issues I have (and most are minor), the word "contract" has connotations that are contrary to the meaning you wish to convey.
Again the word "sense" very open ended word, I understand what you are saying, it is a good word to use regarding poetry, because of its added meanings. For example, "I sense danger" the word has a different meaning than "this makes sense", however, "what is the sense of this" can convey either meaning.
But, I may be wrong, I believe Chomsky was warning us with his "colorless green ideas..." and you refer to a "writer's inability to manipulate language", manipulation being a good thing, even though, I understand what you are saying, what are the connations? What are the pitfalls.
Here you make very good points/and imply very good questions.
What I mean is that in order to communicate, I need to apply correct grammar and usage and you need to understand it well enough receive my intended meaning.
Poetry is usually better when you transcend cliche, make the reader see something in a new way by using unexpected turns of language.
There's always the possibility that you won't appreciate what I write because it's not your taste or you're not ready to understand what I'm saying or whatever.
I'm sorry, Angeline, it is just that you make such good points about writing, I do think people should think about them.
These are all tough calls, to have to make, nothing conveys, communicates, like a cliche, but nothing is less worthwhile reading.
These are all difficult paths, and decsions one has to make, one should think about them, hard, when one writes.
What am I doing? How will the audience see this?"
Thank you Angeline.

 

[twelveoone]

Re: Re: well then, the next logical progression is...

Gauguin used colors that didn't exist

What the fuck?
Does this mean we can't see them?
how do you know they are there?

 

[Tathagata]

Re: Re: Re: well then, the next logical progression is...

What the fuck?
Does this mean we can't see them?
how do you know they are there?

didn't exist in nature
purple leaves
orange skin etc



I keep forgetting I have to clarify
i'm not use to it

 

[Liar]

Re: and an extension of the last post...

Of course, there's a lot of poetry, art and music that is nearly random or completely random. My question is: will it stand the test of time? Is it anything more than just a novelty that fades rather quickly? Come to think of it, I haven't heard much about Andy Warhol lately?


Sack

Good point. But however: Will it stand the test of time? You know, sometimes, I really don't care.

I listen to some music in which the novelty of the innovation is part of the value. And in a year, that particular expression will be worn out and other styles, rhythms and expressions will be what gives me the good experience. It is art where the exploration of the form is the main value of it. And when it's all done and fully explored, the effect of it fades. It is that way because it is unconventional and challenges the standard view of what music should be. No single piece of music from those styles (call it alternative, experimental, underground, what-have-you) will probaby be remembered in fifty years from now, but they do color other contemporary things that will stand the test of time. The legacy of those experiments lives on, although the more purist and extreme subgenres I take interrest in won't.

Nobody might give a rat's ass about Warhol anymore, or at least not in the future. But I see Warhol inspired art, design, advertising et al almost every day.

#L

 

[twelveoone]

Re: Billy's poem.....

Very funny, but still dodges the question. If the poet or story writer can do anything he or she wants, on the pretext of "I didn't mean for anyone to analyze it THAT closely", then there is no need to comment or criticize any poem or story, and why vote? Everything's a "5" if you don't look too hard. Many of you probably don't know that I have released 2 CDs of classical music which have been professionally reviewed. Can you imagine if I told the reviewer "But sir, I didn't intend for anyone to listen to it THAT closely to determine I hit a wrong note!" If music is allowed to become "Muzac" than it always sounds just fine. So, are people saying that all poems sound OK after a superficial reading and that's all we writers need to strive for?


Sack

I think you should be able to say this is why I did what I did, if asked. You as either a consumer or a critic should ask, and deserve a reply.
If you wish to determine something's worth by a predetermined set of values, remember that set of values was reached by a consensus, until replaced by the next consensus.
You ask a very important question, how is this consensus arrived at?

 

[WickedEve]

Re: Re: Re: Re: well then, the next logical progression is...

didn't exist in nature
purple leaves
orange skin etc



I keep forgetting I have to clarify
i'm not use to it

It's worth leaving for a couple of hours so I can come back to all this.

 

[WickedEve]

Thanks to this thread, I've decided to write whatever in the hell I want (which I do ).